Case Information
OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN
pan. &kept Ford, AdmLniatr8tor
~exss Liquor Control Board
litian, roxas
Opinion EO. 0-2260
Rca Whether Or A0
of liquor rev
IA these letter5 hat in view of the facts that the present ing rapldly dopletod and that there visa e for t&e r\rrnlahlr~ of’ such stazw, you lot a contraot for tho prlntlng of otan?5. “Ii0 change in the design this letter, being used is oonsldered neoesbnry.” Ye, are than referred to 3ection 45, Artlclo I of the It is stated that, In conform1 y vlth lgg8,ggor Control Act. sion, ample sheets of the sttxospe xwv being we 2 vere Wnt out to proapeotive bidders, along vlth speolfloetlons, by
. . .
goa. Bert For& Page 2 et Control and that by 8cceptlng &so
@ samples and wsh.. sns Q~II to the biddora together vi*th the speoificstions covering w wc);Les, the Board of Control aocepted the suggestion of @# WQUor controlBoard.
On Enm?h l2, 1940, seven bids were opened ia the efflce of the State Board oi Control
r thousand SWS, verex 4) 42.642 (5) 37.25#1
r w your iniorpltion the
bi@ast bid priae, namely, 44.5# per thousand at-m.
ASSuniAg thst the. co&raot is let to .the highest bidder aad boslng the future need of e- on part records, yeu wko tho follouing statomontt “Swalng UP the vhole situation and assunlng that
the COntrsot be Warded at tho bid prloe of 4444 per me thousadl, the total cost of stampa needed during flsCa1 year 1940-41 ~111 Bpproxlsate $16,570, vhfah Is $4,570 ln exoess the amount appropriated by the leglalature for liquor, wine, and beer stamps.”
After presentlng the above fuets, pu nqueet our opfnfoa oa the folloving qwstioar
9. Do you conalder the authority of the Texas Liquar Control Board as establirhed In the Texas Liquor Control Act the daslgning of stamps as to lnolude the she, ahap, oonpositlon, and mothod of printin& that Is, as to vhother such stms shall be printed by lithograph or en&ravod steel methods, and vhether past. experience as to the use of’ stxu!&% AOV provldod lpay be legally urgad by the Texas Liquor Control Board as to any stamps to be contracted in the future?
"2. After doflnlng tho suthority and responsl- blllty of Texas Liquor Control Board in response to question one vi11 you ploaae advise if it 1s essen- Ma1 thnt the Texas Liquor Control Board prescribe
the doslgn and other ayeolfleations, lf authorized to do so, by regularly adopted rule nab rogulatlon?
*3; Do you consldsr the printing of revenue stamps aa vlthln that class of vork ref'ccred as stationmy snd printing ,in the above mentloned Artlole XVI, Section 21 or tho Constitution OC Texas vhlah vould require thnt tho contmot bo approved by the of Ststo, and COnrptWllQr? , Qovernor, Wx-otary
‘-* gort POti, page 3
'4. Do you consider the printing of revenue rmmps a8 vithin that olass of vork referred to under the above wantloned Artlolea to 630b, R.C.S.1
'5. If your ansver to questions 3 and 4 abore are a the affirmative, would atiy contract antered into by my department of the Government vhich does not conform to the provisions of the Constitution and the Revised Civil Statutes, herein Eentioned, be legal and blndlng, and may the Texas Liquor Control Board expend any appro- priated funds in payment for stamps printed under any such contract? : : ’ j
.6. Your valued oplnlon Is also requested aa to whether or not contract vould be legal vhich would create an obllgatlon the Texas Liquor Control Board against and the State of Texas in excess of the amount of funds appropriated by the L8glslatPre
for such purpose.”
An arsver to your first question neceasarlly call8 for a construction OS Article I Section 45* Texas Liquor Control Act, which is A.rt%cle 666-45, Vermnls Penal Code. The i prtinent part of thls statute provldesr : i It shall be the duty of the Texas Liquor “(a).
Control Board the Board OS Control to have engraved- printed all necessary liquor and beer tax stamps a8 provided in both ArtlCl8S I and II of this Act.
