The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1899-12-09
IN FROM BRENNAN
,.H,led to Any Portion Of the Ac-
,,nuIsted School Fund.
! Inc STATE SUPERINTENDENT
.,..,, Large Crowd "t the
s,s.. convcntion"-bur-
- -,.r. at work Again

r...s december SIN inc Fos'
*ahiin .ssrs n, peared q portion oil u
IN cry Attorney Sw, Ca raserenoo "a
bs''ep.. ~. school money now IN tue
M saip'us ,n,y treasurer of Washington
~ Us .s0,y MIR. Kendall writes under
~ Y .ssr :. from Austin, as ioliows'
! pe. swssriugen. City Attorney bren'
u Ttxas' yuur favor of December is
Eptt acting TO reply to the questions
Mr. aIprped the reports now on ME IN
NJ nanns Earning the receipts anu us,
dtre s " the state apportionment anu
|Btrssb s",nty apportionment lot WASH,
nv W snd the Independent district OIL
n soupy 1 have n letter from Judge
khim Sste OCTOBER IL. lSaG In wnich
fy, ptal'pS ,rlv TO my inquiry OF previous
|nsifs y No apportioned out OF this sur
nN " ,nuvbt forward from last year
fupo ~, v, thus making about si5ev ap-
MT c~,br county schools In addlt'oh
|lSnto y ,is,n by the state for TINS cur.
|as W. rhs reports above mentioned
yen ,,a county has regularly paid uie
ln n.,r US lis proportion OF the county
y ns.,Isble FUND and the county Reports
MI s s,s"a The receipt of the. same. My
BOWEN suss, IN making this investisatinh
~. ,lv4s cassidy this surplus heio py Tue
\ VI. n Washington county, as III case
|.sui ..,l so,,pties In the state. arose from
s'sssrulstitn OF available county luuus
/ y s,eh should be subject to appor'ion-
!. Z among the schools of the county m
nv independent school districts Ill tue
M n proportion TO the schoiassic popu
r ~ However, my investisauohs snow
N NV u. s,rnus is an uuexpended balance
81 W ,ra,on county. At the same time
I s WI. made It's Der capita apportionment
IN, ..s,ng,on county II likewise made a
!. ..aartoument to the independent school
', XXI NJ Brepham. The law provides that
w r.,rpended balance at the end OF any
N war belonging to school district
N. n, M beId for the next school year to
Y ..,,Sa ~ aid school district. This applies
\, ~, districts In the county under the
", district system, as well as to inde-
s M sFhoo districts subject only to one
.,,,tiau that II such balance snail exceed
-, eapits, then such excess over 50 pei
Il. ANIL be reapportioned TO the school
hit, Of the county.
|, The case OF community counties. since
X has a legal existence Of only one yenr,
Irtt.pended balances remain to the credit
Il, whole county and are again subject
,tdiysiou or reapportionment among the
nruuites organized for tue coming year.
Il Al this point will answer your first
alton BY saying that II is certainly the
lis q the proper school authorities TO re-
co,icu each year whatever amount in any
rnyniy county is brought forward as a
hue from the previous year The ex-
,rilion which have made as regards the
yrre d this balance in the case OF Wash
fscn county constrains me TO say that !
rot think that the city Of Brenham can
In any portion Of this uneXpended balance
he State appropriation arising from said
gfniatiop made last year or any previous
n, II this balance came from the county
titled TO its proportionate share. AS the
i stands, both the city and county, Just
ID De care Of two adjoining counties. re-
N their respective shares of the State
1urflatlcn in proportion to their scholas-
ppuation Brenham does not pass back
y he county treasury any of its uneX
did balante at the close OF any school
Y. hence Is can not participate in any
eHson Of the State funds held by ths
no AS regards tho State fund. Bren-
spd Washington county are as independ-
! u eaeh other as Washington is independ-
w Burleson county A careful investiga-
|. q the facts. as exhibited by your letter
ne records Of this office. together with
a'eiu examination of the law on the sub
! iiads ne 10 the above conclusion.
j S. Kendall,
sie Superntendent Public Instruction.
sN Attorney swear.ngen, asked what If
\ lae above opinion of Superintendent Ken
! vould have on the question at issue be-.
IN he city council and the county off =
. Naled that the said opinion ought 10
paai and that he thought II would settle
nl''er. Mr. Swearingen also stated that
ny gwen the city council written opn-
'0ne time since in which he had reached
I'M nme conclusion as has Superintendent
lssls nut that in Difference TO the wishes