We quote from your letter of June 18, 1946, requesting an opinion of this department.

"The minor inherited approximately $100,000.00fromhermother,samebeingeachintheOvertonRefliningCompanyofTyler,Texas,andwasshownastheamountoftheestatethatsaidminorwasentitledtobuttheOvertonRefineryaskedthatthismoneybepaidininstallmentsof$ 20,000.00 each over a period of approximately 4 years. Should this $20,000.00 be taxed as income each year or not. Please give us your ruling as soon as possible."

In response to our request for more detailed information concerning the above, we were given substantially the following additional facts by letter dated July 29th, 1946:

"When the Reflining Company settled with her, which created the estate for the minor, they gave her approximately $100,000.00eachforherinterest,butthroughanagreementweretopayapproximately$ 20,000.00 a year until the amount was paid. Is this $20,000.00 taxable for county judge fees?"

Article 3926, V. A. C. S., provides that the County Judge shall receive the following fees:

*2 "1. A commission of one-half of one per cent upon the actual eash receipts of each exeoutor, administrator or guardian, upon the approval of the exhibits and the final settlement of the account of such exeeutor, administrator or guardian, but no more than one such commission shall be charged on any account received by any such exeeutor, administrator or guardian."

The foregoing statute, unchanged since its enactment in 1876, appeared in the Revised Civil Statutes, 1911, as Article 3850, and has been construed by the courts of this State in the cases of Ly108 v. Che1m, 142 B. W. (2d) 959, affirmed 159 B. W. (2d) 102; Grice v. Cooley, 179 B. W. 1098; Von Konner1ts v. Ziller; 245 B. W. 423; and Goodwin v. Dovns, 280 B. W. 512. In the case of Willis v. Harvey, 26 B. W. (2d) 288, it was held that an independent exeeutor is not an "exeeutor" within the statute nor did the word "receipts" embrace eash on deposit in the bank at the death of the testator.

It is clear that the statute contemplates and the authorities so hold that the commission is payable to the County Judge upon the submission of exhibits and the annual report showing receipts by the guardian of the minor's estate.

In Willis v. Harvey, supra, the Court stated: "It is thought that the term 'actual eash receipts' should be held to specifically describe monies received by the exeeutor other than eash or corpus of the estate which was on hand when the testator died, because the words point to and imply that meaning. . . . Also by Article 4310, R. S., commissions are expressly denied to the guardian on 'Estate. . . . first delivered.' The express shutting out of a commission to executors and administrators on 'eash. . . . on hand at the . . death of the testator or intestate' and to guardians 'on the estate first delivered' is to be'taken as an expression of the legislative intent of the scope and purpose of article 3926. There is no difference in the meaning of the terms 'actually receive in eash', as used in article 3689, and 'actual eash receipts,' as used in article 3926, and 'estate when first delivered,' as used in article 4310. . ."

*3 The question before us is not without difficulty in answering. In view of the compensation statutes, however, considering their context one with the other and our inability to assume facts in connection with the settlement sufficient to take the $\$20,000$ "actual cash receipts" out of the category of estate of the ward "when first delivered to him", we feel the question is governed by the language of Justice Levy as above quoted from Willis v. Harvey, supra.

It is therefore the opinion of this department, under the facts submitted, that the $\$20,000$ inheritance, being cash or corpus of the ward's estate on hand at the date of her mother's death is not subject to a commission thereon as provided in Article 3926, subdivision 1, V. A. C. S.

Yours very truly ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

BY (signed) Wm. J. R. King Assistant

WJRK:djm:rt APPROVED August 6, 1946 (signed) Carlos C. Ashley First assistant Attorney General

Approved: Opinion Committee By: B.W.B., Chairman