281
OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
pan. &keptFord, AdmLniatr8tor
~exss Liquor Control Board
litian, roxas
Opinion EO. 0-2260
Rca Whether Or A0
of liquor rev
IA these letter5
hat in view of the facts that the present
ing rapldly dopletod and that there visa
e for t&e r\rrnlahlr~ of’ such stazw, you
lot a contraot for tho prlntlng of otan?5.
this letter, “Ii0 change in the design
being used is oonsldered neoesbnry.”
Ye, are than referred to 3ection 45, Artlclo I of the
lgg8,ggor Control Act. It is stated that, In conform1 y vlth
sion, ample sheets of the sttxospe xwv being we 2 vere
Wnt out to proapeotive bidders, along vlth speolfloetlons,by the
...
282
goa. Bert For& Page 2
@ et Control and that by 8cceptlng &so samples and wsh..
sns Q~II to the biddora together vi*th the speoificstions covering
w wc);Les,the Board of Control aocepted the suggestionof
@# WQUor controlBoard.
On Enm?hl2, 1940, seven bids were opened ia the
efflce of the State Board oi Control
r thousand SWS, verex
r 4) 42.642 (5) 37.25#1
w your iniorpltion the
bi@ast bid priae, namely, 44.5# per thousand at-m.
ASSuniAg thst the.co&raot is let to .thehighest
bidderaad boslng the future need of e- on part records,
yeu wko tho follouing statomontt
“Swalng UP the vhole situation and assunlng that
the COntrsot be Warded at tho bid prloe of 4444 per me
thousadl, the total cost of stampa needed during the
flsCa1 year 1940-41 ~111 Bpproxlsate $16,570, vhfah
Is $4,570 ln exoess or the amount appropriated by the
leglalature for liquor, wine, and beer stamps.”
After presentlng the above fuets, pu nqueet our
opfnfoa oa the folloving qwstioar
9. Do you conalder the authority of the Texas
Liquar Control Board as establirhed In the Texas Liquor
Control Act for the daslgning of stamps as to lnolude
the she, ahap, oonpositlon, and mothod of printin&
that Is, as to vhother such stms shall be printed
by lithograph or en&ravod steel methods, and vhether
past. experience as to the use of’ stxu!&% AOV provldod
lpay be legally urgad by the Texas Liquor Control Board
as to any stamps to be contracted for in the future?
"2. After doflnlng tho suthority and responsl-
blllty of the Texas Liquor Control Board in response
to question one vi11 you ploaae advise if it 1s essen-
Ma1 thnt the Texas Liquor Control Board prescribe
the doslgn and other ayeolfleations, lf authorized to
do so, by a regularly adopted rule nab rogulatlon?
*3; Do you consldsr the printing of revenue
stamps aa vlthln that class of vork ref'ccred to as
stationmy snd printing ,in the above mentloned Artlole
XVI, Section 21 or tho Constitution OC Texas vhlah
vould require thnt tho contmot bo approved by the
Qovernor, Wx-otary of Ststo, and COnrptWllQr? ,
283
‘-* gort POti, page 3
'4. Do you consider the printing of revenue
rmmps a8 vithin that olass of vork referred to under
the above wantloned Artlolea 607 to 630b, R.C.S.1
'5. If your ansver to questions 3 and 4 abore are
a the affirmative, would atiy contract antered into by
my department of the Government vhich does not conform
to the provisions of the Constitution and the Revised
Civil Statutes, herein Eentioned, be legal and blndlng,
and may the Texas Liquor Control Board expend any appro-
priated funds in payment for stamps printed under any
such contract? :’:j
.6. Your valued oplnlon Is also requested aa to
whether or not a contract vould be legal vhich would create
an obllgatlon against the Texas Liquor Control Board
and the State of Texas in excess of the amount of
funds appropriated by the L8glslatPre for such purpose.”
An arsver to your first question neceasarlly call8
for a construction OS Article I Section 45* Texas Liquor
Control Act, which is A.rt%cle 666-45, Vermnls Penal Code. The i
prtinent part of thls statute provldesr :
“(a). It shall be the duty of the Texas Liquor i
Control Board and the Board OS Control to have engraved-
or printed all necessary liquor and beer tax stamps
a8 provided in both ArtlCl8S I and II of this Act.
