R-404
April 30, 1947
Hon. Claud Gllmer, Chairman
Appropriation Connnittce
Rouse of Representat lves
50th Legislature
Aust In, Texas Opinion NO. v-172
Re : Constltutlonalitg of H,B.
Dear Sir: No. 779, 50th bgislature.
We refer to your letter of April 23, 1947,
wherein you advise that the House Appropriations Com-
mittee has under consideration the matter of making
an appropriation of $30,000 for the relief of the Cen-
terville CommonSchool District No. 42, in Trinity
County, Texas. The proposed House Bill No. 779, as
amended, recites that the school buildin of that dls-
trlct and its facilities have been total f J destroyed
by fire, the insurance recovered from the destruction
being wholly Inadequate for the replacing of sams, the
property values of the district renders it impossible
for the tax payers to increase the bonded Indebtedness
in an amount sufficient to replaee said school, and
that the cum which can be raised by the district to-
gether vith the insurance monies recoverad by the dis-
trict are wholly insufficient for the replacing of said
school district. Said bill also contains the following
public calamity clause :
“Sect ion 1. The destructive and dlsast-
rous fire that occurred on or about March 17,
1947, aad which resulted in the comp,lete des-
truetlon of the sohool building of C&@tervllle
Coranon Schoal District Iie, 42, Rural Route 1,
Qroveton, Trinity County, Texas, Is hereby
found aad declared to be a great public calam-
ity in such school district, as to require
and authorlee the axpeaditurs of public funds
for the purpose of aiding hnd assisting the
population of said school district in the re-
plaoiag of said schoal house; and there la
hereby appropriated out of the Qeneral Revenue
Fund of the State, not otherwise appropriated
Hon. Claud Gllmer, Page 2, V-172
the sum of Thirty Thousand ($30,000.00)
Dollars, or 80 much thereof aa may be nec-
essary, for the purpose of assisting said
Centerville CommonSchool District No. 42
at Groveton, Trinity County, Texas, in con-
d.;u;;~gna school building and equipping
.
You ask to be advlssd concerning the coastl-
tutlonallty of the proposed bill.
Article III, Sect ion 56, Ooastltution of Tex-
as, provides, In part, as f’ollowsr
%he bglslature shall not, except as
otherwlss provided IA this ConstitutiaA,
pass any local or speolA1 law, authoricing
the building or repnlriag of schcol
~o~A&J, aTd the raising of money for such
purposes. ’
Article III, Seotloa 51, Oonstltutlon of Tsx-
arr, provldoa, In psrt I
“Thr bglslature shall Inave no power
to mak8 a&g grant o r luthorlAe th8 making
of any grant of public money to any lndlv-
id-ual, aaroolatloa of bdlviduals, munlcl-
Pal or other oorporatioar whatsoever; , , .
and provided, however, that the provlaloncl
of thl8 8eotlon sha,ll not be oorrrtrwd 80
a8 to proveat thy, grant of Ald in 01000 or
PUbliO OAlAlllitf,
In Opialoa No, V-111 thin D8 rtmeat AdVlOed
thAt Artlola III, 8Aotlrn 56, brtlolr Vr brotlon 5, d
the t?o~rtltutlor A8d tb rtaablla lrglrirt 1Qn provldod
la Art lo18 27848; 2706 ARd 2788, 6. 0, be, ooatrmplrto
that the rehrol d.lrtaiote Ai TIXA8,
Vhf1 YillAflOiAlly
OApAbk of dOi&g 89 Ah@Uld WeOt And brAr tk@ .Xp~nlO
of thr errrtiou of hrlr own relPoo1 bulldlngm And fro-
i%itkr, And thAt th0 ~gi8~AtW0, OXOOpt i8 01101 8i
pub110 orlralt Ao8Mg wlthlr tb rxorptlor of hrtlolr
III, Soot loa 5I , of th aart it ut lon, 10 wlthout Auth-
ority to ~mlg am approprlat16n frt, the oan8truotioA of
o(811811on
or lade~adomt dbtrlot sohoel buildlag or fro-
1U.t 10s. IA that oplnlra,
we wor8 ooaelderlng 8, B,
60 OS th8 50th LgllllAtUr8, whloh COntAilPod no roOltA-
tlons of pub110 oalamlty, And la thAt respect H. B.
60 and our Opinion V-111 Are clearly dlstlngulehod from
the present P. B. 779 and thin oplnlen.
