Case Information
*1 rtm. wiiiie O'Real
County Auditor
Carson County Panhandle, Texas
Dear Madam:
'Opinion Ho. o-1919 Re: Whether the~commlssionarsl court is, authorized: -(l) to lend money to-theass-istanoe of an indivi- '~ dual in the nature of support of a pauper vithout. requir,ing the ~Sndividual receiving the aid to ~, sign a pauperls affidavit; (2) to .empley anassistant in the office of the county home demon&ration agent; ,(3) to emple a.csunty wel- fare worker; and (4 7 whether the salary of the county judge for acting as superintendent of pub- 110 1nstruction;Article 3888, Revised Civil Statutes, is to be Included in calculating the maxl- mum amount that the count judge can drav under Article 3 85 3, Ver- non's Annotated Civil Statutes.
In yeur letter~of Janua~ry 28, you submit four ques- tions t&'thls department foran.opinlon thereon, and we will discuss them In the order in which they are presented In your letters.
Question No.~,l. 'I's, It 'lawful for the county to lend financial assistanoe to an in- dlvidual Fn the nature of support of a pauper .vlthout requiring the Individual recelvlng the aid to sign '8 pauper's affidavit?' *2 Wlllle O'Neal, .Page 2, O-1919 Mrs.
Article 2351, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes, relating to powers and duties of the cornmissIoners' court, in part reads:
"Each commissioners1 court shall: "11. Provide for the support of paupers and such Idiots and lunatics as cannot be ad- mitted into the lunatic asylm, residents of their county, who are unable to support them-, selves. By the term resident as used herein, is meant a person who has been a bona fide inhabitant of the county not less than six months and of the state not less than one year." The statutes do not make any provlsion concerning the signing of a pauper's affidavit by one who is to receive support as such from a county. Whether he executes a pau- perr's affidavit or does not, appears to be a matter left entirely within the discretion of the commlssionersl court. The fact that a.person executes such affldavlt would not be conclusive of ths question that he Is or Is not a pauper, or that he Is or Is not entitled to support by the county, and certainly Is not binding on the county. This question Is to be determined by the commissioners' court, and we think it wlthln their dlscretlon as to whether or not such affidavit shall be required of the person seeking county aid on such grounds. The statute quoted contemplates a satFsfactory de- termination of the question of whether a person is entitled to support from the county by whatever investigation or pro- ceeding the commissionerat court chooses, not necessarily dependent on the person's own affidavit or statement. The law, of course, does not contemplate county funds paid out to support persons merely upon their own statement or affi- davlt.
In answer to your question WC. 1, it is therefore the opinion of this department that after the commissiolrers' court has satisfactorily determined from all reasonable sources that one needing support as a pauper Is a resldent of the county and unable to support himself, it Is within the authority of the court to so find and furnish such necds- sary aid without requiring a pauper's affidavit executed by such person.
Question No. 2. "Is it lawful for the county to employ an assistant in the offioe of the Coutity Home Demonstration Agent?'
Mrs. Willie O'Real, Page 3, O-1919
Article 164, Vernon's Annotated Clvil.Statutes, provides:
"The Ccmmisslonersl Court of any county of this state is authorLzed toestablish and conduct co-operative demonstration work in Agriculture and Home Economlas in co-operation wlth~the Ae;i?Fcultural':and-Mechadic~l College of Texas, upon such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon by the CommLssLonersl Court and the Agents of the Agrl.cultural and.Meohan- lcal College of Texas; gnd may employ such :._, means, ,and may appropriate and expend suoh~s.ums of money as may be neqFessary to effqctively. ' establish: and c~~..on:~~uc~,demhn~tr.atin~.~brk~ In Agriculture and Home Economics In their respective oounties." i
The above statute.is an amendment of.Article 164, Revised CFvil Statutes; -1925, which artlole~ asp codified limited the expendit.tuFe of funds by a county, "'net.exceed-,~ ing one th,ousand 1dollars peryear, for farmers Go-operative. demonstration work Ln tlm county. . ." By the 1920: amend- ment of said article, Article supra; this limitation was omFtted,,tionsequently, the on1 3 1,lmltatlon placed upon the expenditure of oounty funds un er our present statute, is the constitutFona1 limitations 'of tax levies for county purposes. We assume that your request ,ralses' no question as to the legality of such amounts appropriated to meet the expenditures mentioned.and as setup in the county bud- get, but deals solely with the authority of theecommissioners~ court.to employ an assistant to the County Home D&monstration Agent and pay the salary mentloned.
