The Soragolng saotlon or the Constitution makes no raiar- an00 to praolnotr or praolnot orfioam. A Constable is an OfSloar OS the praolnot. If a Constable may ba lnoluded within However, the 3ftloaP as used in the above anlola, than it is term “oounty raadlly seen that ha does not raoata his oitloa unless ha ramovas tram tha oount Thus theily question Sor datarminntlon hare is whether a “ens bla 4 is s oounty offloor, the answer to whloh we look to Saotion 24, Artlola 5 OS tha Taxar Constitution readins as Sollows: oounty attorneys, olarks OS the Dls- wCounty judges, triot and County Courts, of tha pasoar oonstablaa, justices

and othqr~~aounty oiflgara, msy be removed by the judges OS courts ror ~nooapatanoy. tha Eletrlot mlsoonduot. . _ . orrioiai . . . .- (Emphasis added)

It is obvious Srom a rmadlng of the above saotlon that the Sreunars OS the Constitution olasrlfled oonstablas as county oSSloars. stated by the Court of This oonstruotlon of the seotlon has been well Civil Apgaals of Taxsa in the oasa oS Handarloks v. State, 49 c;. ‘7. 705, whsraln it w%s held that tha trustees oS comaon sohool dlstrlot sra County orSloers, In tha SoIlowlniJ language:

*r,ahool dlatrlots ara eubdirislons OS the County %s are 00lMl1ss10nars’ and justloos’ praolnots. Comisslonrm, jus- tices OS tha peace, and oonstablss era named aloe with other oifloers whose oSfloa8 extend to the entlrs county; end the santlon OS ‘other oounty osfloarsl is a refaranoa to them as County ofricers. Xaoh OS them Is an otrloar id and for the praolnot or the county OS w?loh his preolfiot is a pert, and ooneequantly oS the county itbali; and we think there ahould and the stat- be no dlifloulty in oonstrulnc; the Constltutlon uta as lnoludlng 0r a county the OSSloam OS the praoinotr and dlrtrlcts

in the genrrtl dsoignatlan 0r county 0Sfioarm.~ th4rsror4, that a oonstabla is a “County It is our opinion, ofSlomrw within tha meaning or that tam as wed in Artlola 16, 380. 14 of the Taxes Colistltutlon. Consequently, he does not vaoata his thm County and his oitioa upon removing to another praolnct within authority to appoint a deputy la not srfeoted by euoh ohang4 OS resl- danoa; however, his authority is not absolute, but is subj8Ot to by tha Cocmlselonars @ Court whloh it my dsire only %Ster it approval in order to properly aarry rinds thn Constable is in need of a deputy on the business OS his off104 orlqlnatlng in his preolnot ss provided in Artlola 687Qa. Joe Johnson v. state, 52 S. Y. 26 110, for proper prooadura by Constable to seoure the eppolntment OS a deputy.

JXii:djra