OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
&al. Baso0m Olles, Page 2
BHIB, and 00ntinU4 in force t&at pert of the btd
Of the Clear Fork embrooed in the lease, or at
14BSt a reeoonable an~unt of acreage io. the vi-
oinity of the produof~ gas well aonditloniad,
however, upon the
pay-&ant of all rentala QII t&a
MTee64 tha 14~38 Of $2.00 per acre
PetaiR4d iA
from the inosption of the original leare down to
the present tirae.”
The lease In queetion reaultsd from dLcooveryor
oil under-an oil and gas proopeoting pernit lommd by virtue
of the authority of Chapter 83, Aota of E917. f3eution 15
of aold Aot provibes~
*#hen one desirem 43 lease or patent anf one
or ame whole tr.sota in the wrmlt may be aben-
doned by relinquishment filed in the @e-&al. k&d
OrSioe am herein prorided and theraupm ObOain
a lease or potent upon the romtiing area$ pm-
vided auoh remiaing area8 in in a solid bow,
,&ii owner may relinquiuh n permit or leeee
at any tbm by having the deed Of WA.nqulSbX%e&
lokmwleOgeA, reowded by the pro r aounty oI.erk
and illed In the &UXeTal Land Off r 04 booaopaniad
by one dollar tiling fee.*
There fe no erg~resr authorle8tlon in rkapter 83
fsr the relinquialuasnt of a paxt only of the t4L severed
by a mineral lease. Ae ahown by the above quoted portion
or the statute, thir o&y rrliquirhmente authorleed by
Chapter 63 ares
(1) "One OF rpore whole traota in the ym’d.t’,
v&i& relinquishmmt ie authorized to be made at the t&m
r~leaae $0 iscpu&, and
(2) the relinquishment of "a permit or leeae* at
Blnce the Legiel,atum BBW fit by expre8a ~rgrovieio0to
authorize an abandonment OP relinquishment of a portifom Of the
.6rea oovered by the permit at the tias a lease wea ieaued but
failed tu provide for a partial ~elinquishaeat aubbs@gaWt k, the
icsuanoe of lease, it appears evident that it wt88 the Leti*
lature'a intention to rsfuss to authorize the 3!e;UBQtLiamnt
Ban. BarcarP Giles, Page 3
of a QCIX%iOA only of the mea crovered by a lease after the
permit had been merged into 8 J.saee.
Thio view haa been hssetoiore axpreersd br this
Depart&exit in Opinion Ho. 29k7, dated Lkaroh 3, 1934, eddreesed
to Hon. J. H. Walker, Connaieaioner of the General Land Otfioe,
295 ol the RepOrta and 0 inions of the Attosnep Oenaral,
f 932-1934.
’ Although the op !A Ion above rererred to dealt with
the ennit Aet of 1913 e oonipariaon of that Aot with Chaptar
83 Afsolo aem that the i913 Act oontained eubstentiallg thr mm
provlislons with respeot to rellnqui&ment of ponuitr and leaaee
as ie oontained fn the 1917 A&i. WI quote a8 ioUowr iron
the 1934 o#nionr
%eving 414otsd to reoeive one has* for tke
entire eoreage, they could not thereafter nU.nquWk
a portion or the leased area under thr tena# Of
Beotion 25 of the aot. Ii they thereatber desired
to relinquish the lease they were mpuired to r+
linqulah the entir4 erea, or ~0 part oi it."
We are ia nocord with the oonoluelon annotmesd in
the above quoted opinion, and we aooordixigly advise rou that,
S,nour opinion, you 84~4not autkori8ed to eooept e rdln-
qulmheent of a portion ow of the area covered by &am
PO. 2825.
ToUTa very truly
moRxxY GMERAL OF l%xAs
J v L/UU’V J
PIRST ASSIST#wL/-
ATTO- .GE.NE