OFFICE OF TXE AITORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
-0.m
--
Hoaorahlr Y. P. Sexton
Couaty Attornry
Orange County
Or a a g r l Tsr u
.. .
Your requeot for
the abore Hated quertloa
ty , Texan.
104 to merlte
ed on the tart
tens of thir
$76.00 per month
er for him to
opinion on this gasa-
the ltatuter diligently
y or mttno to rrlrc an.
the aamt 1s rat out br
to mt that a contribution to
7 a oitirrn or group o? oitlttnr
olrt ion of the law. ’
You rtate in erfeot thnt unCsr exltting low the
salary o? the oounty cudltsr of Grange Couty Is hzs.OG per
month. Ylthout lnvaetlgatlng or ccnsldering the population
Of said oouaty or the taxable valuation Of the proptrty thcrt-
Of, for the pui-po~tc of thtr apinlon ve issunc the aboorr
statement to be oorraot.
. _._
Honorable Y. 0. Sextoa, Pago a?
Tht OC8pOIi6OtlOclOf pub110 OffIOtr6 IS riXt& by
the Conrtitution and statutes. & o??loer mw not ala18 or
reaoh an7 aoatf rlthout a law authorlrlag him to do to, sa&
olearl? fixing the amount to whIoh he Is entItled. An offi-
oec is not entitled to a nyoo8pene~lon la ld6ItIon to that
uhloh hss been fixed by law for the performnot of the duties
of his offloe, even though the oosotnsatlon so fIxed Is un-
reasonable or inadrquate. He 84 be requIrea b7 law to ptr-
form s9eoI?lo aerrloes or dlsohsrge uldlt~oaal 4utIes for
uhlch no oomptnsrtlon 16 providea. The obllgatlon to perform
such eerrIoes 16 I~90846 as an Inoldent to the off108 and the
offloor br his loooptanoe thereof is deemed to hart engaged
to perform them without oomptnsatlon. (Terre11 v. XIng, 14
8.W. ted) 786; XoCalla v. CltP of F&okdale, W3 B.V. 664;
Texas Jurlr., ,Vol. 31, 9. ml.)
Ae’alreadf mtntioaed, an 0ffIoer is not entItle
to reoelre any oomptnratlon for hi6 offlolal rertloee other
i
thsn that vhloh has been provided for by law. He my not rt-
CoYer from third persons oomptneatIon for tht ptrfomanoe
of an rot wlthla the 80094 of Rle 0??10lal duties; and effect
rlll not be glren to a oontraot whereby he Is to rtoeIve
from the 0ount.J or fro8 taird ptreons a different, or a greater
or less oomgtnsatlon for his offlolal eertloes than that uhfch
has been prtsorlbtd by law. (Cz’OSbr County cattle Company 1.
KoDtnitt, es1 8.W. 295; fasling T. Xorrie, 9 S.W. 759; Latti-
more T. Tarrsnt County, 124 S.V. ~206; Gulf, C. and 9. 8. I.
co. v. the, 27 8.U. 110.)
The dale of 8trIngtr 1. Franklin County, 123 S.V.
1168, hold6 in effsot that where the law fixes the oompen6e-
tloa which an o??loer Is to reot~re for given strvioes, or
Im9oses upon him the autr of p~tcrformlag his serrloe vithout
speoIfloally fixing an;J oomptnsatlon thtrefor, he osnnot lav-
full7 oontraat or recelrt from any other ECUrOt any additional
oosptnsation.
Th6 SUprtme court Of Ohio, in th6 oase Of 8Omtr6tt
Bank T, Edmond, 81 Northeastern Reporter, 641, glong other
thIng8, hold6 In effect that public 9olIof and 6ouab morals
allkc forbid that a public officer should demand or rtcsltt
for #errice performd by hla in the dlsch6rge of official dut;
any other or further remuneration or reward than that prcr-
cribsd and allouad by lau.
--
Honorable If. P. Boxton, Page 3
Ye quote from Ruling Case L4w, Vol. 22, 99. 837-640,
es rolloue:
Wontnote ?or extra
oompensatlon of pub110
offlosrs have been void oa ground of pub-
adJudge
110 90110~. Not only sre they forbIdden br oommon
lsw to reoelve extra compensation for their offloiel
6eniee8, but the oommon lam Is not Infrequently
reInforcea by constitutional prorlslons. . . . It
18 a prlnolple of the oomion lsu that en offlasr
ought not to take roney for doing hi6 autf, but that
he should perform hls OffIO~al dUtl68 wlthou& re-
uard cc conptneetlon than such Is flxsd and allowed
by law. Therefore a pub110 officer oannot rtoOfer
ronptnration from third portlee for the performance
of act8 within the scope of hi6 official duty, even
though the Pots were oerformtd at their rtquest,
or though thtx may hare txprtaely promised to pay
him. A proalst made under such clrc~stanoes is
contrary to public $olioy and cannot be tnforotd.
. . ..
In view of the forer.dng suthorltles, your question,
a6 nbort stated, Is answered In the negatlre.
Yours very truly
ATTORNEY GEXRAL 0.F TKXAS
Ardtll ‘illllams
AStiEtaAt
AW:db