must bs exeroisedby the Gnmuission as auohe FIon,Johz,E.. Taylor,Page 3 (O-1943)
FWthennors, it is not oon+smpIated that the members of the Conmissionshall act in respectto matters involvingthe exe@.oe of judgmentand disoretionas individuals,but as a board. When action -bythe board on a matter involvingthe exerciseof judgmentand dis- oretipnisto be had, it is contemplated that a meeting of its members shall b had, at which meeting at least a quorlrmshall be present,in order that the questionto ti determinedmay be freelydiscussedand - full  a free exchangeof ideas among the mem- bers, that the deoisioafinallyreachedby the Canmissionwill reflect the consideredjudgmentand opinionof the Cammissionas such, and not the several and independently formed visas of the individualmembers canposingthe commission.
Rhere a duty or powerinvolvingthe exerciseof judgmentor discretionis entrustedto a bard or commissioncomposedof differ- ant individuals,such board o@n act officiallyin respectto'~ths dis- char-pof that duty only as such, in oonvonsd seasion, with the memlwrs or a quorum thereofpresent. State ex rel Baria v. Alexander,130 Sm. 754, 158 Miss. 557; State ex rel Mayer v. Sohuffenhauer, 250 N. W. 767, 213 Fiis.29; State v. Kelly (New Max.) 202 Pac. 524, 21A.L.R. 156; McClellan,HunicpalCorporations,Sec. 695; 22 R.C.L.456; 46 C.J. 1034; 34 Tax. Jur. 457, and Texas oases cited;Mooham,Public Offloors, p. 376.
Moreover,the board is not at libertyto hold such a meeting for the determinationof a questioninvolvingthe exeroiseof judgment and discretionat any place of its choosing. On the contrary,&tiole 6447, R.S. 1925, providesthat "the ocnnaissionmay hold i5.ssessionat any plaoe within this state when deemednecessary." By dlear implica- tion, the statutoryprevisiondeniesto the conmissionthe authorityto hold its meetingsor sessionsat a place outsideof the tsriitorial limitsof this State. Rhan the law confersupon a person pcwersthathe, as's naturalperson,does not possess,that power cannot accompanyhis personbeyond the boundariesof the sovereignty whioh his conferredthe power. and although the Legislature may requireor authorizeoertain officialaots to be done beyondthe State'slimits,such acts are dona by expressauthorityor permission,and the power to perfonuthsm out- side the territorialjurisdictionof the State is not to be implied. Jacksonv. Hunzphrey, 1 Johns (N. Y.) 4981 McCulloughv. Scott, 182 N.C. 865, 109 S.W* 789: Meoham,Public Officers,p. 332; 46 C. J. p. 1032.
It thus appearsthat (1) the Commissionitself,as such,must determinethe questionwhethera prorationorder shall be rssoindsd(2) at a meetingof its members, (3) which meetingmust be held within the territoriallimitsof the State of Texas, (4) at which a quorum of the Commissionars are present,and (5) that the exerciseof this power can not be.delegated,but must be exercisedby the Commissionas such. Hon. John E. Taylor,Pago 4 (O-1943)
Whhenthe decisionof tb Commissionwithnspct to the adoptionor recissionof a prorationorder has been lawfullymade by it, the signingof the order itselfby the individualCommission- ers becomes a mere meohanioalorministorialaot,.whiohmay %a dal- egatedby the Conunissionars. Bee our opinion No. O-1607,attached heroto.
The selectionof the person or personsto lxeroisothis power of signingordstr for and at the instanaaand requsstof the individual ccawnissionarswould seem to involvethe reposingof specialoonfidenoa and trust in the person seleoted,and to that extantthe determirr*tion of the questioninvolvingthe exerciseof jud@ent and discretion in the s&action of such person or persons8but it is a judgmentor dison- tion