Case Information
*1 . OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AVmN
Hon. Aug. Celaya, Chairman
House Investigating Commit tee
Austin, Texas
Dear Sir:
mmittee for revenues.
Your request for
position has been received
clearly to answer your qu 1 divide it into the following parts :
Does the Eous entatives of the State of Texas have th ch a committee as is set up by House 001 (A copy of said resolution is at of this opinion.)
the power to issue process for wi
, upon disobedience to any attachments?
ttee have power to punish for confem?? ( \
g the first question, it should be point- to investigate tax evasion for the pur- ret-hand information upon whioh to base and adequate” tax laws is within the resolution. In Terre11 vs. Icing, 14 S. W. (213) 786, Justice Greenwood makes the following statement in regard to the power of either House of the Leg- islature to establish such investigating committees: *2 Hon. Aug. Celaya, Page 2.
"In declaring, in Section 11 of Artiala 3 of the Constitution, that each House may determine the rules of its own proc,eedings, the Constitution plainly delegates to each House the choice of methods for the most advantageous use of its function in the exercise of the State legislative power, which Mr. Cooley defines as *authority under the Constitution to make laws and to alter and repeal them.' Cooley's Constitutional Limita- tions, 8th Ed., p. 183."
Continuing, Judge Greenwood said: *Having such ohoice of methods, eaah House is fully authorized to appoint committees to make investigations .and conduct inquiries and gather information with respect to the operation of sub- sisting laws and the need for their improvement, or alteration, or repeal. McCullough va. Maryland, 4 Wheaton 4C9, 4 L. Ed.'579. Not only does the Constitution in the granting of the rille-making w-r, authorize either House to name such aom- mittees as it may deem necessary or proper for the purposes of,investlgation and~inquiry, when looking to the discharge of any legitimate tuna- tion or duty or euch House, but the Constitution goes further and makes the consideration by a committee a condition precedent to then enactment of any law. Section 37, Article 3, Constitution of the State of Texas."
Since each House continues tn existence after the end of a legislative session, asdetermined in Ferguson vs. Maddox, 114 Tex. 93, 263 S. W. 880, and since each House is invested with independent responsibilities~and duties, 'and is the sole judge of its own rules of procedure, we think the power of each House or of the Legislature cannot be denied to name committees to sit either during sessions of the Legislature or in recess for the purpose of gathering information considered requisite or helpful to enlightened or efficient legislation. A legislative body cannot legis- late wisely or effectively in the absence of information respecting the condi'tions which the legislation is intended to affect or change; and where the Legislature does not ft- selt.possess the requisite information, reaourse must be had t? others who do possess it. Experience has taught that *3 -f
Hon. Aug. Celaya, Page 3
mere requests for such information often are unavailing, and also that information which is volunteered is not always accu- rate or complete; so some means 0r acmpulsion are essential to obtain what is needed. Again quoting frau Terre11 vs. ging, supra:
DOur conclusion that the legislature, or either house, possesses the authority to order committee investigations and inquiries, in order to get inrormation necessary to the right use of legislativelpower, is but an application of the principle often recognized by this court that a constitutional grant of authority includes *authority to do all things necessary to accom- plish the objeat of the grant.'"
Thererore ,.it would logically follow that if the House had the power to establish this committee, certainly the committee would.have sufficient authority to oarry on, in an adequate manner, its investigation. This deduction forms the basis for~the answer to question No. 2 in regard to the committee's power to Issue process. The following quotation taken from 65 P.L.R. 1518 clearly states the law in this regard:
"It has been consistently held that either* branch of the legislative body, or one of its com- mittees, has the power to summon persons who are not members to attend as witnesses any meeting which it had the power to hold."
There seems to be no doubt that this general rule is followed'in Texas. Justice Greenwood, in Terre11 vs. King, Bupra, explained this power of the committee by the following reasoning:
"Each house must also be allowed to proceed in its own way in the collection of such intorma- tion as may seem important to a proper discharge of its function; and whenever it deems desirable that witnesses should be examined, the power and authority to do so is very properlyref'erred to a committee, with any power short of final legis- lative or judicid action as may deem necessary or expedient in the particular case.'
