We refer to Artiolr25, 26, 1.021 and 1025, Vemm'r &notated Code of Crimiml ?rOoedwe, without quoting the W, wh$ohhavebeen oaa%truedbytheCoortin the oaae ofVoge8 vu. Sheppard, 67 8. U. ,(2d) 856. We quote iMm the above uatiap- l d C%KW a% follow%r

"St is at caoe rppamnt that a purpwe of artiole lop5 vu to mpend to tha o811 of ut- lole 26 for o aalpennt1ao to thb omuty attomby r’0r thb aerviae8 pruerlbed by thb latter, stat- ute u 8 rubjeot fcm em&mnntlaa. Wtwe 28 little doubt that in na8lng that offioea, along vlth the dbtriot otttaruy, ea a bbmilolmy of the teea preeoolbed In otlole 1~25, the Leglr- lature had in -te oaa-latbmthepro- vislon8 otthe 0therartSele ngudiagtho oom- pbnsatiar of the oouuty bttomey in felmg trlale, and rhiob, in exprur tbna, 1-t euoh ompener- t&m to 'fees allaved by law to dletrzot attorr- neyta.' Itla thue eeatbtthe,rlghtofthem- later to fees In aw~ea ol tolay oouviotlQ8, ae presoribed ln utiole lC25, depeude on whether suoh fees saw allowed to the dlstrlot attorney of the dlstriot rhioh embmoes Wllsm oounty.

That said di%triot attorney ia not allowed %ald r008 A% plfslulp discloeed by the prov1s1aae of Artlole lC21# for the laet-nmned wtlcle providu, in aub8tanae. that a dletrlot sttbnrey, in a dir- trlot oompoeed of two or mom oouutlu, oh11 re- oelve a per diem oompakutiah, depsading upaa h%cl ttemlmoe upon the %eecrian of the oeurt in the neoea%sry perfonnenos OS hi6 offiol,al duty. This canapemotion doe% not depad ~1 the number OS owea tried, or the result achieved, and exolude% all other ccmpensatian except hla w-1 salSPy.

"In regard to compbnsatlfm far the omtg attorneg in habbae oorpus oaae%, sltuatldn la materially the %ame as the other. Exoept artlole 1025, there 1% no statute vhioh provtdes oompema- tlon for that offiaep In a habeas aorpm oh80 Zn- *3 Ionaruble A. A. Xiller, Page 3

volting a felmg, and, u ve bsve neea, the 8tatute memtiamd relator eroltmlvely to aor- does for vhloh the dlrk?i6t Mtomey, if he, In8tesd o? the county rttormay, performed them, would be entItled to reorlre the fees there provided.

~e~o~~dthotthevrltofmaadsn~

be ?3ru80d."

In v3.w of the above mentioned ate,tute, it le olur that the Leglislature has nrde Lt the duty, and It i8 llkmlre the right, of the 8ounty attorney to Mprestmt the 8tate In Ike dbtrm caurt in the absaaoe 0r the itistrict attwa~. ma t or oolmty attorney in ewh in8taace to aoapamatfca P; UDI fiti P Articles 26 aud 1025, 8upr@, depends on vhethea the fee8 are llored to the diatriot attorney of the distrlot for the aervioea performed, Sn the abSauoe of the BUetrict l ttoane y, br the county attorney. 8Inoe Jmuary 1, 193636, the &atr%ot attomaey8 f~ all judlold dirtrfotir 3a thin &at0 hve ka OO!XpSn8Bt3& by the prpmant of &II 8nnual Salary In twslve eqtml mantbly insfalments, rathar thm by the allovanoa of fear. (Article 38&r, Vemon~s Annotated Civil Statutes) The em- pensaticm a? the various dlmttlat attorneys doer not depaa cnt the nunbar of aasea trlsd, OP the results achieved, aad ox- oludw all other oompens8tian exoept his &znUrl~eal.uy. b&me PIL a fee ba818, diotwat attorneys are no laqgsr awsatab but by the payment a? an mmual ealary, and the Leglslatame bu far oompanaating the aouuty attonkey who aots mde no gravlalrm $n t&e abaenae a? the distrlcrt attorney by appropriatlmg to him a pnrt o? th0 salary to be paid to the di8trict attorney, St follows that the oounty 8ttOLtlleg U'hO acta in the ab8encM of the &rtpiot attomey ts not entitled to 0Ompeneatlca HOP the 8ewloo8 thus rendered. Thersiore, the above stated qusatlm is re8pe0C- f'ully zawmwed in the ne@Sve.

Truat~that the ?0~@alg ?ullrmwlteve yma? inquiry, we are

YOux% very truly AT- -L QP TXM ATTORNEY GENERAL Or' TEXAS