Such stanps shall be of such design and denomination as the Texas Liquor Control Board shall from time to tirPe prescribe and shall ahov the amount of tax, the payment of vhlch 1s evidenced thereby, and shall con- tain the vords *Texas State Tax Paid.’ All contracts stamps required by this Act shall be let by the Board of Control an provided by lav. The Texas Liquor Control Board 13 authorized to expend all necessary funds from tine to tine to keep on hand an ample
supply of such stamps .”
The cardinal and paramount rule of construction 1s to ascertain the intention of the Loglslature in having enacted b bv, Cousins v. Sovereign Camp U.O.U. (Sup. Ct. of Tex. 1931) UO Tex. 107 ,. 35 S.W. (2d) 696; and having ascertained this intent, It must be given effect lr it 1s legally possible to do so. Kay v* Schneider (Sup. Ct. of Tex. 1920), 110 Tex. 369, 218 S.W. 479.
k. must, , therefore, determine vhat the legislative intent VSS In Providing that “such stamps shall bo of such design and denom- ination as the Texas Liquor Control Board shall from time to tlm prescribe .” (Article 666-45, aupra.
ml. Bert mrd, Page 4
The Texas Uquor Ccntrol Act wu origlnslly eoeated u EOUSS Bill 77, 44th Leglalatwe, hation 21 of thle bill ?nd Called Session, 19% tams on alcoholio lovled cert8ln uqmr aad protided that such taxoa vera to ba paid by affixing 8w on oech bottle or containor of liquor. Tha b3giS~tUl’O ~aognizod the poaoiblllty of attoz&a to counterfeit these rm% and by VlrtW3 Of 9eCtiOn 2% provided that 185~ $NWSOn rOrging 0~ acuntarreitlng &ny swap provldbcl for Ln the Act vould be daoaad guilty of a felony. Having recognized the posslblllty it vould sea that the or tim counterfeiting of these atazw, ~glalature vould have made coam provision mpWding the type or cbawcte.r of ot?z@s to be used in order to prevent, M fa~ u poaslble, any such countarfalt~.
Such VIU) the pwp08e of the Lcglalature, in our epinlon, in provldlng in Ssctl3n 45, 80~~4 8111 77, supraB that %u& atazij?s shall be of such doslgn ard denomlnatlon n8 tha hard shsll rroz t&o to tine pmacFib6.” Eiwi5g ascertained that the intention of the Inglslatut-0, l.n thle respect, va8 to f vent, as far 8s possible, my counterfaitlng or forging of I p" lquor atmpa, the vords of' tha stntuta must bo accordad the i um5t5.g that ccmjmrts vith thla i.ntcnt. Po;?han v. Pattorocm, ~. (Sup. Ct. or Texas, ES?), 121 Tex. 615, 51 33. (26) 6%0.
I I Xa the ~880 of McDO55ell v. ~~anmiller (Cir. Ct. App.,
1934) Fed. 26 320, a Stnte Comzisslon ln Fiebraske entered l5to a ooatraat vith lk~rns und E'lcDoxmell, vhereby they vere to bat as aonsultant engineers end have the duty of supervlsinO the plan tmd doslip of o bc:cstlng plant vhlch vas to BerYe the Unlvcralty and Stuto Cnpital. ?m oourt in detarainlng
ncanlng or “Ceslgn,’ oald:
nI)oslgn must include not onI3 the mode 0r installa- tlon, but the type and wsd of rmterlalr to be wed in tbs aonstruation...
Such is the 8~365iw or the vord %ealgn' 63 it 1s wad ia Artlale 6GG45, Vornon~o Peml Code, and in order to @vo err00t to tho.lntentlon of the Leglolature (to provent, a0 far W pO88ible, ang aountari+eftUig or forging OS uq"or s-s), it la tho o?lnion of tW8 dapartment that tize Taxas Uquor CO5tPOl tho si80, Oh5p0, CoW?O8itio& End ~al’d has 8UthOrit.y to sscitty mthod of printing llguor 8tar,ps vhlch lnoludea the authority to doternine vhethor such stamps shall be prtitad by lithogrWh W owravad steel nethod8.
g0n. mrt Ford, Page 6 V~OV or this MSYOP t0 70~ rb3t p93ti0n aad
tie aver to your second question, vhich follovs, vo deem Lc ~txcssary to ansver the lsst part 0r the rim ipstioa mutive to the legality of ur@.g past experiences as a sr;tsrlon future etaq contracts.
