Case Information
*1 Gerald C. Mann
Attorney General
Hon. E. C. ~oseley Opinion No. O-2337 Civil District Attorney Re: When does the 19&O Fed-
Hall of Records era1 census become con- Dallas, Texas
trolling uuder our statutes involving pop- ulat Ion?
Dear Mr. Moseley:
We beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of May 6 1940, requesting an opinion from this department which has been propouud- upon che above captioned question ed to you by the County Auditor o h Dallas County, being the third of the group of questions so propouuded, as follows:
“We were further requested to give our opinion as to when the 1040 census would be- come controlling. It was this third question which we desired particularly to refer to the Attorney General. Our tentative opinion on this third question Is that it becomes opera- tive and controlling as to the laws applicable as to the particular bracket when the census figures for Dallas County have been compiled and made available to the public; that Is, pub- lic information, without regard to the fact that the Washington Bureau reserves the right to make such corrections as might become neces- sary. v
The Act of the Congress authorizing and regulat- ing the taking of the decennial censuses prescribes:
@He (the director of the census) Is fur- ther authorized to have printed by the public printer, in such editions as the director may deem necessary, preliminary and other census bulletins, and final reports of the result of the several Investigations authorized by this chapter or by chapters 1 and of this Title and to publish and distribute said bulletins and rep0rts.v -- Sec. Title 13 U.S.C.A.
Hon. E. C.Moseley - Page 2 (O-2337)
The question propouuded by ou is ruled by the cases of Holcomb v. Spikes, 232 S.W. i; 91 386. (App. for writ dis.) and Ervin v. State, 44 S.W. (2)
The opinion In Holcomb-Spikes declares: "It wonld seem when the bulletin is so published and distributed It then becomes an official pronouncement of the law of which the public and all officials may ake notice. c ***
"The bulletin does not Indicate that it (the enumeration) was incomplete or negllgent- ly done, but rather Indicates it may be sub- ject to correction. It does not carry the idea that It was incomplete, but that It was com- plete. we think when the bulletin was given to the public, officials who were required to act with reference thereto may take official notice that the enumeration had been made and was then in the archives of ~that office subject to the inspection of the public in which the po;I~ii$ of Lubbock County had been determined.
that it may be corrected does not Indicate that the census was not complete and then a public document under the law."
Ervin v. State declares:
"There is no specific provision in the Act of Congress June 18, 1929 (13 USCA ]I 201 et seq.) with reference to the time of final an- nouncement of the census; nor Is there any pro- vision as to the time the census shall become ef- fective. Under the terms of the Act of Congress March 6, 1902, Ill (13 USCA ]I 41, the Director of the Census is required 'to have printed, pub- lished, and distributed, from time to time, bul- letins and reports of the preliminary and other results of the various investigations authorized by law.* Substantially to the same effect is section 13 Act of Congress June 18 1929 (13 USCA i 213j, which imposes on the D&e&or the duty to have printed preliminary and other census bulletins and final reports of the results of the several investigations. Section 205, 13 USCA reads as follows: 'Each supervisor shall perhorm *3 Hon. E. C. Moseley - Page 3
such duties as may be imposed upon him by the Director of the Census in the enforce- ment of this chapter,' etc.
"In Holcomb et al. v. Spllres, S.W. 891, 894, the Court of Civil Appeals at Amarillo, Tex., In holding that a prelim- inary annouucement of the census by the Director was an official pronouncement of which the public and all officials may take notice, said: 'It would seem by the act of 1902 duties were imposed upon the Director to publish and distribute bulle- tins and reports of the preliminary and other results of the various investiga- tions authorized by law. This in so far as we can ascertain, is the on y method i
to inform the public and of giving It ac- cess to the information ascertained and compiled by the enumerators and supervis- ors. It would seem when bulletin is so published and distributed it then becomes an official pronouncement under the law, of which the public and all officials may take notice. * * * In this case the un- disputed facts show the Census Bureau under the signature of its Director, 1. s- sued a bulletin showing before the elec- tion the population of Lubbock County to be 11 096. This seems to have been of- ficiai. This information appears to have been given to leading papers of the State.
Under the law this Information could have been obtained in no other way than through the Director's official act, without vio- lating the law and subjecting the parties to a charge of felony. We think the case of Nelson v. Edwards, Tex. 389, indi- cates, when the enumerators1 list is filed, as required bv the law, as it then existed, this made it such evidence as that public officials could and should act upon it.
There was no other method provided or shown requiring a proclamation placing the census in effect. * * *
"The opinion is expressed that the pre- liminary announcement of the census of the *4 Hon. E. C. Moseley - Page %
city of Abilene was an official pronounce- ment . This announcement was made prior to the ~time the ‘jury commissioners selected the panel from which the jury was drawn.
The announcement of the population in the preliminary report should havr been the guide of officials whose duty it was’ to Bet with reference thereto,. The effeot of the prelim- inary annouucement was to place the county of the proseoutlon under the provisions of Arti- cle 2094, Revised Statutes 1925, as amended.
Hence ‘the motion to quash the ,jury panel &Wild have been sustained.”
Your tentative advioe to the County Auditor is,, in our opinion, a correct pronouncement of the law.
Very truly yours ATTORIVEP GEHERAL OF TEYAS By /s/ Ocle Speer ~OS:l%rwb Ocie Speer, Assistant APPROVED MAY 18, 1940
/s/ Gerald C. Mann
ATTORNEY GE8RRAL OF TEXAS
APPROVED: OPIRION COMHITTgEEi BY: R.U.F. Chairman ’ ,