Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

“8‘ 447 i [dt- + ;* .I;-1 I,+I; OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Honorable J. 1. Allen County Auditor mult Oounty Oreenvllle, Texas Dear Sir: Your request for op carefully considered by this request as follovsr "The Hatlonal Oua ed in Oreenv te of Texas. expense on the traln- 3.ngto them 4600.00 fund of Hunt oounty. le to find any conetitutfonal or statutory endlture or donation of county funds by urt for the purposea above desarlbed. The court8 of Texas have repeatedly held that county commbaloners* courts may exercise only suoh authority M is conferred by the Constitution and Statutee oi thilrState. There are abundant au+&orities to this effect. We cite the follorinsr Article 5, 8eatAon 18, Texas Constltutlont titlole 2351, Revlired01~11 Statut88 of Texas; Texan Jurl6prude&xoe,Vol. 11, pagea 563-566~ bland v6. Orr. 39 SW 558) &unn-Warren F+ublLshlngCompany VII.Hutohl8on County, 45 SH 26 651; Rogg vu+ CampbeIl, 48 SW 2d 51 ; zmdman ~6. State, 97 lW 26 26 3 8 Rl Paso County VI. ,Elu, 106 i?W2d 3931 Howard v6. &mdOr6Gn County, 116 SW 26 2791; Oobson VI. Mar8hal1, 118 SW 2d 621 J&l116county VII.Lampas* county, i 0 Blf4q4. This department has repeatedly ruled to the 6am orreot. For uxample, opinion go. O-591 of thie department hold that the oomml6alou6rs* court of Calv68ton County, Texau m ilthout authority to expend county fund6 for the employ- mtmt of life guard8 for Qalveaton Beach2 opinion Ilo.0-1085 of this Depwtasnt held that the ooasisslonerr* oourt of Marion County, Texas *a6 without authority to y the 6alary of a game *ardent and opinion go. O-l@99 of this ~ r epartment held that the oommi88lonera~ court of Ber&r Cqunty, Texas, was without author- ity to expend oeunty ?undk?or Tire protootlon ?rom the City of 8anAntord.o and in the county. Confer6noe opinion Bo. O-2662 of this Department, d&ad February 4, 1927, Book 62, p. 46, 1926-1928 Attorney General*6 Report* p. 390 et @op., written by Bonorable D. A. Wamom, FIrat Ansl8tant Attgrmby General, held that the com- mia8lonersf oourt had no authority to appropriate pub110 fund6 to oharltablr orguclsations aged and oontrolled by private individual6 and t&t Conatltutlon a? 1876, tit. 3, ZWotioae50, 51 and 52; Art. 8, Seation 3; Ait. 11, Section 3, and Art. 16, Beotion 6 referred to, prohibit the appropriation of pub110 fund6 to ohiwltles op6retW by private lndfvlduals. Opinion No, O-1001 of $h.ledepartrunt hold8 that the oommis6lone~~ court did not b.avqthe authority to donate oounty funds to the Tuberoulosls Assoolatlon, to the American Rational Red Cro8.aor to othw charitable or other oqanisations making requests for u*6chdonatlond. h gonorable J. 1. Allen, Page 3 In vl6v 0r the foregoing authoriti66, you ar6 r6- ~p&,?ully advl66d that it 16 th8 opinion Of this dopartrsnt row QWStiOn should b0 answered in the MgatiVe, and it 16 SO uwwmwd. ?iOw?S VOVtW&iY ATTORNHX @ENBULL OF TElcIL8 irm.J. hn-i.iq ii56iSturt