Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OFTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL OFTEXAS AUSTIN Bonimiblr Qordon C. Cam county AttQrnsJ Lampasasoounty Lsqasas, Tans Dssr Sfr: lsttsr ot Juno a8putPmt 0p0n for a per- sons nam ballot as a r0r rspressntat iv8 math. sspT bs- bs sufflolsnt to roper men~er?~ on*8 ~umetatea clvll statutes, assiring his name to appear allot as a sanaiaats for the id just100 or rasooiats ourt of Civil Appeals, or ?or rspressntatits In Gon~ss, or for Stats Ssaator, or for roprssentetlt*, or alstrlot JUap or ah- trlst attorney in rsprsssntstl*e or $aUlclsl alStriOt8 OQnrpOSOa Or POr8 tbaB OB8 OOMtYs shall ii18 With th0 ChrfZ7EfiIIOi i&C CXOOUtiTO 00aitt00 0f the party for the aistrlot, said request with rorerenoo to a aanilidats ior a Stats ncmhatlon, or ii there k no ohlrmss i¬able Gordon C. Caqs, Pa&a 8 o? such dtitrlot ereoutite osnmittas, thoa with the chalrman o? wash oouaty oo~poalng suoh dietriot, not latsr than the iirst Wn- day In June pn~dlng ths gonual prinmrg. Such requests q llkewlse be filed not l,atrr than da date by any twenty-fivo qualiri8a rotors meldent within suok ~distrlot, s-86 a a duly lb k newh d ~ 4 4 . lbmdlataly otter 8816 date cmoh suoh dlstriat ohalrmaa shall carti?~ tho name4 of all gerscns SOT whom staOEP4qu48tS ban bwn tiled to the oounty shalrmmn o? *aoh county ooaposIn,g woh dIs$rIob." Iphls artioh pr0da08 th4t e aanaia8te w4ii iii0 wltlt the ohairmn of the euoutive cmmittw* his wquhet to hate his PLUPB pleosd upon ths oflicial ballet, and pu dosin So know whother QT not daposit oi an ~>~pl&s%t&m iB propsr row ocmtainlng every attsr r0qtllrea b7 law In the fhttoa Staten mails ena re44Ipt by ths prepar otriber ti au8 time, may be 4458Iaarsd vIlIi@ witihfn t&Wlbanfiy a? ArtIoAs SUB. as statd bp kdr. Justfoe Iloximna In mioaa i3tatss va. Lombardo, 841 U. 3. 73, 36 S. Ct. 306, 6Q L, Ed., 8971 word vile* vho is a4m4a from ths latia ubra *ii t Ma wlatos to ths ansiont praotlo*or papore oa a thwad er wire for safe-keeping ai& roe4y refewnoe. Tills& It must be ob84mod, Is not ce~@eta until th. doouerent Is deliyand ,and r~40ired~.~ It will .bs observed that two element4 are eesoatiti to eQBstltuto "?111ag" of &B iJiS~OStt; vie. aemory to and rsoslpt o? by th4 proper o??lo4z. This Is wall .rstabiIshed. In T*xas. Real V. Alexander, 6 Ter. 6@r CIt7 o? Dallas t. B@man (0. 0. A. 19398) 18 Tex. C&V. h&q. SF&i, 48 s. w. 686; Brogaoka v. State, 68 Tex. Cr. B. 4T5 I.40 23. W. SS8; Wsst v. 3tat0, 106 Tax. cr. R. 647, 8 S* w. fed) 571 HQlb 7. wwa, DIetriot Clark, (C. C. A. 1993) 65 S. ?i+(8d 368,,‘1RIt zWamd# 3lElleokbux-n T. State (G. C. x. 1934) 7~2Y. 8. f &d) 667* Br patio %?&;I ff37 Tex. Cr. B. 445, 77 fit. Vi. (8d) 178~1 W&Z V+ . ri. 193P) 108 3. W. 389. Sab afuo Poynor 1. Com- tiesfor& o? ~tsrnal Aevau4 (0. C. 8. 6th elr,) 6L lr.4. (ad) 681. ~@m.4 th4 me*. d4posIt or all lr@SWmnt in tha unit46 3t4644 ~llails Is not su??lcisnt to oea88itWo *?lfIn@ (;n. 9. v. 33 Ronorable Qoraon c. Cam, Page 3 Lombardo, supra; Moores v. Stata, SO N. W. 225) reoelpt by wall within the proper time and by t.he proper o?fIoer Is a “f lllug” ) and the vehiole or egenoy by whloh the instrument Is tranauittod 1s Of no oonsequenoe. Is all oases the query Is, has the Instrument been raoelved and plaoed In the oustory of the proper offloIal. Moorer, Y. State, 06 Ii. W. 225; Swaeneg v. City of NOWYork, 225 N. Y. 271, 122 N. E. 843; O’Hesrn v. Rrloksou, County Auditor (S. Ct. Mlnh. 1022) 152 i&m. 3449, 188 W. W. 736. AS stated in Swesney v. City of New Yor&, supra, “The varb ‘to ills1 my be used In rarlbus senses. When, as in thfs statute, It la eald that a paper suet be riled with au otflwr, the r4QUirOaent le at leaat oowplled with when the party dellrers that paper to the orfleer at his o?flolal place 0s bualhess aa thsrs 1~~08 It with him. Whother ha does this uersonally or by ml1 Is. we think. lanatar 1. so long as ‘it is aotualkr n00ivOam. ~Un~er*oorIng ours) In aooord with thls statement of the law Is Oonmn- wealth v. O’Bryau, Utloy & Compan~r, lb9 Ky. 406, 155 9. W. X1.26. In Stat.0 4x rel. O*I&arn v. Eriokson, Gount7 Auditor, supra, a aandldate ?or tbs offlee Q? State Reprosentativs mailed an appliOat%OB to have his B~QU phOOa on tha ballot on the last day for legal rilfng aad it was not reaelvrd until the rollswlng day. Ths oourt held that the da7 tho appllsstion was aotual17 reoeited by the proper O??Is8r was th0 day It was filed. It Is the opInlon of this departmnt, Consapuently, and you aro respeatrully advised tht whm nn appllsatlon 0s a oandiaate to have his nanw plaoed upon the primary ballot In propar form and oontainlng every mattar requ&red b7 law Is tranamltteathrough the UBitOd States mall8 ana la reoelved by the proper OffloOr within the time allowed by la~;lt IS !'?lledR within tha msaning of r;rtiole 3112, VO~BOB'S Annotated CIvIl strstutes. APPROVECJUN 26, 1940 Very truly 7ours