Such stanps shall be of such design and denomination
as the Texas Liquor Control Board shall from time to
tirPe prescribe and shall ahov the amount of tax, the
payment of vhlch 1s evidenced thereby, and shall con-
tain the vords *Texas State Tax Paid.’ All contracts
for stamps required by this Act shall be let by the
Board of Control an provided by lav. The Texas Liquor
Control Board 13 authorized to expend all necessary
funds from tine to tine to keep on hand an ample
supply of such stamps .”
The cardinal and paramount rule of construction 1s
to ascertain the intention of the Loglslature in having enacted
b bv, Cousins v. Sovereign Camp U.O.U. (Sup. Ct. of Tex. 1931)
UO Tex. 107 ,. 35 S.W. (2d) 696; and having ascertained this intent,
It must be given effect lr it 1s legally possible to do so. Kay
v* Schneider (Sup. Ct. of Tex. 1920), 110 Tex. 369, 218 S.W. 479.
k. must,, therefore, determine vhat the legislative intent VSS In
Providing that “such stamps shall bo of such design and denom-
ination as the Texas Liquor Control Board shall from time to
tlm prescribe .” (Article 666-45, aupra.
ml. Bert mrd, Page 4
1
The Texas Uquor Ccntrol Act wu origlnslly eoeated
u EOUSSBill 77, 44th Leglalatwe, ?nd Called Session, 19%
hation 21 of thle bill lovled cert8ln tams on alcoholio
uqmr aad protided that such taxoa vera to ba paid by affixing
8w on oech bottle or containor of liquor. Tha b3giS~tUl’O
~aognizod the poaoiblllty of attoz&a to counterfeit these
rm% and by VlrtW3 Of 9eCtiOn 2% provided that 185~ $NWSOnrOrging
0~ acuntarreitlng &ny swap provldbcl for Ln the Act vould be
daoaad guilty of a felony. Having recognized the posslblllty
or tim counterfeiting of these atazw, it vould sea that the
~glalature vould have made coam provision mpWding the type
or cbawcte.r of ot?z@s to be used in order to prevent, M fa~
u poaslble, any such countarfalt~.
Such VIU) the pwp08e of the Lcglalature, in our
epinlon, in provldlng in Ssctl3n 45, 80~~4 8111 77, supraB that
%u& atazij?s shall be of such doslgn ard denomlnatlon n8 tha
hard shsll rroz t&o to tine pmacFib6.” Eiwi5g ascertained
f that the intention of the Inglslatut-0, l.n thle respect, va8 to
vent, as far 8s possible, my counterfaitlng or forging of
I p"lquor atmpa, the vords of' tha stntuta must bo accordad the
i ~.um5t5.g that ccmjmrts vith thla i.ntcnt.
(Sup. Ct. or Texas, ES?),
Po;?han v. Pattorocm,
121 Tex. 615, 51 33. (26) 6%0.
I Xa the ~880 of McDO55ell v. ~~anmiller (Cir. Ct. App.,
1934) 74 Fed. 26 320, a Stnte Comzisslon ln Fiebraske entered
I l5to a ooatraat vith lk~rns und E'lcDoxmell, vhereby they vere to
bat as aonsultant engineers end have the duty of supervlsinO
the plan tmd doslip of o bc:cstlng plant vhlch vas to BerYe the
Unlvcralty and Stuto Cnpital. ?m oourt in detarainlng the
ncanlng or “Ceslgn,’ oald:
nI)oslgn must include not onI3 the mode0r installa-
tlon, but the type and wsd of rmterlalr to be wed
in tbs aonstruation...
Such is the 8~365iw or the vord %ealgn' 63 it 1s wad
ia Artlale 6GG45, Vornon~o Peml Code, and in order to @vo
err00t to tho.lntentlon of the Leglolature (to provent, a0 far
W pO88ible, ang aountari+eftUig or forging OS uq"or s-s),
it la tho o?lnion of tW8 dapartment that tize Taxas Uquor CO5tPOl
~al’d has 8UthOrit.y to sscitty tho si80, Oh5p0, CoW?O8itio& End
mthod of printing llguor 8tar,ps vhlch lnoludea the authority
to doternine vhethor such stamps shall be prtitad by lithogrWh
W owravad steel nethod8.
g0n. mrt Ford, Page 5
6 V~OVor this MSYOP t0 70~ rb3t p93ti0n aad
tie aver to your second question, vhich follovs, vo deem
Lc ~txcssary to ansver the lsst part 0r the rim ipstioa
mutive to the legality of ur@.g past experiences as a
sr;tsrlonfor future etaq contracts.
