## THICATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAY
April 7, 1960

Honorable Glyndon M. Hague County Attorney Cleburne, Texas Opinion No. WW - a24 Re: Whether afarmer hauling livestock to market inhi8 unlicensed trailer, returns the same livestock tohis farm, would beviolation ofArticle 6675a-2, V. C. S. Dear Mr. Hague: We quote your letter ofFebruary 26, 1960, in part as follows:

“This is a request for an opinion ofyour office concerning Article 6675a-2 ofthe Revised Civil Statutes ofthe State ofTexas relating to the registration ofmotor vehicles and trailers.

“This Article provides that the owners offarm trailers operated or moved temporarily upon the highways shall not be required to register such farm trailer, provided such farm trailers are operated in conformity with all provision8 ofthe law and providing further that such exemption shall not apply to farm trailers weighing in exces8 of4,000 pounds and used for hire.“The ques,tions Iwish to submit are these: (1) Ifa farmer used his unlicensed trailer tohaul livestock to market and because ofan unfavorable market returns same livestock tohis farm, is he inviolation under Article 6675a-2, V. C. S.? (2) Ifafarmer u8es his unlicensed trailer to haul farm produce to market, market8 same, then as an incident to this trip to town, is he inviolation ofArticle 6675a-2, V. C. S. ifhe hauls products back to the farm for use in the production ofagricultural products ?‘I-_

Honorable Glyndon M. Hague, Page 2 (WW - 824)

Our answers to both ofyour questions are “No”. Article 6675a-2, V. C. S. as amended reads, in part:

“Owners offarm tractors, farm trailers, farm semitrailers
. . . operated or moved temporarily upon the highways shall not be required to register . . . that the exemptions in this Section shall not apply to any farm trailer or farm semitrailer when the gross weight exceeds four thousand (4,000) pounds,
. ~. .‘I Article 6675a-1, V. C. S., paragraph “q”* reads as follows:

“By ‘operated or moved temporarily upon the highways ’ is meant the operation or conveying between different farms, and the operation or conveyance from the owner’s farm to the place where his farm produce is prepared for market or where same is actually marketed and return.” (Emphasis added). While the law generally construes an exception to a revenue statute stricly against the person claiming same, the cases construing Article 6675a-2 have given it a liberal construction. InTexas Highway Department, et al. v. Kimble County, et al., 239 S. W. 2d 831, Court ofCivil Appeals, writ refused N.R.E. the Court stated,

“such article is, therefore ofa penal nature and must be construed most favorable to the owner ofthe vehicle.” Again inAllred, et al. v. J. C. Engleman, Inc., Court of Civil Appeals, 54 S. W. 2d 352, affirmed by the Supreme Court in 61S. W. 2d 75, the Court said “the statute must be liberally construed to effectuate its purposes and designs.” The statute in question being ofa penal nature requires “the act which is claimed to be aviolation ofpenal law must be fairly within its terms to sustain an action for the penalty”, Thompson v. Missouri, K &T Ry. Co. ofTex., (Sup. Ct. ofTex.) 126 S. W. 257. Under the liberal interpretation given Article 6675a-2, V. C. S. by the courts and due to the words “and return” (see underlined words inArticle 6675a-1 above) we do not feel that the legislature intended that afarmer using his unlicensed trailer, not exceeding the weight limitations imposed by law, and proceeding legally to a certain point, should be required to return empty , butwould have the authority tohaul products back to the farm to be used thereon. As the Court stated in Petroleum Casualty Co. v. Williams (Commission of Appeals) 15S. W. 2d 553, at page 556:

II

. . .This construction ofthe statute is inharmony__. -

Honorable Glyndon M. Hague, Page 3 (WW - 824)
with logic and sound economic principles, and such may be looked to in construing the intent and purpose ofthe statute, ,I

. . . . SUMMARY

A farmer may use his unlicensed trailer tohaul livestock to market and because ofunfavorable market condition8 may return 8ame livestock to his farm under the provisions ofArticles 6675a1,V. C. S., paragraph “q” and 6675a-2, V. C. S. provided the weight limitation therein is not exceeded. Also, afarmer **Using** his unlicensed trailer to haul farm products to market in compliance with the above-mentioned statutes may haul products back to the farm to be used thereon, providing products hauled back do no exceed the above-mentioned weight limitation. Respectfully submitted, WILL WILSON ATTORNEY GEN By&Gs

JOHN C. IjHILLIPS Assistant Attorney General APPROVED OPINION COMMITTEE Wm. V. Geppert Iola Wilcox F. C. Jack Goodman Jerry H. Roberts REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: Leonard Passmore