9, or rxt1010 16, of our cQnBt1tot1on Off10~6 rlthln thle state 8hal.l oaa- hr dutlea sf their offlowd until th8ir auaoecmora shall be duly quallfled.* It ha8 been held that this prorlslon appliee to bhrr truateee 8 oonsoll6atJd aomd100. sahool dlstrfct. plalrm Comon Conrol. Sob001 Diet. vs. Hayhurst, 182 6. W. (24 SSS, by the marillo Court Of rn our 0p3.n on it wul6 ala0 ba appllaable civil. Appea1.s. 1

to trueteas or rural hi&h rohool flLtrlot8. I?rom the opin- ion in the @bore altard 86110 m quoter

Hon. Charles S. Mohlllan, page 2

*under a general pro~ialon or the Constl- tution, Vernon's Ann. st. const. art. 15, % 17, *all oifieer8 within thle State 6hall oontlnue to perform the duties or their 0rrioc.m untfl their 6uooe8sors ahall be duly quallfled.* m OMEtXuing thb provision of the Constitution, in 34 Tex. Jur. 370, pare. 31, we rind thl6 laf%uagor The p~rp00e Of OOll6titUtiollal and statutory provlalons requiring orrlaers to hold over until their suoacimorm have qualtiled is to prevent vaaanolee ln offloe and a OOMO- quent oeesatlon 0r the fuaotlons or gorernmont, The oonetltutlonal provision le self-exeoutlng, and, like the similar provisions la the statutw, it 1s mandatory. under the Constitution an or- rioer oaanot arbitrarily divert himeli ?r the obligation Me authoz+lty to perrona tbe'dutiss or hi6 orrloe until his 6uooo8eor quallile6; and even though he reslgm bla re8ignatlon la aaseptod, the law operates to aontlnue him in orrloe until his nuooo6oor quallrlos. * * **"

As said in MoOhoe t6. Dlakap, 23 8. W. 404, *the pub110 neoeesltg for aontlnulty of ettialal tenure 1s not left to the aaprlae or.tW orfloeholdar." IO. the oases of Keen ~6. aeatherston, 69 5. WC 9S3 (error roiussd), El Paso aad F. F. R. Car fs. AnkeIfbemer, 17!3 8. a. 1090, Rlaglins vs. City or Hempsteed, 193 fed. 596, it was hold that under the above,~onstltutlona.I pro~lf4lon an orrioor~s rerignation does not beoonte aiieatlre until the appolnt6mt and quallfl- aatlon of hi6 6uootwaor. In iwlger va. u, S., 93 U. 8. (199, 23 L. Ea. 991, under a 6onat;itutlondl provlslon of xlll6ols almost ldentlaal with our offa, tha Eluprama Ceurt hold that the qualirloatlon or a su~oessor wa6 neoosmwy to the efteO- tlreness or a resignation,

yroa the oplnlon of the Su come Court of South carollna in the cede State was f St oklay, 61 8. 15. au, we quoter

*The ramaining questions proaented by the petition and return all doDen4~ugon whatber a publia orrioor, who ha6 tendered his reslgaa- tion uaoondltlonally, aaa withdraw the earn be- rore acoeptanooi or what is the efteot of an *3 Hon. Charles 6. MoMlllan, page 3

unconditional resignation. on this question the authorities are not in acoord. There 1s a line of 'oasas.malntalnlng tha proposition that an uucondltlonal ro8ignatlon tendered to the authority entitled to reoeire it aan- not be withdrawn. Btate f. Fitts, 49 ml&l.

402; 6tate T. HauSE, 43 Ind. 105, 1.3 J&L Rep. 364; State ex rol. Klrtloy f. Auguetine, 113 MO. 21, 20 6. W. 651, 35 ADI. 6t. Rep. 696; State Y. Clarke, 3 NOV. 566. on the ocher hand at ootmah law and la a great number of Etates the doctrine prevail8 that the resignation or a public ofrlcer is not aom- plete until ~lt is either expressly or by ln- p1loatlon accepted by the proper authorities.

state Y. Clayton, 27 mm. rH2, 41 m. Rep.

418; Colonan t. Snada, 67 Va. 669, 13 S. g, 1481 State Y. Ferguson, 31 N. J. Law, 107; Van Orsdall v. Kazard, 3 Hill (I:;. Y.) 2431 Edwards V. united Gticlteti, 103 13. 6:471, 26 I.. Ed. 314; Hoke Y. Henderson, 15 W. C, 1, 25 Am. Doe. 679; 1 MUon, malo. Corp. (34 Ed.) 249. In the case of State t. Anoker; 2 Riafi. Law, 245, thi6 rule wae applied to the resignation or oertain ofrloers end me&ore of a ohuroh, tho oourt saying: *The question is whether suoh a resignation has b&n mado and acoopted aooording tc law, and in a way obligatory oa all the parties to this eon- trovers y . To mcike tt oo there must have been both a remlgnation ounplalao and an aooeptanoe of it on the pert of the aatlag and rosponalble government at the time.9 fn~the absenoo of etatute this rule is euppcrted by the better and the greater weight oi authorftles, reaeonine and ha8 boon adopted by the Supreme Court Or the Uhit9d 6tato6. E&war46 v. mite4 States, 103 U. 6. 4V1, 24 L. Ed 314, Until the tender or 0rrer to resign f6 accepted by the proper authority, 18 oan be withdrawn. * * **

It. is ow: opinion that those trustees riahing to do so may withdraw their attempted ro6lgnatlon8, slnoo no sucoemors &WW been appointed.

(jn xey 12, 1939, the Tax ~s6666or ColleOtor or Rexar County tendered his written reelgnation tc the Cam- *4 Eon. Charles 5. ~c~~illan, page 4

missioners' court of mxar county. on the followiI3g day, and before any action had been ta!cen on such resignation, he delivered to the same body a written withdrawal of suoh reslgnatlon. In our Opinfon MO. O-555 we held that the withdrawal of the resignation was effective and Rlaced the situation in the 831% condition es it would have been lf the resl&nation had never been tendered to the Commiesion- ers ' court. We hand you herevrith a copy of that opinion.

,Should some of the trustees continue in their wish to resign they nay do so by tendering their resigna- tions to the remain- members of the Ward, vho would be empovered to appoint their successors. cur opinion No. Q-2230; Clark YCJ. Wornell, 65 s. i. (2d) 360.

For sll praetloal purposes we believe the above sufficiently answers your questions, nithout going into the problem as to what body or authority could accept such a group reslgnatlon and provide for 5uooessor8.

GleM R. LeViiS &3sistant