OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Honorable C. B. Caonesr
State Auditor
Capitol Statioa
Austin, Texas
Zear Sir:
tted to uu reads
‘The Texas State BdSrd’di .R&rmacy is a&
thorlzsd to col%tiE -fees axd oUler moseys for
renewal cert~icq$er,~.llceaser, ~qxamlaation fees,
etc. Should thebe4unU or any pgrt of them be
deposited in and accquate~ ior through the State
Treasury?” ‘.
as amended, creates the
State Its duties and povers.
Sectioa 3, ,EeJating to..fu+; reads aa follow:
..,’ /
“Tha: ‘i&d real.%& from all fees payable
uader thlakAcr:shall tlrat be applied to the
payment of ,all:rreceasary erpeaaes of the Board,
and the remainder la to be applied by order of
the Board to compeasate members of said Board,
said aompe~eatloa to each member of the Board
not to ixceed Tea ($10.00) Dollars per day, or’
Three Hundred ($300.00) Dollars per year, ex-
clusive of necessary expenses ia performance of
his duties. Provided, however, that the premium
on any bond required of the Secretary, or aay
other employee of the Board, shall be paid out
ol said fund, as well as the expenses of any em-
ployee incurred in the performance of his duties.
Honorable C. H. Cavilers, page 2
The State Bosrd of Pharmaoy shall defray all
erpeases uader this law from rees povlded In
this Act, and the State of Texas shall uever be
-liable for the compensation or expenses of any
member or the Board, or its officers or employees,
or say other expeases thereof.’
A portioa 0r Sectloa 6 provides as r0u0tf88
“The Bosrd shall &sake annually to the Oar-
ernor of the state a regular report of its re-
celpts aad dlsbursemeats~ also the names of all
pharmacists duly registered under this Act dur-
log the fiscal year for vhich the report 1s made,
and the names of all phamaclsts whose licenses
or permits have beea cancelled during the fiscal
year.n
The case Or Texas Pharmaceutical Ass’a. v. Dooly,
et al., 90 S.U. (26) 328 (Austin Clv. Apps.), aoastrued
Article 4542a before its amendment by the Acts of 1943, 48th
Legislature, Chapter 395. Ye regard the language or the
Court relative to the purpose of the Act as pertinent also
to the amended Act. Baugh, Justice, had this to say:
“It is manifest, we think, that the chief
purpose of the Legislature la passlag the Act in
question VM the proper regulation of the prac-
tice of pharmacy la the state la the interest of
publio health and public safety. The fees or dues
prescribed by the Act are designated in Section
9 thereof (Veraoa(a Ann. Cit. St. Art. 4542%
Sec. 9) as a license. It a llcease only, the
power to levy it 1s referable to the police power
of the state and not to Its taxing power.”
From a consideration of the statutes and the cited
case it is our opinion that the moneys collected.by the State
Board of Pharmacy are not “public monies’ la the sense that
they were intended by the Legislature to be raised for revenue
purposes, deposited ia the State Treasury and spent only upon
Specific appropriation. To the contrary, it 1s evident that
it was the intent OS the Legislature to allow this agency t0
Hoaorable C. Ii. Cavaess, page 3
raise and spend its own funds la carrying out the police func-
tlon assigned to it. There is no doubt but vhat the Leglsla-
ture could have required these iuuds to be deposited la the
Treasury and subjected them to the same requirements aad safe-
guards throva about other State moneys. The fact is that It
has not seea ift to do so. See our Oplaioa lo. O-3711, a copy
or mhlch 1s etwlosed.
Very truly yours
ATTORHBX GEHHRAL OF TEXAS
Eugene Alrls
ASslstaut
EA:db
Eaclosure