The above a&gives broad powers to the commis- sioners~ court and leaves t:o.'-'their judgment the question as to what is "necessary to effectively establish and carry on such demonstration work Ln Agriculture and Rome Economics In their respectFve counties,." That' conducting and carry- ing on such work as, pro.v$ded-by the Dsgislature is"county business" as within the contemplation of Article 5, Section 18 of the Constitut~ion, of Texas> has neverbeenquestloned.
I&~answer' to your"i$~~~nd,~ue~t~lon,'you~.a~e.r~s-'~.. pectfully advised 'that ,it, i.s within~the: power and authority: of the cbmmissioners 1 court'to determFne whether or not the employment of an assistant to a County Home Demonstration Agent Is %ecessary to the conduct and aarrylng on of co;+
Mrs. Willie OcI?eal, Page 4, O-1919
operative demonstration work" in the county under the pro- visions of Article 164, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes.
Question No. 3. "Is it lavful for the county to employ a welfare worker?" Article V, Section of the Constitution of Texas, creating the commissioners1 court, reads in part as follows:
" . The County CommLss5.oners so chosen, with tf;e'couhty judge, as presiding officer, shall compose the county Commisslonersl Court, which shall exercise such powers and jurisdlc- tion over all oounty business, as is conferred by this Constitution and the laws of the State, or as may be hereafter prescribed." It till be noted that the above provision provides that the commissioners1 court shall "exercise such powers and jurisdiction over all counts business as is oonfefied by thins Constitution and the laws of thi s State, w as may be hereafter prescribed."
Construing this provision, the Supreme Court in Bland vs. Orr, 90 Tex. 495, said:
,'tlhe Constitution does not immediately confer jurisdiction upon these (meaning com- missioners ooupts over the county business and subject that jurisdiction to 'such regu- .latlons as the Legislature may prescribe,' nor authority geaerally over such business.
The proviSion from Seation 8 of that lnstru- ment (already quoted) prescribed: flrst, that the commlsslonersl court shall exercise such power& and jurl.sdLctlon over all county busLn&ss as' La conferred by ths .CbnstLtution. . It also gives them such powers as are Eo&erred 'by the laws of the State.'. . ." It appears settled law of this state that the commissi.oners ( court has no general oontrol over cmnty business, but only such powers of control as Is conferred by the Constitution itself and the laws of this State.
Mrs. Willie O'Neal, Page 5, O-1919
We are unable to find any statutory authority,
expressly or lmpliedly authorizing the commissioners' court to employ the services of a welfare worker. It has been the policy of the state to be concerned by general legis- lation in all matters relating to the health, sanitation and relFef of its citizensas a whole. The Legislature has not seen fit to vest la the commlssioners~ court authority to expend county funds for employing case workers, per- forming duties relating to W. P. A. or relief projects and in the absence of such legislation, we are unable to say that the commissloners~ court, charged with the care and support of the indigent of the county as provided in Article 2351, Section 11, have any such implied authority.
In answer to your third question, you are res-
pectfully advised that it is the opinion of this department that the commissioners1 court is not authorized to employ a oounty welfare worker.
Question No. 4. "Is the salary authorized to be paid the County Judge for acting as au intendent of public instruction by Article 3 I?'- 88 Revised Civil Statutes to be included In calcu- lating the maximum amount that the County Judge can drav under Article 3883?”
We find that the above question has been answered In our opinion No. o-67 rendered to your County Attorney, Honorable Frank R. Murray, Panhandle, Texas, approved by the Attorney General January 11, 1939. For your FnformatFon, we are herewith enclosing a copy of. opinion No. o-67, which answers your question No. 4, holding that su~ch salary paid to the County Judge for acting as superintendent of public ln- structlon la to be Included in calculating the maximum amount that the County Judge is allowed to draw under Article 3883, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes.
Trusting the above answers your request, we are
Yours very truly ATTORNRYGHNE3ALOFTlXAS /s/Wm. J.R. King BY Wm. J. R. King Assistant WJRK:GO:mjs APPROVRD FHB 1940
/#/ Gerald C. Mann APPROVED OPINION COMMITTEE BY /a/ BWB CHAIRMAN ATTORNHYGHNHRALOFTHXAS