Honorable Robert S. Calvert ,Opinion ~No. W-177.
Comptroller of ‘Public kccounts
kstin, Texas Re: Legality of the expendi-
ture of State fundsfor
stationery, supplies and
postage for each member
of the House of Rep,re-
sentatives for their use
until next meeting of the
Legislature, pursuant to
Dear Mr. Calvert: H.S.R. 479.
Your request for an Opinion dated June 17, 1957, reads
as follows:
“I am enclosing a copy of HSR Resolution No.
479 and call your attention to the following lan-
guage found on page 6 of this Resolution:
“‘RESOLVED, That each Member of the House of
Representat,ives of the Fifty-fifth Legislature, be,
ygo;s hereby? allowed an additional Fifty Dollars
each, with the Committee on Contingent Ex-
pens,es for expenditures of stationery, supplies,
postage, telephone tolls, and/or telegraph tolls.
These Members that have exceeded the amount hereto-
fore authorized shall be entitled to have this addi-
tional amount paid from the Contingent Expense Fund,
but no more. t
“You have in subsequent opinions advised con-
cerning the legality of telephone and telegraph
toll charges. Please advise me as to the legality
of the expenditures of State funds for stationery,
supplies and postage for e~ach member of the House
of Representatives for their use until the next
meeting of the Legislature .I’
The aforementioned Resolution was adopted by the House
on May 17, 1957, and deals primarily with post session matters
affecting the House. It is not clear whether the $50.00 allow-
ance to each member therein made for stationery, supplies, post-
age, telephone tolls and/or telegraph tolls was to be expended
Honorable Robert S. Calvert, page 2 (Ww-177)
prior to adjournment or whet~her it was intended to be a between-
session allowance for each member for the purposes specified,
or for both purposes.
Insofar as the resolution authorizes expenditures by
members for said purposes prior to adjournment of the Legisla-
ture, we think it clear that both the authorization, and the ex-
penditures pursuant thereto, are permitted by law; but insofar
as it might authorize between-session expenditures for any of
said purposes, the great weight of authorities by which we must
be guided, prohibits same. The question presented is not one of
first impression b any means. Commencing with Attorney Gener-
al’s Opin?on O-377ii (1941) the Attorney General has consistently
held that compensation of.Legislators is strictly specified and
limited by Section 24 of Article III of the Texas Constitution;
that reimbursement for “personalUU as opposed to “legislative”
expenses is ,in the nature of unauthorized compensation; and that
the only expenses that are “legislative’t are those that relate
to public purposes concerned with duties imposed by law on mem-
bers of the Legislature. The above opinion treats the subject
in an exhaustive manner, citing numerous court decisions of this
and other jurisdictions in support of the proposition therein
announced. To recapitulate such authorities at this time could
only serve to unnecessarily prolong the opinion. See also:
Attorney General’s Opinions numbered v-84 (1947) V-211 (19471,
v-772 (1949), MS-40 (19531, W-131 (19571,WW-146 (1957). We’
do however uote from that portion of attorney General’s Opin-
io: No. O-3378 (1941) dealing with the distinction between a
“personal” and ‘Jlegislative” expense, as follows:
‘IIt is believed that the matter of Legislative
and personal expense may be rationalized~as follows.
Legislative expense is that incident to the workings
of the Legislature as an actual law-making body, as
a wholes, as the Legislature itself, when in session;
through a special committee delegated by the Legisla-
ture while in session to work on a legislative matter
between sessions; through personnel employed to close
matters after adjournment; or through employees main-
tained between sessions for the care of the Legisla-
tive halls or for maintenance of a central office or
clearing house for legislative matters between ses-
sions. These expenses are for the mutual benefit of
all members--for the Legislature itself.
t8Personal expense, on the other hand, is that in-
curred, or which may be incurred, by a Member between
sessions working under his own will, in his own dis-
cretion and as a matter of individual enterprise --
. : -
Honorable Robert S. Calvert, page '3 (W-177)
not as a part of the Legi~slature in session or .un-
der extraordinary assignment from the body between
sessions.
“If, therefore, an allowance of expenses to in-
dividual members of the Legislature during a session,
or while on a committee assignment between sessions,
is presumptively legislative expense, it does not
follow that, an expense allowance to each member in-
discriminately between sessions is likewise so. To
the contrary, in our opinion the latter is presump-
tively personal expense.
“Essentially this view is grounded upon the his-
torical and constitutional concept of a State legis-
lative office together with the practical workings
of the constitutional methods with reference thereto,
and the discernible weight of the cases in support
of such conclusion.”
The foregoing authorities preclude our making ,any valid
distinction between expenses for telephone tolls between session,
with which Opinions WI-131 and W-148 were concerned, and ex-
penses for stationery, supplies and postage. We think between-
session allowances for either, unless such expense occurred un-
der such circumstances as to come within the definition of “leg-
islative expense” as that term is defined above, would constitute
an unlawful use of State funds.
SUMMaRY
Insofar as HSR 479 of the 55th Legislature
may authorize members of the House of Representa-
tives to expend State funds for stationery, sup-
plies, postage, telephone tolls and/or telegraph
tolls, between sessions of the Texas Legislature,
same is invalid as authorizing the expenditure of
State funds for an unlawful purpose.
Very truly yours,
WILL WILSON
Attorney General of Texas
-Leonard Passmore
LP:PF:wb Assistant
Honorable Robert S. Calvert, page 4 (W-177)
APPROVED:
6P~NIO~‘~OMMITTEE:
H. Grady Chandler; Chairman
Larry Jones
Joe Rollins
Milton Richardson
REVIEWEDFOR TRE ATTORNEYGENERAL
BY: Geo.'P. Blaciburn