OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Hmorable Walter Cnpson, page 2
in the petltion and defined by the Commiaaionera
Court to detem?Inewhether homea, mules, jaaks,
jentm%e, and cattle shall be permitted to run at
large fn swh gounty or sqab suWtislon of 8
.aoutxtya8 asagW dewrl?md bx the petition and
defined by the Capnnisaionera Court. . . ."
Articrle16, +wtian 23 of the Oanstitiution
of t&cas
#Povldeet
'%w &e@alatuzw mar pare lay8 for the
tegttltW.onof live irtodst@ the pyataat;ion
of #toolcrafsers:ln.thelrooakralsfng portian
of the StSte, and emupt Finn the operatianof
rruohlaws other portlpn5, seetlons,or.aoyntlesl
hwe pawer to pass gener5.l and mpe-
aad 8haY.l~
aLal laws fix the inapeatianat a&t&6, stack8
aad ,Mdes emI for the regulation of brsnd8;
pravlded that imy local lav thtiapaaead i&l1
be r&ubed(tedto.th6 treehaidelrof the UeatLw
- .
Pxinrsble %.lter CRPBOIL,page j
Other &es ‘ao&truf a similar lav (Artiolee 6930
7 do not seem to have limited
end 6932, R.C.S. of Texas, 1925
~:tqlsa~:~.eub@i+VialoRU
the rnes.nir#g@.~,~,~ ,to a~~knopp~p6~iti~
subdivision of ‘the aouatg.
In lnoe 8. Barber, the
(civ. App.)' 24i’i.W<“iii?
court h&d that under Art ioles 6950 :-aa&~2; .:+&C.8.3& 3Texas ,
1925, a petition, deecrlbing the subdivlsion as, “All of,Liye
o& Peninsula, berag all that portPan of said oounty bounded
on. the east by Bt@ Fish and Araneas +ye,, TO?,,:t+a@$h by, I.
ArsIlctis ar+Copaxic BAya, on ths #c&h .by the northern’ %ie
of San Pt3~3t34~0 County* va8 suf'fioignt. :.:. '::::'::~.~.;::i:
*:,,~l;:.
In the caee of Johnson w. State, (Orlm. App. 244
S.W. 609, the court held that under Articles 6930 and $32,
above referred to, a descriptionof E eubdlvleionof Aranrae
County aa "Live Oak Peninsula,bounded on the east by Red Biah
and Ammeas Bags; on the north by Aransae and Copano Bqe; on
the vest by Copano and Puerto B~ye and on the south by the
line between the oouutles Sen Patrieio and Aransae” was auffl-
cient .
while the authorities,herelneboveresewed to, do
not oonstrue the provisions of Article 6954, aupra, ve think
they me pertinent and a&mlioable to asoertaln the meatking
of the term “subdlvi.slon as wed In aaid statute,
We believe the provleions of Artiole 6954, rtxpra,
are susceptibleof even a awe liberal interpretatlotl, in
ao far aa lta tema authorhe the reqtieltemxnbe2 of petl-
tloners to presorlbeb in their petition, the aree or tomi-
tory or *subdivIsIon of the county In which en eleotlon 1s
to be called and held,than the efPlilaraata oonetruedin the
caeea cited.
You are, therefore, advleed that In our opl.nLou the
petitionersare authorised, by Artlole 6954, supra, to define
the boundariesof the territory In vhleh it is derirsd to have
a rtoek lau eleation eazled md held, whloh petition,lf
signed by the reqtiaZte aua@e~ of freeholderr,and dercrlp-
tlon vould proper1 be the basis of an order of the Connnls-
sianera'Court ca 19 lug the eleotion, in the subdivision des-
iionorable Wplter Caraon , page 4
cribed in
the petition, and #at suoh erea may bo an unincor-
porated town.
Yom brief in thlernetter wae very helpful to us.
Youru very truly
4.
,Q~~JIJEDJUN I-=,1941 ATTORNEY C4BW3FiALOF TKXG3
HMrdb