Hon. Claud Gllmer, Page 3, V-172
Under the provisions of the proposed House
Bill No. 779, as amended, there Is an expressed legis-
lat ion declaration and finding that the disastrous
fire which resulted in the complete destruction of the
sohool building of Centerville CommonSchool District
No. 42 is a great public calamity In such school dls-
trlct, and that the property values in said district
render It impossible for the tax payers thereof to ln-
crease the bonded indebtedness in an amount sufficient
to replace such school.
In Martin vs. Hldalgo County, 271 S. W. 436,
writ dismissed, wherein was considered a public cal-
amity enactment coming within the provisions of Article
VIII; Section 10, of the Constitution, it was held that
the Legislature alone has the authorIt to de~cide the
public calamity matter, and, having decided that the
emsrgencg existed, no Court oould assail such deter-
mination; that the Constitution permits the Legislature
to grant aid in cases of public calamity to subdivisions
of the State government, and that to the legislature A-
lone is confided the power of deciding If such public
calamity exists s It was never intended that the prop-
riety of such legislation should be the subject of ln-
vest igatlon and attack by an individual. On the other
hand, it has been held that a Court may go behind a
legislative iinding or declaration of public calamity
In those cases where as a matter of law the facts found
or considered by the legislature do not oonstltute a
“public calamity”. Jones vs. Willlams, 45 9. W. (26)
130.
Under a former administration, this Department
held In Opinion No. O-941, June 12, 1939, that a similar
Bill to replace a school house destroyed by storm was
authorized under the public calamity clause of 940. 51
of Art lcle III of the Const ltution as an exception to
the provisions of ~ec s 56 of Article III.
Our Opinion No. V-111 holds that only in cas4s
of public calamity can the Legislature make an approp-
riation, and even then there is still the question of
whether its enactment by special law violates Sec. 56
of Article III of the Coast ltut ion. Frankly, this of-
floe is, sharply divided on two questions relating to
the oonstltutionallty of Ii, B, 779, and they are aa
follows :
Hon. Claud Gilmer, Page 4, V-172
1. Whether, as a matter of law, the
burning of a single school house can constl-
tute a public calamity within the manlng
of Sec. 51, Art. III?
2. Even if
such facts could constitute
a public calamity,do they constitute an ex-
ception to Sec. 56, Art. III, forbidding spec-
ial Acts for rebuilding and financing school
houses?
The courts have not passed on these exact
questions, and In view of the division of opinion with-
in our own office on the subject, we elect to follow
the former opinion of this Department (O-941) and the
Leglslatlve Interpretat ion placed on these provisions
of the Constitution in at least thirteen Instances.
See : Acts 1929, 41st leg., 2nd C S., 9. B. 195 Acts
1929, k&t,Ls,p., 3rd C. S., B. B, 6; Acts 1931, 42nd
w.9 9. B. 8; Acts 1931, 42nd Iag 3rd
9. B: li: 9. B. 12 and H, B. 62; Acts i$35,
B. 510, H. B. 763, 5, B..309,
and H. B. 576; Acts 1941, 47th
Lag., R. S., B. B.
In those Instances, the 41st, 42nd, 44th and
47th Ieglslature passed similar Bills for the rebuild-
ing of school houses destroyed by fire, storm, hurrl-
cane, earthquake, etc. Departmental and Leglslat lve
Interpretations of constitutional provisions are always
given due consideration by the courts, and doubts are
resolved in favor of the constitutlonalitg of an Act
of the Legislature.
Based upon such previous constructions, we
find that H. B. 779, if enacted as amended, would not
violate the provisions of the Constitution of Texas. .
Based upon former Departmental and Legis-
lative interpretations, H. B. No. 779, 50th
kg., a special law providing an appropriation
for the erection of a school house for the
Centerville CommonSchool District No. 42,
Trinity County, if enacted as written, with
bgislat ive f lndlng of “public calamity”
.
Hon. Claud Gilmer, Page 5, V-172
(fire) causing destruction, would not be
unconstlt ut Ional. Sec. 51, Art. III, Tex-
as Constitution; Opinion Ho. O-941, June
12, 1939, distinguished from Opinion No.
v-111.
Very truly yours,
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
By e--P-
Chester E. Ollison
Assistad
CEO:djm:mrj
Enclosures ATTOREi'EY
GENFUL
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion