*1 Honorable Je D. Hazlewood

County Attorney

Canyon, Texas Opinion No. O-175.

Dear Mr. Hazlewoodr Rer Ik.potismLaw This office is in reoeipt of your'telegram af January 19 which reads as follows:

%nder~Artiole 432 Psmal Code oaa Anhose 8011 married B's daughter hire B to mrk for him?'

Since you refer to Article 432 o> the Penal Code, m d&l'assnm that the employnmt mentioned inmlvea thb employment of'sone person related to a ooun+qr offioial in the degree .set forth in your tqlugraa'andthat the proposed employee muld drpw ooqensation from* aoumty.

Article 452 of the Penal Ccide provides, *B oftic& ofthi 5-b or any officer of any district, oounty, - . . &al+ appoint, or vote for,-or confinnths appointment lm 8.ny office, pxition, clerkship, employmei& or de, of any persm related dthimthe second degree by affinieg~or irithilr th.tIiiid degree bjr oonsanguimity to the person so appointed or So VOting, . ; .mIititi the oalary, fees, or compensation of suoh appointee is to be paid for; direotly or indirectly, out of or from public funds or fees of offioe of any kind or ohar- aoter whatsoever."

As $d in 2 C. J. 378, blood relationa of the husband and Mood relations of the uife are not related to each other by affinity.. Ex Earris 6 L.R.A. 713, Fla., Lo- v. State, SO~Southern 45, Ala. *he 4's father and the wife's father wufd not ba so related.

As aptly pit by Judge C. J. Blaokley ia the ease of Central R.,Co~i'. v. Roberts, 91 ffa. 513, 18 S.E? 315:,"5 groom and bride each comes wit&ix& ,.. the oirola of the other'o kin; In& skin and kin am still no more related t&m they nere.before.'

You aA, the&ore, advised that tha county officer's dpugkter-in- law*8 father may be employed without violating the Xqmtism Lax.

GRLrN:egw Your8 wrytrlqy A.PPR(lITED,

b/ Gerald C. Mam ATTom GRlwiAL OF TXA8 ATToRBEyGBKERALOF'

I&/S/ Glenn R.'Le& A.sis-tWt