city councilor governingbodygoverned the schoolsend the muMcipalityj and when the changeoccurredin 1938 it merely amountedto changingthe form and name of the school district. The nev independentschool districtwas the sama districtas the former city school district,having a different name and a differentgoverningorganization.This belief on our pert is supportedby the case of Temple Independent,School Districtv. Proctor, (Tex.Civ. App.) fl 9. W. ,(2)1051, in which the court, speakingthrough JusticeDaugh, said:
-... . It is now settled,however,that,where such city does assums controlof its schools,such control,so far as the schoolsare concerned,doas not become merged into ani become a part of the municipalgovernmentas such. And where the tiltscommissiq~rs or city councilretain controlof its public schoolsit acta in a dual capacity-- one as a governingbody of the city in ita status as a municipality,and the other as the controllingor governingboard of its schools. The two capacitiesare not to be confused. City of Rockdalev. Cureton,111Tex. 136, 139, 229 9. W. 852; City of Fort Worth v. Zane-Cetti(Tex.Corn.App.) 278 S. W. 183. In so far as it acts in its strictlymunicipalgovernmental capacity,its powers are referableto Article 11 of the Constitutionand title 28 of the B. S. (Article961 et saq., as amended (Vernon'sAnn. Civ. St..Art.961 et seq.). Whereas, in the managementand controlof its schools,its powers are refaable toArticle 7 of the Constitutionand.title49 of the R. 9. (Article 2584 et sea,., as amended (Vernon'sAnn. Civ. St. Art. 2584 et seq.) ..."
It is apparentfrom a readingof Article2783-0 that the board of trustees of the independentschool districtscreatedunder the act have all of the ordinarypowers of a school districtgoverningbody, including"authority to providefor taxes",and that "the title and rights to all property owned,held or in any,waydedicatedto the use of the public schoolsof the city . . . prior to the separationfrom municipalcontrol"vests and passe8 to the new independentschool districtand 18 subjectto ItSi control,when such new districtis created,and that the bonds and indebtednessand obligationsof such city, "as a municipal,school district", HonorableJ.A. Guest,Page #5 (O-1106)
areasszaedand teken over by the newly createdindependentschool district. We think this indicatesthat it was the intentionof the legislaturefor the new independentschool districtto take the place of the old city districtand for the new districtto take over everything,both tangible and intangible,from the old district,includingassets and liabilities. We can not conceiveof the legislatureintendingfor the new district to be obligatedto pay the old district'sdebtswithout having the right to collectthe money due the old district. When one person takes over anotherperson'sbusinesshe ordinarilyacquiresthe "accountsreceivable" as well as the "billspayable". We have been unable to find any Texas appellatecourt case on this particularquestion,but we do find significant languagein 56 CorpusJuris 271, as follows: ". . . Where a districtis dissolved,abolished,or destroyed,and one or more new districtsare created from the territorythereof,or its territoryis annexed to one or more existingdistricts,the new or other districtor districts.in the absenceof contrarystatute, become and are entitledto all the propertyand rights of the old district,. . ."
The authorityto collectthese delinquenttaxes was clearlyone of the vrightsof the old district,"and the new districtis entitledto that right.
Our answer to your questionis that, under the facts