Justice Greenwood further substantiates his rea- soning by quoting the following from &Grain vs. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 71 L. Ed. 500, 50 A.L.R. 1: *4 .
Hon. Aug. Celaya, Page 4
"In an opinion 0r great rorce and clarity, delivered by Mr. Justice Van Devanter, wherein the Supreme Court, in reversing the order of the court below, upheld the power of Congress and of either House under aonstitutional provisions al- together similar to those in.tha Constitution ot Texas, to appoint committees and to compel wit- nesses to appear and testify before such committees, whenever deemed necessary or proper in the effi- cient exercise 0r congressional legislative power.R
The answer to question No. 3 is closely interwoven with the subject matter and discussion of question No. 2. It logically follows that if the committee has the power to Issue a process for witnesses, books, records, etc;, it must likewise have the power to enforce this process. It would therefore follow that the committee set up by House Simple Resolution 300 would have the power upon disobedience of any subpoena to issue an attachment to secure the presence of a witness before that committee. This exact situation was re- viewed by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of M&Grain vs. Daugherty, supra, which tact6 were substan- tially as follows:
The brother or rormer Attorney General Daugherty refused to appear and testify before a committee of the United States Senate authorized to sit after adjournment of Congress to obtain lniormation for the purposes of future Federal legislation. He was thereupon attached on a warrant auth- orized by the Senate to compel his appearance and testimony. Onzhabeas corpus, he was ordered discharged by the United States District Court. Artier "earnest and prolonged oon- sideration,W the appeal from the order of the District Court was determined by the Supreme Court of the United States wherein the Supreme Court, "in reversing the order of the court below, upheld the power of Congress and of either Rouse, under constitutional provisions altogether similar to those in the Constitution or Texas, to appoint committees and to compel withesses to appear and testify before such committees, whenever deemed necessary or proper in the erficient exeraise of congressional legislative power."
Power is given each branch of the Legislature by the Constitution, Article 3, Section 15, to punish anyone not a member for ob~structing any of its proceedings. "Ob-- strutting its proceeding" embraces not only things done ln the presence of the Legislature, but those done in disobed- ience of a Committee.
Hon. Aug. Celays, Page 5
-' C. J. Morrow, in the ease Ex Parte Youngblood, 251 S. W. 509, stetes the law in this regard in the following lan- gua ge :
.wWe have searched throught'the Constitution in vain for anything that expressly permits a committee of the Legislature, 0r;any collection . of persons belonging to the Legislative depart- ment, to imprison ior contempt. The only refer- ence to the question of aontempt as related to the Legislature in any way is that,contained in Section 15, Artiole 3 of the Constitution, which in terms *expressly pewits e,ach House of the Legislature to aprison for contempt ror not ex- ceeding (8 hours at any one t.ime.
"In our opinion, under our Constitution, while the Legislature may function through a com- mittee, and, because of the refusal of any per- son to answer .proper inquiries before the committee, the matter may be reported to the House appointing the committee ror its action, and said House of the Legislature may, by appropriate proceeding, adjudge such person in contempt and he may be thereafter imprisoned for the time specified by the Constitu- tion for such aontempt, the committee itself has no such power because of the rorbiddance of the Con- stitution."
In conclusion, may.1 sum up the discussion of the .powers of this committee, in the following manner: The Leg- islature has the power to set up such a committee as is es- tablished by House Simple Resolution 300. and such committee has the power to issue subpoenas and attachments for witnesses, books and records. However, if a witness refused to comply and thus were *obstruating the proceedi@ within the mean- ing of our Constitution, such contempt oould not be punished by the committee acting as a committee, but only by the House as a whole.
We hope the above discussion has answered the questions you have in mind in regard to the authority and power of your committee. If any further questions arise, please ref'er them ta us.
Sincerely yours FBI:pbp
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS APPROVED NOV 21, 1939
(8) Gerald C. Mann
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS BY
Frederik B. Isely Assistant APPROVED