ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIS. TEXAS 78711 

December 29, 1971 

Honorable Bevington Reed Opinion NO. M-1024 

Commissioner 

Coordinating Board Re: Tuition fees for students 

Texas College and University who are citizens of any 

System country other than the 

P. 0. Box 12788, Capitol Station United States. 

Austin, Texas 78711 

Dear Dr. Reed: 

Your request for an opinion asks the following question: 

“The Coordinating Board requests your opinion 

as to whether a student who is a citizen of any 

country other than the United States of America 

as identified in Item (7) of Section l.(a) is a 

‘nonresident student’ for purposes of Item (1) of 

Section 1. (b) of Article 2654c.” 

Subdivision (1) of Subsection (b) of Section 1 of 

Article 2654c, Vernon’s Civil Statutes, as amended by House Bill 

43, Acts 62nd Legislature, R.S. 1971, Ch. 511, p. 1745, provides 

“(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) of this section: 

“(1) Any nonresident student who is enrolled 

for the spring semester of 1971 in an institution 

covered by subsection (a) of this section may continue to enroll at the same institution at the same 

tuition rate that was effective at the time of his 

original enrollment until one of the following conditions first occurs: 

level”~~!eh 

e receives the degree at the degree 

the baccalaureate 

doctoral degree) toward which he 

master’s 

is work&irduring 

the spring semester of 1971; or 

-4995- 
Hon. Bevington Reed, page 2 (M-1024) 

“(ii) he voluntarily withdraws from the institution or the institution involuntarily withdraws the student for disciplinary reasons or for 

failing to meet the academic standards of the institution; or 

of lg;‘5(iii) the t ermination of the spring semester 

. )’ 

Subdivision (7) of Subsection (a) of Section 1 of Article 

2654~) Vernon’s Civil Statutes, as amended by Senate Bill 1036, 

Acts 62nd Legislature, R.S. 1971, Ch. 958, p. 2898, provides: 

“(7) Tuition for students who are citizens 

of any country other than the United States of 

America is Fourteen Dollars ($14) per semester 

credit hour, but the total of such charge shall 

be not less than Two Hundred Dollars ($200) per 

semester or twelve (12) week summer session, and 

not less than One Hundred Dollars ($100) per six 

(6) week summer term.” 

The provisions of Senate Bill 1036 above quoted apply 

to the tuition fees payable by students who are citizens of any 

country other than the United States for two reasons: (1) the 

provisions of Senate Bill 1036 are a later expression of the 

Le islature than the provisions of House Bill 43 above quoted; and 

7+-T-- t e provisions ~’ of Senate Bill 1036 above quoted apply to a 

particular class of nonresident students, that is, those who do 

not reside in the United States. 

In Wright v. Broeter, 196 S.W.2d 82 (Tex.Sup. 1946), 

it is stated: 

‘1. . . In order to uphold both acts the first 

act may be regarded as an exception to the second. 

Cain v. State, supra. Under the rule requiring 

that the two acts be construed together as one, we 

are not concerned with the question of whether or 

not any provisions in one may be found to be repugnant to corresponding provisions in the other. Our 

concern in this case is limited to a consideration 

of whether or not there is repugnancy between the 

particular provisions of the acts with reference to 

service of process. If it should be granted, as 

-4996- 
Hon. Bevington Reed, page 3’ (M-1024) 

contended, that certain provisions of the second 

act are repugnant to corresponding provisions of 

the first, it would not follow that the whole of 

the first be stricken down, for the second act would 

repeal the first act only to the extent of the repugnancy. Any provisions in the first act not repugnant to provisions of the second act would remain 

as valid portions of the two acts considered as one. 

As stated in Garrison v. Richards, supra (107 S.W. 

865) : ‘Where two acts are passed at the same 

session of the Legislature they should be construed together as one act, and, if possible, so 

that both may stand. McGrady v. Terrell, 98 Tex. 

427, 84 S.W. 641; Lewis' Suth. on Stat. Const., 

4 268. But where the two are repugnant and irreconcilable, the one approved last repeals the 

other to the extent of the repugnancy.“’ 

See ,also Allied Finance v. Falkner, 397 S.W.2d 846 (Tex.Sup. 1966). 

The rule applicable to the two acts in question is 

distinctly stated in 53 Tex.Jur.2d 160, Statutes, Sec. 110, as 

f,ollows :~ 

“The enactment of a general law does not 

ordinarily operate as a repeal of a particular 

or special law, by implication, though both relate to the same subject matter. On the contrary, 

both statutes are permitted to stand, and the general 

law is applicable to all cases not embraced by the 

specific act. In other words, the particular act 

is construed as constituting an exception to the 

general law. This is a settled rule of construction, 

based on the presumption that a specific statute 

evidences the intention of the legislature more 

clearly than a general one, and therefore should 

control .I’ 

In our opinion, the two acts being construed are not 

repugnant and may be harmonized? as above shown. In view of the 

foregoing you are advised that in our opinion the provisions of 

Subdivision (1) of Subsection (b) of Section 1 of Article 2654c, 

Vernon’s Civil Statutes, as amended by House Bill 43, supra, are 

not applicable to students who are citizens of any country other 

than the United States for the reason that tuition of these 

-4997- 
Hon. Bevington Reed, page 4 (M-1024) 

particular students is governed by the provisions of Subdivision 

(7) of Subsection (a) of Section 1 of Article 2654c, Vernon's 

Civil Statutes, as amended by Senate Bill 1036, supra. 

SUMMARY 

The tuition applicable for students who are 

citizens of any country other than the United 

States is governed by the provisions of Subdivision (7) of Subsection (a) of Section 1 of 

Article 2654c, Vernon's Civil Statutes, as amended 

by Senate Bill 1036, Acts 62nd Legislature, R.S. 

1971, Ch. 958, page 2898. 

n 

Prepared by John Reeves 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

Kerns Taylor, Chairman 

W. E. Allen, Co-Chairman 

W. 0. Shultz 

Houghton Brownlee 

Jack Goodman 

V. F. Taylor 

SAM MCDANIEL 

Staff Legal Assistant 

ALFRED WALKER 

Executive Assistant 

NOLA WHITE 

First Assistant 

-4998-