Case Information
*1 186 OFFICE OF THE A7TORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN
&noraUe J. N. fiauldwia
@unty Attorney, Johnson County
cleburne , Texas
Dousir:
Yio have rscslvsd your rs
and quot. from ssas as
"OILS Of the iasmbsrs Of th lonars~ Court holssale lum- thls oounty ha ; hs oprates bar business ior a truok and goes
east Taxas and buys lumber e buys various kinds of lumbar 8 buys Umber suitable ror br
ous lumber yuds in ld bridge lumbar to ias In this *lolnlty. Hs iereot lumber yards in ke whatover kind of lum- me of the lumber mld to Jurls on ha sold to one of the re load of bridge lumber.
"The other three nrembars of ths Comaisslomrs~ Court halve heretofore bought from these local yards some of the indention1 bridge lunaer that this Comls- sloner sold to the yards, and ueed it in repairing and building bridges in their resgaotlve preolmts. I tiso understand that this partloular Comalssl~na~ has pur- ohased rrom sane at the looal yards suas of the idsatl- oal bridge lumber that he had previously sold ths ya#&s, and used it in re;?alrlng and building brld@es in hls preolJlot. Ths smterial in eaoh of suoh lnstanoss was paid Soor by the County, and the price paid ror the material was ths sake prioe that any individual wou3.d
have had to pay Sor this kind of material.
*I do not hiue any InformatIon that tbsre existed any-ape-at or understendlng between the loss1 lumber yards and the Commlsalonor, thtit he, or any other Cm- mlssIoners or oounty ~uld purohase at retafl any part of the lumber the ~yirrd wers buying from him. WKould the purebasing of this ldentleal lua- bride from the boa1 yerds by the other three nonbore of
ber the Commissloaers~ Court, to be assd In bridge repairing and bulldlq In their respeotlve prsolnots, be a viola- tion of either art. 571 or Art. 373 of our Penal cads?
Vjould the purshaslna of this ldentlosl bridge 1-0 bar rroathe looal yards by this partloular Comlssloner, to be used in &id(s repalrln(l and buIldisg Is his prs- olnot, bs tlolatisa of elther Art. 1191 or Art. 37S, OS our Psnal Oods?*
Artlole 571, Psnal Cods OS Texas, reads as followsr or any sounty or OS asy olty or town *Any ofiloer who shall oootraot dlreotly or indlreotly, or beoome La any way latrsted is say oontraot ror the purohsss oi any drait or order on the troasurcor suoh sosatyr alty or town, or ror asy jsry oertltlsato er any other debt, olaia or dsmand for whloh said seunty, elty or town uy or oan in any event be made llabl?, shall be lined not lass thur ten nor more than twenty tlass the amount of the order, draft, jsry osrtiiloate, debt, olals or llablllty Bs purohased or oontraoted ior.
Within the term 'oifloer, ' 18 lnoludsd sr-offloer8 ontll they have made a ilnai of their oS?IoIal ao- settlement OOunts.”
Artiole 373, Penal Code of Texas, reads as *IS any officer of may oounty, or of any crlty or town shall beooiw in any manner peeuniarlly lnterestsd olty or tom, in any eontraots made by suoh sounty, through Its a&ents, or otherulse, Sor ths eonstruotion repair of any brldse, road, street, allay or house, or any other.work undertaken by suoh oousty, city or in any bld or propt~al town, or shall be&we tnterested for suoh work or In the purohase or sale of anything t *3 for or on ecoount oi aloh oounty, city or town,
-de or who shall oontruot for ore noelve any mney or property, or the iepreseatatlvs of either, or any or advantage whatsoever la oonelderotlon emolkaent of such bid, proposal, oontraot, purchase or sale, he shall be flned not less than fifty nor more tkaa rive hundred do11ars."
Under the above by you, it seems olear faote subaitted that the bridge lumber purobased by ths ~mmls~loners for use sad benefit or the oounty was purohased IFofii your looal lumber yard and not~fron your soarmiseloner~. Under well dsttled prlaol- la the abssnee of facts to the oon- plea of law we must prssums, ,trary. that your oommlssloner owned so interest in such brldEe lumbar at the tlms s&me was purohased for the oouaty. Yea also state in your lstter that you know of no sgrwment or udlerstandlnt, between the lumber yard and the eommlrslonor meking the sale of such lumber to the luaiber yard, that would lndleste same was other than Eons fide sale..
We do not believe that the aots-desorlbed in either of par se violations of the hereinabove set Jour questions oonstituts out penal statutes. Trust&a6 we have answered your iaWry satlsfaotorlly, we are
Yours very truly