purposesby reasonof the removalof the school or for aw other reason,then that the title thereto shallvest in the individualsocmprisingthe last Board of Trusteeaof the above named sohooldistrictas trustees for the ccm- munity, to be held and administeredby them as a trugt, andfor the use and benefitof all of the people of the Fairlandand Toby ommaunities." Hon. Een King, Page 3 (O-7265)
We understandthst no bonded indebtedness exists concerning the lot or the schoolbuildingbuilt thereonand that, therefore,no qua+ tion of assmnptionof indebtednessis herein involved.
Under the facts submitted,the land was oonveyedto the Board of Trusteesof the F & T ConsolidatedSchool Districtfor schoolpurposes, was paid for by said Board with public free schoolfunds of the grantee dis- trict, and subsequenttheret8,a schoolbuildingwas constructedon this land with funds borrowwdby the granteedistrict on its bonds; that in the gear 1945, the.F & T ConsolidatedCcnmon SchoolDistrictwas acnsc:'idated under Art. 2806,V.A.C.S.,with the Marble Falls IndependentSchool uistriot and became legallya part thereof;that since the consolidation no school has been maintainedon said land and that presentlythe~propersoh~olauth- oritiesdo not intendaver to maintaina schoolthereon.
It is definitelysettled,we believe,that a deed of land to schooltrustees"for schoolpurpolsssa wher-inthe habendunclausewas to have and to hold unto the schooltrusteesa8 assigneesforeverwas a convey- ance of a fee simpletitle,and simplythat. GladewaterCountyLine Inde- pendentSchoolDistrictv. Hughes, 59 S.i% (2d) 361, and the many oases cited therein. The insertionin a deed of land to a schooldistrictof the words "for schoolpurposesonly" does not restrictthe title of the district. T. W. PhillipsGas & Oil Co., v. Linge'-+elter, 5 A.L.R. 1495. The mere ex- pressionof a purposewill not debasea title. Wilsonv. CountySchool Trustees,229 S. W. 669, and Gladewater0888, supra.
Under the line of oases above quoted,the deed in question herein operatedto conveya fee simpletitle in the trusteesof the F deT ConsolidatedCommonSchoolTrustees,its sucoesscrsor assignsforever, in trust for the schoolor schoolsof the districtin which it is situated, providedthe clausethereinstatingin substarrcthat in the event the lend ceases to be used for schoolpurposes,thentitle theretowill vest in the individualdesignatedtherein in trust for Fairlandand Toby communities, cannotbe construeda8 a conditionallimitationdivestingtitle, under the facts, out of the schooldistriottrustees,their suooessorsandassigns.
Based on the facts suhnittedin your letterand heroin sunmar- ized, it is shown the F & T ConsolidatedCoon School Trusteespaid for such land with publicfree schoolfunds and causedthe provisionto be insertedin the deed by vhioh it was soughtto fix the title for the benefitofthe commun- ity ratherthan the school district. We are of the opinion that said provi- sion is ineffectualand thereforeis inoperativeto divestthe fee simple title out of the trusteesof the school district,their suoess)rsand assigns and into the last named individualtrusteesof the districtas trusteesfor the community. It is elementarythat the F & T Trusteesin causingthe inser- tion of such a provisionclearlywere acting beyondand without the scope of their authorityas schooltrustees.They have no authorityto give away schoolproperties. Furthermore, the grantorhaving conveyedall the title Hon. Ben King, page 4 (O-7265)
it had in said land, legal and equitable,for the considerationpaid in hand with schoolfunds, preservingno right of reversionin itself, was withoutright or power to make, or attemptto make a subsequent conditionof defeasance.