Ulth refocanae to your sooopld quostlon, there 1s no
8;4olrlo provision In tho Texas Liquor Control Aot (Eouso Bill
n, 44th I.%&., 2nd C.S., 1935, as amendedby E.B. 5, 45th Leg.,
P.S., 1937) vhich votid require the Texas Liqwr Control Soard
to proscribe the dasign or thsso revemo stemps by a ragulmly
sdoptod rule or Te,@ation. In the absamo OS such e requlro-
mat, and since it 1s ‘8 voll nettled propooitlon that.statutes
are to be given a reasonable and sonslble construction, rather
&sn a stralnod or tochnical one (39 Tax&W. X72), Lt 5s not
essential that the Texas Liquor Control Board speclfJ the doslgn
of there revenue stamps by a re@arly adopted rule of Fogulatlon.
It 1s our oplnlon that any reasonable swum adopted
by the Board In specifying the tioaign 0r thoro revenue rtamps
sad vbich is reasonably calculated to notlSy the Board ot Coatrol.
Of the type and character of tho stamps vhlch the Liquor COntPOl
Bosrd, In the exercise 0r its sound dlsdrotlon, deems best for
the purposesdoslrod, vould be sufficient. Such a aonstruotlon
vould be the reasonable one and votid comply vlth t&9 lsgiis-
lstivointunt.
YOW thed, fourth an4 firth qt30stm3 am3 30 muted
tit vo vi11 consider them togother.
Aftor stntlng that liquor stamps vom to be of suoh
deSi&n as t.ho Toxaa Uquor Control B0ard tight prosorlbo, the
~@BlQtUro provldod:
, . . All contracts for stfuaps roqulmd by this
Act shall be let by tho Board oi’ Control as provldod
by I.av...” (Underscoring ours )
Clearly, the Lo~lslaturorecognized the existence Of
k bv under vhlch cozdrncta for Surnbhixg the necessary stamps
Could ba lot. ,Tht?ro UM only tvo statutos which the La~lslaturo
Ccud have had in nlnd in this instance. The Slrst of thoee
satutos lo Articla 608, Varnon’s RevlBod Clvll Statutes, 1925,
Wch providoo t
.
28fi
loo. Bert Ford, Page 6
,Vhe Board shall bmuot for a term 0r not
emaading tuo years vlth rospor~lble pmmm~,
rlrrjs, cor~orutlom or a3nociations 0r pecaons,
q/ho shall be rosldento of Texas, for supplyin&
to ths Stab all yrlnting, bfru.Uq, stationery
and sup~lios nP liZ;o c;xrficte~ for al2 dopctmnta,
kxt1tutfo.m and boards, save and sxcopt such
uork es my iw dona at the yarlous educational
ami eletmoaynmy institutions. said contract shall
be let to the loveat p3d boat reeponsibh bidder
after public advertising af such proposad bstt:ng
ror one% 8 uoak for r5u.r con5eoutive vocks in ut
least six nevspuprs 0C gonoral circulation 10 this
state. tie two of such p3p~ra shall bo published fn
the 6)33cJcounty. Tba iiomd may reject 811~and all
bids; the ronson therefor ahall be entered 3.n full
in the minutos or the Bourd and shall. be open to
the inspeotion of the publ.lc at all tirzos. Nev aon-
tracts sOal1 be mado in the mam manneras hord.n-
b&ore prwidod. ” (mderscoriag ours)
The eocond statute is Artiale 634, Vernon’s RiwWod
Civil Statutes, 1925, and it reads aa iollovsr
Vhe Board or Control shall purckass all the
~upplIos used by oath Department of’ thv State OOV~FIL-
nent, iacludi.lg the State Prison Systam, and eaoh
elsw~osynary lr~tltutlon, Uormal school, Agricultural
alad Hechaoical Collem, University at Texas, and saoh
and ell othor State Yohoolu or Departrzonts of the State
Oovornmentheretofore or hereaftir created. Such sup-
plias to locltie furniture end ffxCu.ro~, technical
lnstrunantaand books, and all otbor things roqulrod
by the dIlfercnt~deyiWx+nts or lnstitutiOn8, except
strlotly pctriohable @~0d8.”