Ulth refocanae to your sooopld quostlon, there 1s no In tho Texas Liquor Control Aot (Eouso Bill 8;4olrlo provision n, 44th I.%&., 2nd C.S., 1935, as amended by E.B. 5, 45th Leg., P.S., 1937) vhich votid require the Texas Liqwr Control Soard to proscribe the dasign or thsso revemo stemps by a ragulmly In the absamo OS such e requlro- sdoptod rule Te,@ation.
mat, and since it 1s ‘8 voll nettled propooitlon that.statutes are to be given a reasonable and sonslble construction, rather &sn a stralnod or tochnical one (39 Tax&W. X72), Lt 5s not essential that the Texas Liquor Control Board speclfJ the doslgn of there revenue stamps by a re@arly adopted rule of Fogulatlon.
It 1s our oplnlon that any reasonable swum adopted by the Board In specifying the tioaign 0r thoro rtamps revenue notlSy the Board ot Coatrol. sad vbich is reasonably calculated Of the type and character of tho stamps vhlch the Liquor COntPOl Bosrd, In the exercise 0r its sound dlsdrotlon, deems best for the purposes doslrod, vould be sufficient. Such aonstruotlon vould be the reasonable one and votid comply vlth t&9 lsgiis- lstivo intunt.
tit vo vi11 consider YOW thed, fourth an4 firth qt30stm3 am3 muted them togother. Aftor stntlng that liquor stamps vom to be of suoh deSi&n as t.ho Toxaa Uquor Control B0ard tight prosorlbo, ~@BlQtUro provldod: , . . All contracts by this for stfuaps roqulmd
Act shall be let by tho Board oi’ Control as provldod by I.av...” (Underscoring ours )
Clearly, the Lo~lslaturo recognized the existence Of k bv under vhlch cozdrncta for Surnbhixg the necessary stamps Could ba lot. ,Tht?ro UM only tvo statutos which La~lslaturo The Slrst of thoee Ccud have had in nlnd in this instance. lo Articla 608, Varnon’s RevlBod Clvll Statutes,
satutos 1925, Wch providoo t
. 28fi loo. Bert Ford, Page 6
, Vhe Board shall bmuot for a term 0r not emaading tuo years vlth rospor~lble pmmm~,
rlrrjs, cor~orutlom or a3nociations 0r pecaons,
q/ho shall be rosldento of Texas, for supplyin& bfru.Uq, stationery to ths Stab all yrlnting,
and sup~lios nP liZ;o c;xrficte~ al2 dopctmnta, and boards, save and sxcopt such
kxt1tutfo.m
uork es my iw dona at the yarlous educational said contract shall
ami eletmoaynmy institutions.
be let to the loveat p3d boat reeponsibh bidder
after public advertising af such proposad bstt:ng
ror one% 8 uoak r5u.r con5eoutive vocks in ut
least six nevspuprs 0C gonoral circulation 10 this bo published state. tie two of such p3p~ra shall fn the 6)33cJ county. Tba iiomd may reject 811~ and all bids; the ronson therefor ahall be entered 3.n full in the minutos or the Bourd and shall. be open to
the inspeotion of the publ.lc at all tirzos. Nev aon- tracts sOal1 be mado in the mam manner as hord.n- (mderscoriag ours) b&ore prwidod. ” 634, Vernon’s RiwWod
The eocond statute is Artiale Civil Statutes, 1925, and it reads aa iollovsr
Vhe Board or Control shall purckass all ~upplIos used by oath Department of’ thv State OOV~FIL- nent, iacludi.lg the State Prison Systam, and eaoh elsw~osynary lr~tltutlon, Uormal school, Agricultural alad Hechaoical Collem, University at Texas, and saoh ell othor State Yohoolu or Departrzonts of the State Oovornment heretofore hereaftir created. Such sup- furniture end ffxCu.ro~, technical plias to locltie lnstrunanta and books, and all otbor things roqulrod by the dIlfercnt~deyiWx+nts or lnstitutiOn8, except strlotly pctriohable @~0d8.” 66645,
Article CiuplVb, Makes zt the dutr 0r the l3cnrdo l.Qt10r and hoer stam;ls Feroin provided for to hfm3 811 n~cssoary krtioie supro, mlutes to the PUP- Wcravad or printed.” &80 of suppllen, vhereas Artlolo &, sup’%, r8late8 SpOcifiC- sly to printing f?rul surplios of Uko charaoter. Comidarlng all tbroo of thoao statutes togothor, vo feel Chat there can be 8x1 doubt but that the Legislature contemplated that the EtarPp ~ntrnota vould ba let uador Article 608.
