OFFiCE OF T?IE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
nonorable V. A. (;ollioa, kember
I 80~~6 of tiegents 0r the state
‘Peachare Colleges Of G.xam
’ Livingston, Tarrae,
that .yotlr 1508
aertaio impr in sav naraom,
Texas, the a in should be paid
was completed, war-
the amount aped to be
irered to Mr. lIartin, who
them at a diaaouat of
took in oelling~hio war-
e 0piniQn of this Depart-
sther the Board must or 0011
e .eurrent rumw,
er is reaeirable
by law as money,
om 0r notes or aoin. hull V. ~First
hational bank, 1.23 0. 6. 106, 31 L. ed, ~97. hr. gartin
Is perhaps laboring under the misapprebeuclion that a war-
rant upon the Treasury of the State aonetituted l paVmentu
of the State’ B obligation. This i8 inaorreat ; a warrant
is efn;ply an order upon the state %easurer to pay, out
of appropriated funds, as ana when the moneys are arall-
able, a specified 6um of money. Th1.s is the mavner pre-
scribed by lau for the payment of obligations OP the
state,, and all persons entering into covtraats with the
State are charged with knwledge that payment will be
Uonoroble v. A, Colllna - page a
Mae in~suah mannsr ae aad whea monkys are on hand in
the Treasury. such rarrants, vhen funds are available
for-their psyment in due order, are psid in sourrent
runcw.
It has long been settled in this State that
the holdsr of a warrant upon the Treasury of' the State,
iasusd by the Comptroller, who sells the warrant at a
dimaount, aannot hold the State liable for the loss he
thus suetains; that an orriasr or the State has no pm-
er to obligate the State to pay auah least ana that
the payment of such loss in prohlbitsd by Ssctlon 44
or Artiole 3 or the State Con8tltutl0n. State t. Wll-
con, 81 f. 291, 9 2. w. l26.
very truly yours
ATl'OjblSX PltYEiUL OB TR2AF.t
2. 1. R'alrahlld
AssLstant