Article 66645, CiuplVb,Makes zt the dutr 0r the l3cnrdo
Feroin provided for to hfm3 811 n~cssoary l.Qt10r and hoer stam;ls
Wcravad or printed.” krtioie 634 supro, mlutes to the PUP-
&80 of suppllen, vhereas Artlolo &, sup’%, r8late8 SpOcifiC-
sly to printing f?rul surplios of Uko charaoter. Comidarlng
all tbroo of thoao statutes togothor, vo feel Chat there can be
8x1doubt but that the Legislature contemplated that the EtarPp
~ntrnota vould ba let uador Article 608.
Artl’elo 16, Seation 21, ‘psxao ConoUtution, protideo~
‘sea. 21.
All otatfonory, and printing, exuspt
proobuaatlons and ouch printing ao .rmrybo done at t&o
Doaf and LhunbAsylum, popor, and Sue1 uood in the
b~f818tlve and Oth8l' departments of the ~ovwnmont,
sxaept the Judlclal Dopnrtment, ohall be Suanlohed,
and the prlntLn8 and binding OS the laws, journals,
and deportment reports, and all other prlntiq and
bw aad the repnlri~ and furniohl~~ t&e halls and
POWS UsOd rOl. the L!EiStl~S Qr the Li3~3iatUW Md it13
wncaittoeo, ~hal,l be porfomed under contract, to be
given to the lovoot rosponolble bidder, below ou.ch
maximus price, end under ouch regulationo, ao shall be
prooorlbad by lav. 80 amber or osslosr of any dopart-
wnt of the govorsmnt shall be in any way intereotrd
in ouch ocintracto; and all euch contraoto shall be
oubjoot to the approval of t&o Governor, Seam3t8q
or stem and Coxptroller.”
The ficEPar0 OS the Conotltutloa 3n providing r0r the
madrsapy dopartmontal prlntlng provided that the contract 8hould . !
bo let to the lovast reoyomlblo bidder, ‘under auoh rules and
mgu&tlano ao shall be prescrlbsd by &v.~ It vaa, than,
aontbmplated that tho &@slature would omct statutes ln
~COrdanCO vith AIUolo l.6, Saotlon 21 of our Conatltutlon
for the purpoot3 of em3ctuatinE;this provisicrr.
Artlalea 607 to 63Ob, lnolwivo, Verncm~o Rev&sod
Civil Statutes, 1925, are thho leglolntlve enactaeats contom-
Plated by the fmmers OS our Constitution, &u@ ainnao the print-
in8 or engraving OS the awvonue ota!cpo hero In quootloa 10 that
of vork rofcrrad to in Article Go8, it neccsuarily lo the
CtE 8 of vark referred to in Artlcls lG, 3oution 21, of the
Constitution of Taao; and all contrsots for tho “printing
C@ erqravlng” of thcao s-o must be approved by the c)ovtwnor,
~oretary of state and Comptroller, 00 is therein provldod*
It ir, therefore our opinion that your third and
S=H.b queotlons should both be ansvored in the ~SriI%3t%tlV~.
The fifth question preoonted 18 a very brood O~OD
but by rcferrlng to quootion number three, ve oaounu3 that YOU
Qalre our oplnlon ea to vhothor or not a contract for the
Piatlag of these Upuoz otaq~, which la not approvod by tho
OOV~Faor, 3.screttuy 0S Steto and Conptrollor, ao is provided
top in Artlola lG, Section 21, Texas Conotltutlon~ vould be
h-1 and blndln.&
*. mrt pordB PW a
.