Artl’elo 16, Seation 21, ‘psxao ConoUtution, protideo~ ‘sea. 21. All otatfonory, and printing, exuspt proobuaatlons and ouch printing ao .rmry bo done at t&o Doaf and Lhunb Asylum, popor, and Sue1 uood in the
b~f818tlve and Oth8l' departments of the ~ovwnmont,
sxaept the Judlclal Dopnrtment, ohall be Suanlohed,
and the prlntLn8 and binding OS the laws, journals,
and deportment reports, and all other prlntiq and bw aad the repnlri~ and furniohl~~ t&e halls and
POWS UsOd rOl. the L!EiStl~S Qr the Li3~3iatUW Md it13 wncaittoeo, ~hal,l be porfomed under contract, to be
given to the lovoot rosponolble bidder, below ou.ch
maximus price, end under ouch regulationo, ao shall be prooorlbad by lav. amber or osslosr of any dopart- wnt of the govorsmnt shall be in any way intereotrd
in ouch ocintracto; and all euch contraoto shall be oubjoot to the approval of t&o Governor, Seam3t8q
or stem Coxptroller.” 3n providing r0r the
The ficEPar0 OS the Conotltutloa ! madrsapy dopartmontal prlntlng provided that the contract 8hould . bo let to the lovast reoyomlblo bidder, ‘under auoh rules and It vaa, than, mgu&tlano ao shall be prescrlbsd by &v.~ aontbmplated that tho &@slature would omct statutes ln
~COrdanCO vith AIUolo l.6, Saotlon 21 of our Conatltutlon
for the purpoot3 of em3ctuatinE; this provisicrr.
Artlalea 607 to 63Ob, lnolwivo, Verncm~o Rev&sod Civil Statutes, 1925, are thho leglolntlve enactaeats contom- Plated by the fmmers OS our Constitution, &u@ ainnao the print- in8 engraving OS the awvonue ota!cpo hero In quootloa 10 that
of vork rofcrrad to in Article Go8, it neccsuarily lo the CtE 8 of vark referred to in Artlcls lG, 3oution 21, of the Constitution of Taao; and all contrsots tho “printing
C@ erqravlng” of thcao s-o must be approved by the c)ovtwnor, ~oretary of state and Comptroller, 00 is therein provldod*
It ir, therefore our opinion that your third and S=H.b queotlons should both be ansvored in the ~SriI%3t%tlV~.
The fifth question preoonted 18 a very brood O~OD but by rcferrlng to quootion number three, ve oaounu3 that YOU Qalre our oplnlon ea to vhothor or not a contract for the Piatlag of these Upuoz otaq~, which la not approvod by tho OOV~Faor, 3.screttuy 0S Steto and Conptrollor, ao is provided 21, Texas Conotltutlon~ vould be top in Artlola lG, Section h-1 and blndln.&
*. mrt pordB PW a
. PubllshftqCO. 9. &thW CtUb8Or8tat0~XlX?i%&S 0r state (sq~. ct. 0r m~tarut, 1a99), 56 ~00. ss0mat-y facts shoma that the state 0r PZontana haa a conatltu- grthe u-1 prOViSiOn vhich in all r8SpUtS vas aubstantiallp thw - act Article lG, Section 21 of our Twxas Contttitutlan. Ihw p~~~sion of the Hontaaa Constitution fequirwd all printing a&raots bw approved bp the Oowrnor and the State Treaeurer.
