47
OFFICE OFTHEATTORNEY GENERALOFTEXAS
AUSTIN
Norris
48
imm that granted to it bx tha Gonstitutl.on~i or tsglslatun.
A8 etated by tEa Supmue uoaxt ot ‘&+a8 in 1 he OWN of
GomlclEslon4r8’ owrt ot Leadisoa County vs. ~Am,IAo4, 15 5. W.
(Zd) St%;
" . . . As ssld bs th4 Court of CivilA5~eala
in its opinion: tThe-o~ailcnerst oourt~iii a
orsature of the stat-4 Gon8titutlon 45d it8 pwsrr
are lllnitedan8 ~0ntr0u43a by tho CwAatltutioA
and the laws aa pasee by tEe &gf4laturo.* Cm-
stltutlon, art. 6, emotion 3.64 Ikaldwin v. Ratio
eouaty, 40 Pox. 'Xv. ARq lQ9 S8 8. W 480;
Seward~_'I. Falls Gounty PTori hi*. A& 846 8. W.
8owrnbl.e Prod grrl& Page 8
The outstandfug authority on the propmltlon of
t%;4piquatea for which the caonstitutional fund8 AAY be 4x;r
pendetl by the C4i~13&selo54rs
' Court is the 06~34 of Carroll
vu. Wllllams, a02 s. Ii. 504, Supraw Coust oi Tsras. In
this OQRO, the f3u~ssuw Gozrt 4peoItlo4lly held th4t ths
a;oney 001140t4d for the various oo54tltutlonal fu~d8 oould
oat bs spent for any other purpcm4 th4n th4 purpme ror
whl4h suoh fund ~44 set up by the Constitution. fn 44
holdiqg, th4 court amiteb, al to11owsr
* . Tars8 levied astaraolbly for any
ep4elfio'pur 4e 0.v elaer of purposes dealg-
nated in cwwloa
r U of artfel6 a, siqra, maat
bo applied themmto, in good fhith, . . .*
It in the OpiAiOA Of thi4 dO~l-tW%Ut, thOlWfOW,
that the Comi4dowant Court in usauthmlasd to pay t&o
flsm of tax engi5eere lnrolvad to asstat aaia courtia
4valuAting oil prop4tilslr in the oooaty out of 1po1100of
tE0 rorlous aQMtltutfoaal SUMS IO ssta Oountyr %6n lo
no authoritiy for t&e payment OS this money out ot any
fund exoept th4 genenl ft28a.
In your 1otte.r you refer to a4lisquurbta.x t305-
tW0t.l whewla pryBsAt iS Pada QUt Of th4 tEX !A4A4p 04b
ltNWd, tdd0E OOZW bdl4A@ bo tii 0f the VafiOUll fwS
or the aounty. l34ll~qw~t tsx eontraoteare not a~aloijous
to tha oontraet in this 44s~ bboAU44 or the taot th&
there Is ltglslativs authority Sor the paymAt oi delln-
quent tar eontra4ts out of the tax SiOAey 4A 443leotsd.
snob ppp;rssntin th4 4ase OS d8linqWAt tax 4Ontrwta wall
upheld by t&o Supreme Court ot Tmc44 IA th4 4480 of
Gow13.seioners~ Court OS Lfatlluon
Gouaty vs. WaXlao 6upra.
Tbo oauti u,pheld ouch peymtmt because of Chs l+&bLfIre
authority. fn Balng 80, the must stated es i!olla*t
". . . The @oontrtwt ftsre doaa -sot lnrol~4
tha quo&ion of the transfer oi rpone;pImm wae
rilnd 4x1another. Astial* 783s cruthorizss a
oounty eomm.:~siansra’ Ootlrt *to psy for en
sbstraat of prqmrty aase8ee& or unknown 4~d
WlmAdQr4d froz the titxos, lntere8t atA& Qen-
Rltp to bo aolleeted on 8uoh llilldli,' 8uoh
paynonti betisg 4oUFtPngOnt upon tb4 Wl%U4tiQA
or 4ueh t4x4spe,iAte.rcrat,4i%d penalty* Thla
is &t,eglSlatiVGauthority for elm 4l#mmiasiowru'
OOUH tct aontraot and pay for isu4h an abstract
of property cut of euh O(PUtl6tfon.6,iaoludf~
the 8t6t6.6 part Or 6Uoh taX(18. 0r WhEA UOuid
be th6 etatstr part of suabtare6 ii or when
it was oolleoted and turnd into ita funde. . . .”
In war lettsr yc;u aleo 66ked the tollorrdng Qua 6..
tienr
wOuppo6s th6t tbsre ie no 16~ ptitbiag
this, acd our Tax Colltmtor oosaente, and does
do It, Cc what 6XtUd i6 b6 llabl80"
Yime it ia to be prasuwed Chat the Tax Collector
will handle the rpattsr propmly we hardly deasa it moenerr~
te anow*r ycur 1arPltQu68tiim.