For the purposes of this opinion, we assume that the

city or town in question has avallsd itself of the privilege or requiring County Tax Asaeasor-Colleotor to oollect the oity taxes under the applloable pro~lslons of Art. 1042b, Vernon's Annotated Clvll Statutes. Ye also assume that the county oiil- clals or the county involved are oompensated on a fee basis for rather than on an annual salary basis. their offlolal services *2 :-Ton . ‘I’homaa F. Clover, page 2

Article 3891, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes, pertalnlng to the disposition of fees, provide6 part:

r( The oompensatlons, llmitatlonr, and ilxed in thls Aot for orrioers shall naxin&s’h&ein and apply to all officers mentioned herein in illclude aeoh and every oounty of this State, end it 1s hereby deoiared to be the lntentlon of the Le&islature that of twin Act shall cpply to eaoh of mid the provlatons officers, and any speoicl Lr general law lnoonslstent with the provisions hereor is hereby expressly repealed in 80 far 6s the s6r.e may be inoonsistcnt with this Aot.

“The compensation, and merlmuns hareln 11zAtatlo1?s rlred shall also apply to all f608 and oompenaation whatsoever colleotad by said officers In their official capaoity, whethbr sooountable as fees or ofi’ios under the presett law, and any law, general or speolal, to the oontrury 1s hereby expressly repealed. The only kind end oharaoter of compensation exempt iron the provisions or this Aot shall be rctwarda received by Shbrlfro ror apprehension of crlmlnele fugitives frmn juotloe and for the recovery of stolen property, and moneys reoelved by County Judges and Justices of the ?eaoe for performing merriege oeremonles, which sum shall not be aooountable for not r6qulred tc bc reported SE ieea of office.n

;i’hea the Tax kssescor-Colleotor oolleots the taxes of and for the olty or town involved where there is no oiiloe of oity tax ssseasor-oolleotor, the oounty tax assessor-oolleotor is holding only one oifloe which :s the orrioe of oounty tax and In oolleotlne taxes ths olty (r sasessor-oollaotor, town involved, he is only periorminq additional duties imposed upon him by statute. In the ease of Taylor, et al, Brewster County, 144

P y . (2d) 314, it was h6ld, among other things, that fees recelvei . by a sheriff (;vho was also acting as tax essesoor-osll6ctor of i or assessing and ccllecting taxes for lndegendent the county), school Zlatrlcts to the sheriff, sub:eot e0 !:iS duty t0 be10n~ to th,a county the fee bill. account therefor (irlso see the case of Flchcls v. SZalveston County, 225 ?. I’. 547).

!!on. Itc3t1 B. Clorar, peea 3 6fiV1666 that it 16 th. OpiniOth Of this -fOU-aI.0 TCWpOOtfUllf it 1P tl?. duty the Gount7 Tax Aaaorror-Collaotor

4e;rtWmt G-at HYC OOllOCt6 tsrer fo r l oltp or town to l aoount raar ra- from ruob oity town for bie 60nlorr. Statad dirr0r0ntl7, oeivsd BUC:? fee8 reOdvOd irOB the Oity Or tOWn rOr 5OlleOthg tnxea are roec :lr offloa murt bo rooounted tha tar to oounty under tte r04 3ill. i;s ksr~tofora 6tatod, ansunln~ that thm County Tax Aseeasor- 11 002pnw5t0a on a r00 baalr,

Collector arriving at t-110 xarinum oc:;!;onsatlon 3683 and 3891, A. C. 2., tha faae Artiolar rec3losd ty him ror collootlng tam8 ror tka oity or town in quartlon tiu~t ho included In srrir?ng at his maxima ooapensatlon. Ghan t3a CoJIltv Ter ~asoeror-Collector !aaae raosirad any amount tn l xoaa8 of allowed by Artlolrr 3603 and 3891, V. A. C. S., t!e !..~xl?lum aomponsatton he IS pay the mount in axoem OZ hlr iaaximum aom;:anr8tloa to :::e oounty.