fn aaoordaxuo vith this protisfon OF the Constitution prwsaribud by lair, the &U.Pd of EXa!!dnors d th8 IW@AtiOW dvartlsod for bfds for printing and, having: found that thw bid of the relator ~66 the loves t and beet, awarded the contrmt Appllcatfon vaa mud8 for 6 urft b t,h&ptatntirP. of psndamus requiring the tiwowtary of State to deliver oop~os ‘oP the bra to the state PubLiShin& Coripmy to the and that sam ml&t be
Ihw Cocrmy contondti tkerw MS an existing contract and thcx#elvea by virtue oP the avard mudo t%~~~*t,h% Stat8 hl the Btird of Eaminors~ on the other hand the Secretary of St&to contendud there uas no contract bwcawo under the Con- rtftutlon aXl such printing; contracts vwre subject to the 0i th8 GOVOMOr and the fXiBCLt)UC(I~, Mb, if Mt OppcOVod QQtVVti by thoa, verw lnvalld and in wffwct no oontraet.
The couxt doned the matier roqwsted and in boldlng that tha approval 0r the Governor eml Freaeurer va8 wasontial before there could be a valid contraot, ia part, statedt e . . . The appWtai Of the38 OftiWPS OC%tQi%tOtt
tho contract. . . . It bolng indispensable that thw ttgreomnt ot the board ahall bw approved by the BOY- wrnor aad tmamarer, before thorw CM bo a valid
oontract, mro a5logatlons that tho bomd ot oxaalnwra rooolvod bids, and nndw a controot vlth relator, vhose bla VW the lowm, az-0 wholly Lasufr~ciwnt; ...n
Arkmsas has a conatftutlonsl provision vhlch, also, is substantialljr the ss.mw as Artiolo 16, Sootlon 21 of our Constltu- uon. The Suprwms Court of Arkansas in Ellison 0. Olllvwr (1321) %' S.W. @6, conetruing oaid aectlon, In hokIln& that a
rirrting oontract~ub.loh kd not bown spproved by the Trwaeurer P One of the thrww officers rtaml) was not a valid and bindlq Cahtract up0n~t.b In part, tfaiat state,
" . . . The sootfan of the Constitution in uestlon Provldos that a11 such contmts oball,bw sub act to Of GOVOMOr, aIId T~%%wxw. the 8pp~O~81 hK?dtOr,
~QCI. Bert Ford, Page
mforo thir is don8 no oontraot 18 tmdw.. . The lnnguago we&la plain and uziaznbi~uo~~~, and it Is apparent that th8 requlremwnt that the contract shall be appn>Oed by the dwrrlgaatwd ofPloers 3.8 niandator~.~ Wo are OP tlmoplrclon abov8 cases are a oorreot that
l xprt~asio;l of the lair in regard to the point hbre la quertion, urd therefore, as 0 general rule, an alleged contraot for printing 0r liquor sUmpa would not bw binding unless it is rpproved by the Oovorno~, Secretary of' State, and Comptroller.
Since, a13 a Semral rule, there 1s no mua contract for prlntlq until it has been appw30a b7 the officers nwmd in the above mcntloncd swotlon of the Conotltutlon, and alnce providas the Constitution that all prlntI.ng shall bw pcrfomed under contract, vo are of the opinion th6t the Texas Liquor Control Board vould not bw authorized expend sny appropriated funds in paynwnt stamp8 unloes the contract hs3 bsen apprOV0a by the Oovernor. Secretary of State, arid Ccmptroller. See Attorne7 General's Oplnlona ijos. O-289 and O-815.
With regard to your last questlon, you no doubt have in mind the logallty of obU@tlom vhlch night bw cradtwd by 8ow apwcilic contract. Since YO have not men this oontract, cop7 of it., it I?, inposslblw us to pensa upon its le@ltp or to dotoxmine tho wxtont of the obllgatlone, if any, .' vblch it might oreatw against the State.
Trusting that this vi11 satiafaoto~ll7 anawr gour qwstiona, we are
Your0 very truly ATTORREX GE?iERAL OF l'E7AS .-vu Yaltor R. och