‘A CDRFJEP GENE
0~ TEXAS
June 25, 1948
Hon. Weldon B, Davis Opinion Ro. V-617
County Attorney
Austin County Re: Legality of defraying
Bellvllle, Texas the expenses of BP-
ploging a county nurse
fpom the jury fund.
Dear Sir:
Your request fop oup opinion on the above sub-
ject matter is, in part, aa follows~
"The CommissionersCourt of Austin
County, Texas, has been requested by
some of the county citizens to employ a
graudate registered numc) to visit pub-
lfa schools fn the county and to investl-
gate health aond%tfonaand sanitary sur-
roundings of ~ueh sohooPsp etc,, all.as
provided under Article 45288, R, C, se of
Texas, Seetfon 3 of the same article pro-
vides that the ComiIssfoneasCoust shall
be empowemd to appropriatefrom funds of
the reepectlve count%ea, the necessary
wney to cover the salary of such nurse,
not to exceed $1.800.00a year fop any one
nurse, and In addftlon themto, the Con-
mlssions~s Cowt may appropriateadditlon-
al funds to covep the expensea of such
mwse fncumed In the visiting of schools,
etc.
"You will notice that Section 3
above mentione& of ArtfcPe 4528a, pro-
vides Df~~m any funds of the Pespective
oountiesDR ktfcle 8* Section g9 of OUP
State Constitutionprovides, among other
p~ovislons of such section, that a COM-
ty, city OP town may levy a tax of not
to exceed fifteen oents on the $lOO,OO
valuation to pay jurofs.
"Questfona Since Sectfon 3, AleI-
Hon. Weldon B. Davis, page 2 (V-617)
cle 4528a above referred to, uses the
vords Ofporn any funds of the respective
couutles0p could the CommissionersCollpt
legally levy a two pep cent jury tax to
defpag the expenses necessaxy,,fop the
employmentof a oounty nupse?
AFtlcle 4528a, V. C. 9. ppovlder::
"sece 1. That the Comlrslone~s
Court of the various Counties In the
State of Texam shall have the authority,
when in their judgment it shall be de,em-
ed to be necessary OF advisable, to em-
ploy one OP more Graduate Registered
nurses whose duty It shall be to visit
the public schools in the county In which
they are employed,and to Investigatethe
health conditionsand sanlhb supround-
lngs of such schools, and the personal,
physical and health condition of pupils
thepeln, and to co-opeaatewith the duly
organized Board of Health and local
health authoritiesin general public
health nursing and perform such other
and fplpthepduties as may be required
of them by the ConrfssfonersCourt.
'See0 2. That said nui%es when so
appointed shall be employed on a month-
ly salary to be fixed by the CommLssion-
ers Court and shall at all times be sub-
ject to Pemoval by the Commfsafone~s
Court without prfor notice,
"Sec. 3. The CommlrslonePsCourt
shall be empowe.Pedto apppoprlatefrom
any funds of the r?espectlveCountfes
the necessary money to cover the ealaPy
of such nurses, not to exceed the sum of
$1,800~~ to each nose, and In addition
thereto may apppoprlateadditionalfunds
to COV~Pall expenses that may be proper
and necessary in the visitin of such
schoola, and Qenepal Pnblio fie
alth mupa-
ing including tpanap$rtstfonand other
Incidentalexpenses0
Aptlcle VIII, section 9 of the Toxaa Constitu-
Hon. Weldon B. Davis, page 3 (V-617)
tion provides the maximum rate of taxes for aounty ptir-
poses, for roads and bridges, for permanent improve-
ments and for juries. The courts have repeatedly held
that the CommiasionePsD Court cannot transfsr these oon-
stltutionalfunds and it cannot spend tax money for one
purpose raised ostensiblyfor another gurpose. See
Aqlt v. Hill Count 116 S.W, 359, and Carroll v. Wil-
liama, 202 9,W. 50T'
D
We quote the following from Attorney Cener-
alss Opinion No. V-332:
"ArticleVIII, Section g9 authorizer
the levy of a tax Onot exceeding fifteen
(15) cents to pay juror~.~ In cons truing
Article VIII, Section 9, the courtm have
uniformly held that the p~ovlslons of this
Sectlon of the Constitution Dwere designed,
not merely to limit the tax rate for cer-
tain therein clesfgnatedpurposes9 but to
require that any and all money rafsed by
taxation for any such purpose shall be
applied, faithfully, to that particular
P-Poses as needed therefor, and not to
any other purpose or nse whatsoever.D
Carroll v. Williams, 202 S.W. 5Ok, 506.
See also Ault v. Hill County, 102 Tex,
335, 116 3.W. 359.
"The JUP~ Fund of the county la a
constitutionalfund composed of tax money
levied for the sole purpose of paying jurors.
The Legislature is thereforeprohibited by
Article VIII, Section 9, from authorlzlng
such tax levy to be used for any other pur-
pose than Dto pay jur~rs.~ Therefore,it
is our opfnfon that the portion of Section
3 of H. B, 683, Acts of the 50th Legfsla-
ture, authorizing the CommissionersCourt
to pay the salaples of the investigators
OP assistants and stenographersout of t#e
Jury Fund is unconsti%ut%onal and void.
Sines the jury fund of the county fr composed
of tax mOn8y levied fQr the SOPS pwpose Of paying juP-
OPS, and in view of the foregoing a,athoritles,It is
our opinion that no portion of the jury fund can be
used to defray the expensea necessary for the employ-
ment of a registered nurse to visit public schools in
. .
Hon. Weldon B. Davis, page 4 (V-617)
the oounty,
Bloportion of the jury fund may be
expended for the purpose of eaiployinga
reglstepednurse to visit public schools
in the county. Artible VIII, 8ectioq 9,
of the Texas Constitution.
Yours very tmalJ,
ATTORRRY QEl#ZRALOF TEXAS
APPROvH)s