shall not iaolude,and this AOt shallnot apply to motor~vehiolesoperatedexclusivelywithiathe inaorporatodlimits of cities or towas."(Emphasisours)
A "ooatraot carrier"is definedas follows:
a(h) The term loontractcarrier'manas any motor carrieras hereinabovedefined bransportingproperbyfor oompensatioaor hire over aw highmuyiathis State &her than as a common carrisr.x
This lessoris uaqdti~~ebly, in the languageof the above defi- nition, a "person,firm or corporatiqnf" it ems, controle,manages,operates Hon. Gee. H. Sheppard,page 3 (O-6656)
or oausesto be operateda "motorpropelledvehicleused ia tratwpofiing prop erty for ocsnpensatioaor hire" betweentwo or more incorporatedcities,towns or villages,a8 distinguishedfrom exclusiveoparatioaia citiesor t-8. Such a "lessor"as posed in your letterfails squarelydthinthe putiaw of the statutorydefiaition,ðer treated as a "motorarrier"or "oontraotcarrier," and heaoe in our viewis subjectto the tax imposedby A&iole.7066b(a),supra. Wesre not withoub judicialoomf%rmatiorofIfiis aonolusioa,althoughthe cases we note are not tax oa8e8, but iwolvs penal violationsof lapter277, supra. This is not important,however,for we wed only to determi.la if such lessor is a "motorcarrier"or "contractcarrier"inthe purviewofthe si,stutory dofiB nitica adoptedia the Aot, dich is the same for taxingpurposesas for viola- tions of the Act3 if 80, tax liabilifyfollowsas a matter of law under the expfessterms of the taxing act.
The SupremeCourt, ia the mase of &w Way Lumber Co., et al, v. Smith, 96 S.W. (2d) 262, in an iajunotionsuit by ths Lumber Ccmpaxyagainst the members ofthe RailroadCormnissioa and some of its executiveofficerscon- oernedprimarilywith motor fratlsportation, sought to restraininterference with its operationsupon the ground it was not a "motorcarrier"or "contract carrier"as definedin the Motor Carrier Act (Chapter277, supra). The Court said:
". . . The term %oter oarrier'as defiaedin the act iaoludssevery one oper sting 'anymotor propelledvehialeused in transportingpropertiy for ooanpensa- tion or hire over axy publio highwayinthis State,'and exoeptothose 'operated exolusivelywithin the incorporatedlimits of oitiesor tarns.* The term 'oas- man carrier'bps long had a def'ititemaaing in this state, and the Legislature saw no neoessityfor defiaiagthat term. However,the Legislaturedid see fit to define the tezms 'motoroarrier*md 'contractcarrier.* Thus it clearly appearsin subsections(g) and (h).ofseotioa1 of the ack(Veraoa's Ann CiV. St. art. 911b, 1 1) 'hat the Legislatureintendedto briag under the act*weq person who operatesau(yr&or propelledvehiolr irtraasportimgpropertyfor compensationor hire oa the public highways,outsideof oities,eitheras a o-on oarrieror as a contractoarrier."(Ekaphasis ours)
The case of Reavlayv. State, (Coutiof Criminal&paalr) 63 S-W. (2d) 709, involveda criminalprossoution,thedefaaseof the dofsnlsstbaiing that he did not come sithi.athe definitionof the Aot. Defendantiathiscnse leasedhis truck uder a writtenagrament,as is the case here, some of the provisionsbeing similarto the provisionsof the lease submittedby you. The lease agreementinvolvedin this1oaseis set out in the opinionand for oompar- ative purposeswe quote so much as we deem pertinsntr "Appall-t R-M the owner of the truck aad trailerdescribediatb fOllOWing writtea agreement* "%%moranda of agreementmade and eaterediato this Fourthday of April, A.D., 1932, b and betweenArmour & C-say, a corporation, first prty,and Thos.W. Reavley,Jr., of Baoogdoches,Texas, sac- ond party. .
Hon. Gee. H. Sheppard,page 4 (O-5866)
"Whereas secondparty is the owner of.a osrkaiaChevrolettruck and trailer of fivetoae capacity,motor number T2853666,oarryine: 1932 lioeasenumber 166835,suitablefor the haulingamd deliveringof 'mat and mt products, aad
"Whereas first prty, in the operationof its Raoogdoohes,Texas, Inxnchis williagto hire said truck