i.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF 'I'EXA8
AUSTtN
Deer Girt
ah hn8 to do
8asora, rcddl,
In 00unt1.8 In wh1ah
$ed twalrr thouaua&,
itatxtm,tha useamr
or the tirnt faux
pwtmcttt, in omlsulotlngthe amQuat
aor uailarthlr Artiols, has hereto-
1930 cbaaue rsport ae dettnulniag
T of l~~abftaatr in 8 county.
"The iPa- OIInBUB bar ohen&%l the number of
iXlb%~tfd4i 6ild them 6m 6eVeld COUttti~~ &ff&Ot-
sd +dicraby.
&a a ?u grwraor
wt ocmputiwgthe ~II;OXUB::
for this ywm, rhou%d the nwrsberoi inhabit&at8
a6 ahaun by the beneu8 YW 19SO be the bade OS
omputatlan of the faes We the hse*0aar, Or
shoul& this Uagwtitmat now we the nusber of ia-
ik 1
Fiomrable r2eo.E. Shorpard,r?aga2
h$dp";;3,~
m akown by tBn.oenaus 88 completed
-"
TZ our o~lnlan :‘c. O-2337 we ruled tbet tlijraounter propoai-
t.lon*:[ftla true tlnot1eivespeak proapsoti?oly
'unleab the aontrery ia alearly lndloeted.'COWI-
Ronorabls Oeo. R. sheppart!,
Puize8
eel ior rd.8tor a0 not conteet thle prlnolple
oi law, ac0 alk that tbs istatctrinvolveclbe
glvan a prosgsatiV4eti4at.
"Tt is also true, b@yoncJquestIon, that
If all the mkrlel rrsmIost~ o? 4 taz a8f466uor
for 1925 httdbean amFlsteU beSay ?un@ 18 of
that year, h4 would ham been paid under the
old rate. mare could be no oontroveray upon
this point.
,:c Y .
Teupondont aeeao tc be OP the view that
the takiae c: ttts xandltlon fxa!i~ aach oltizen
oonetltutceall the duties of th4 aerm4mr'8
OffiUO 6XWpt Wh4t COLUUBd ~hOOIiB4 t0 b~OWin-
ate a4 mre *lnci&fntalEutIee.@ 813think his
work after AprIlG50,1936, as 40tlned by zkt-
ate, was equal to If not aborethan the autien
pmzorlbed In art1014 7l89, nupra. At any rats,
the duties subsequentto the tarin& of tbe mm-
ditfons wsra verr material. It we are aorrsot
In that view, we am not quite 4ur4 that r4-
apondent entertain8 a view oontrary to our&
Tf ha doee, we think he Is in error.
Th4 auti4s of tb tax esaenmr, In aaal-
tlon to those prezoribmlby axtlole 9189, lr4
crwmirlzaflby coum141 Sor relator in his brief
as rdli0ws:
?h'hc
aomt than quote4 at length Srcm the brief of
relator discussinGthe varlpuu duti.seof.th4 Tax kmmwmr,
and coaLinue5as follow41
vscex-4 nt3dIng of them vorlous dutiee,
prescribedbr stetute, fa aontinain$ that the
tax aalleotor has hut made a~@od bcglnni~
when he flatbcrkr
the rent+ltloneof property for
taxation.
"-he WiL’i~apUted 8tUtCment ia the pl04diIl&?S
is thsi the mlatoz did not aanplete hi4 offi-
clal duties until !?&ismber 15, D&5, about 90
days subaequ4nt to the taking efieot af the new
ree atstute i The aerviosa prior te IQril 50
l..._.
636 1.
Honorable Caoi H. shappard,Page 4
related only to the taking of nnaItIon4 a4
hantolora stated. There wee In no menma a
valid and bIndIn& l44844manton ~prI1 JO, 19X5.
Ml the authoritiesSO hcl@. 'Theasoessnmnt
butian of thi8 county 0rfi0i4i are not oompleta
until the various 66rvI664 above outlined ha+6
bean perfomsd.
*The fee 8tatute prOVia a oartaln par
oent. of asw886d vslrutlan a6 pay for the
laaes40r*a *sarvleae*. The oompanaatlonio
not for taking nnaitioam only. The 8tatuta
doae not 4ap he 8hall reoaIva 6o muoh ?or part
of Die work an6 romething0186 for other offl-
olal duties. ff the ooape~naatlon wau aiTi8i-
blr, It would b6 po86ible to apply the 19&Q
fee 8tatUte ta puMrfOf M14tOrr6 aeooMt8 4nd
the 19BS law to other portIon ther6of. Rut,
rlnoa it I8 lmp044Ibleto pl866 a Vulua upon
hi8 8atrr61 86Id666, it mu4 t b a l4uuwaa that
the usisla tura Inteadaa to apply the new rate
t0 kin 19e6 s6rViOe8 as a whole. phi8 f6 811
the more reasonablea aonolullton In view of
the faot that the Le@rrlatureknew he could
not present him bIl1 for u6rVIa6u until the
roil (tr1985. At the time bin looount beoemc
due, the new rata ra4 afteotire. Xi the Leg-
lelature h4Q Intended to apply one rate to a
part or the aooount and another to the other,
then It ohauld have provided a method for do-
ing 40. It ehoula have plaeaa a value on laoh
part or the work. meI having aone 80, we hold
thsre wa4 no 4uoh Intention on the part o? th6
lawmakers. Re,think th18 of?ioia,lshould b6
paid under the 19E5 statute. W6 have Sound
no authority covering this 8Ituation, aa aoun-
be1 oits none. Ee 4e8ume that no attorney in
this case hae found 4ny authority in point.
-m think the mana4mus ehoula iseue ae
prayed for, and we 40 reoomnand.n
It would 466m that the p444ing of 4 oounty rrcwe
one populationalaseifioationto another, thereby oheagiag
the etatutory rata of compeneationte be paid a Tax Assea5or,
would be the 84m(l,or elmIl6r, in principle to a ahang la
8ueh companuetlon by reason of the amen&eat ot ap$lI4able
etatutear.
fion0rRble *se. F. r;heppard, raga 4
Fassd upon OLir assumptftmof the publlostion
of the resul.tof the 1940 ceuaua as herelmbovc rentionsd,
it is our opinl~n that your departmnt shoulc?now use the
nussbsr of inhabitantsaa shown by the lC40 Federal Census
in Cetrmining the canpencration to be peld Tax .qssss~ors
ior this year under the pr0~1ai011ref that portion of atl-
19Q5, quoted In your letter of request.
010 8951, P. c. ::..
Yawa very truly