&thW CtUb8Or8tat0~XlX?i%&S PubllshftqCO. 9.
ss0mat-y 0r state (sq~. ct. 0r m~tarut, 1a99), 56 ~00.
grthe facts shoma that the state 0r PZontanahaa a conatltu-
u-1 vhich in all r8SpUtS vas aubstantiallp
prOViSiOn thw
- act Article lG, Section 21 of our Twxas Contttitutlan. Ihw
p~~~sion of the Hontaaa Constitution fequirwd all printing
a&raots to bw approved bp the Oowrnor and the State Treaeurer.
fn aaoordaxuo vith this protisfon OF the Constitution
d th8 IW@AtiOW prwsaribud by lair, the &U.Pd of EXa!!dnors
dvartlsod for bfds for printing and, having: found that thw
bid of the relator ~66 the lovest and beet, awarded the contrmt
b t,h&ptatntirP. Appllcatfon vaa mud8 for 6 urft of psndamus
requiring the tiwowtary of State to deliver oop~os ‘oP the bra
to the state PubLiShin& Coripmy to the and that sam ml&t be
Ihw Cocrmy contondti tkerw MS an existing contract
t%~~~*t,h% Stat8 and thcx#elvea by virtue oP the avard mudo
hl the Btird of Eaminors~ on the other hand the Secretary of
St&to contendud there uas no contract bwcawo under the Con-
rtftutlon aXl such printing; contracts vwre subject to the
QQtVVti 0i th8 GOVOMOr and the fXiBCLt)UC(I~,
Mb, if Mt OppcOVod
by thoa, verw lnvalld and in wffwct no oontraet.
The couxt doned the matier roqwsted and in boldlng
that tha approval 0r the Governor eml Freaeurer va8 wasontial
before there could be a valid contraot, ia part, statedt
e . . . The appWtai Of the38 OftiWPS OC%tQi%tOtt
tho contract. . . . It bolng indispensable that thw
ttgreomnt ot the board ahall bw approved by the BOY-
wrnor aad tmamarer, before thorw CM bo a valid
oontract, mro a5logatlons that tho bomd ot oxaalnwra
rooolvod bids, and nndw a controot vlth relator, vhose
bla VW the lowm, az-0 wholly Lasufr~ciwnt; ...n
Arkmsas has a conatftutlonsl provision vhlch, also, is
substantialljr the ss.mwas Artiolo 16, Sootlon 21 of our Constltu-
uon. The Suprwms Court of Arkansas in Ellison 0. Olllvwr (1321)
%' S.W. @6, conetruing oaid aectlon, and In hokIln& that a
rirrting oontract~ub.loh kd not bown spproved by the Trwaeurer
POne of the thrww officers rtaml) was not a valid and bindlq
Cahtract up0n~t.b state, In part, tfaiat
. . . The sootfan of the Constitution
"
in uestlon
Provldos that a11 such contmts oball,bw sub 7 act to
the 8pp~O~81 Of the GOVOMOr, hK?dtOr, aIId T~%%wxw.
~QCI.Bert Ford, Page 9
mforo thir is don8 no oontraot
18 tmdw.. . The lnnguago
we&la plain and uziaznbi~uo~~~,and it Is apparent
that th8 requlremwnt that the contract shall be appn>Oed
by the dwrrlgaatwd ofPloers 3.8 niandator~.~
Wo are OP tlmoplrclon that the abov8 cases are a oorreot
lxprt~asio;lof the lair in regard to the point hbre la quertion,
urd therefore, as 0 general rule, an alleged contraot for the
printing 0r liquor sUmpa would not bw binding unless it is
rpproved by the Oovorno~, Secretary of' State, and Comptroller.
Since, a13 a Semral rule, there 1s no mua contract
for prlntlq until it has been appw30a b7 the officers nwmd
in the above mcntloncd swotlon of the Conotltutlon, and alnce
the Constitution providas that all prlntI.ng shall bw pcrfomed
under contract, vo are of the opinion th6t the Texas Liquor
Control Board vould not bw authorized to expend sny appropriated
funds in paynwnt for stamp8 unloes the contract hs3 bsen apprOV0a
by the Oovernor. Secretary of State, arid Ccmptroller. See
Attorne7 General's Oplnlona ijos. O-289 and O-815.
With regard to your last questlon, you no doubt have
in mind the logallty of obU@tlom vhlch night bw cradtwd by
8ow apwcilic contract. Since YO have not men this oontract,
or a cop7 of it., it I?, inposslblw for us to pensa upon its
le@ltp or to dotoxmine tho wxtont of the obllgatlone, if any,
.' vblch it might oreatw against the State.
Trusting that this vi11 satiafaoto~ll7 anawr gour
qwstiona, we are
Your0 very truly
ATTORREX GE?iERAL
OF l'E7AS
.-vu Yaltor R. och
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion