Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1947 )

,
March 20, 1947
Hon. Royce Whitten Opinion No. V-92
County Attorney
Lsmar County Re : Authority of the Commls-
Paris, Texas sioners’ Court to deter-
mine sheriff Is bond and
pay premiums on official
bonds of sheriff’s depu-
Dear Mr, Whitten: ties in salary counties 0
Your recent request for an opinion of this De-
partment reads as follows:
“Please advise me as to whether or not
the County Auditor or Commissioners’ Court
has authority to set the amount of the Sher-
iff and his deputies official bonds.
‘I call your attention to excerpt of
your DspartmsntSs Opinion No. o-5110, To:
Ray Winder, County Attorney, Cooke County;
Date, February 18, 1943. This doesn’t an-
swer my questlon In that said excerpt reads
in part that the Sheriff may require his
deputies to execute surety bonds but my in-
quiry Is when such Sheriff requires his
three riding deput les 0 Chief Deputy and
Day Jailer to make bonds In the sum of
$5000.00 each, his Right Jailer, $1000.00,
together with his own in the amount of
$12,000, what right, If any, does the Coun-
ty Auditor and/or Commissioners’ Court have
to refuse paying such premium?”
Article 6866, R. C. 3. of, Texas, provides in
part as follows:
,~ ‘Qvery’ person elected to the office of
sheriff shall, before entering upon the duties
of his office , give a bond with two or more
good and sufficient sureties, to be approved
by the Commissioners’ Court of his county, or
suoh sum as may be directed by such court, not
less than $5000.00 nor more than $30,000.00,
Hon.” Royce Whltten, Page 2, V-92
payable to the Governor and his successors
in office, conditioned that he will account
for and pay over to the persons authorized
by law to receive the same, all fines, for-
feitures and penalties that he may collect
for,,the use of the State or any county . .
. s
Article 6870, Revise& Civil 3tatutes of Texas
provides as follows:
“Sheriffs shall be respoaslble for the
official acts of their deputies, and they
shall have power to require from their depu-
ties bond and security; and they shall have
the sams remedies against their deputies
and sureties as any person y,an have against
a sheriff and his sureties.
B;r virtue of the above authorities, the Com-
missioners’ Court shall approve the bond of the sheriff
in an amount not less than $5000.00 nor more than $30,
000.00, to be determined by the Commissioners' Court.
Further, the sheriff shall have the power to require
bonds of deputies, and If such power is exercised, it
Is the opinion of this department that the authority
to determine the amount of the bond la vested in the
sheriff.
Section (b), Article 3899, V. C. S., reads ln
part as follows:
‘*aoh officer uamsd in this Act, where
he receives a srJ.ary aa comtnsatloa for his
services, shall be entitled and permitted to
purchase or charge to his county all reason-
able expenses necessary in the proper and
legal coaduot of his offlce, premiums on of -
ficlals’ bonds, premiums on fire, burglary,
theft, robbery Insurance protecting public
funds, and including the cost of surety bonds
for his deputies, provided that expenses ln-
curred for premiums on officials’ bonds for
the county treasurer, county auditor, county
road commissioners, county school superin-
tendent, and the hide and animal Inspector,
including the cost of surety bonds for any
deput lee of any such officers, lgay be also
,
H&a. Royce Uhltten, Page 3, v-92.
included, and such expenses to bs passed on,~
predetermined aad allowed la the tlms’and a-
mount, as ne,arly as possible, by the Couanls-
slonersl Court once each month for the en-
suing month, upon the application by each of-
’ricer, stating the kind, probable, amount of
expenditure and the necessity for the expenses
0r his office for suoh ensuing month, which
application shall, before presentation to said
court, first be endorsed by the county auditor,
if any, otherwise the county treasurer, only
as to whether funds are available for pegmeat
0r suoh expenses.
”
All such approved claims and
locounti &hali be paid from the Officers Sal-
ary,Fund unless othervlse provlde’d herein.”
Article 3899, supra, was amnded b Senate Bill
Ilo. 270, Acts of the Regular Session of the t 5th Legis-
lature, to provide for the payment of surety bonds for
the deputies of those officers receiving a salary as com-
pensation for their services. By a subsequsnt amendment
Iu 1941 by House Bill 524, Acts or the Regular Session
of the 47th Legislature, Article 3899 was further amended
to provide that the premiums one official bonds for county
treasurers, county auditors, county road commlssioners,~
county school superintendents, and hide and animal ln-
specters and their deputies should be paid from county
funds and In so doing provided further “that if any of
thd officers so designated are on a salary rather than
a fee basis, then all such bond premiums for officers
and their depukles shall be paid from the General Fund
of the county. Therefore, it will be seen that Section
(b) of Artlole 3899 would be applicable to Tour county
inasmuch as Lamar County has a population In excess of
20,000 inhabitants accorditig to the 1940 Federal Census
and must be compensated on a salary basis. (Art .~ 39120,
v. c. 9.)
In oodformlty with the statute abok quoted, it
will be noted that the Commissioners8 Court is only auth-
orieed to pay “all reasouable expense8 necessary.” While
it may be oontendad that the cost of offfolal bonds for
deputies may 0~17 be paid If they are required by law to
exeoute such bonds, aevertlreless, the statute evidences,
at least by implication, a legislative Intent that the
coat for official bonds for deputies shall be paid, If
,Hon. Royce Whltten, Page 4, V-92
the same is a reasonable and necessary expense. More -
over, Article 6870, supra, authorizes a sheriff to re-
quire a bond of his deputies at his option and dlscre-
tion, (Attorney General Opinion No. o-5110, deted Feb-
rurary 18, 1943) and if such a bond Is required, it 1s
the opinion of this Department that the cost of such of-
ficial bond for a deputy is an authorized expenditure
to be paid from the Officers I Salary Fund of your coun-
ty upon a finding of the Commissioners1 Court that the
sams is a reasonable bond and a necessary expense.
Therefore, it is the opinion of this Depart-
msnt that vhen the county officials of a county are
compensated on an annual salary basis, the premiums on
the bonds of said off leers and their deputies must be
paid by the county as authorized by Section (b) of Ar-
ticle 3899, V. C. S., from the Orfloers’ Salary Fund
of said county.
We are horewlth enclosing for you lnforma-
tfon a copy of Opinion No. o-5055, written by this De-
partment on January 29, 1943, which holds that bond
pl?emiums for certain named county officials and their
deputies in counties operat lag on a salary basis should
be paid out of the Officers I Salary Fund of the county.
-
1. The amount of t,he off lclal bond for a
sheriff is determined by the Commissioners1
Court, and the amount of the official bond for
a sheriff Is de uty is determined by the sher-
iff. (Arts. 6i 66 and 6870, R1 C. 9.)
2. The cost of official bonds of a sher-
iff and his deputies, compensated on a salary
bas la, is an authorized expendlt ure, allowable
by the Commissioners f Court from the Officers’
Salary Fund.
BU:d jm:wB:mrj
&cl; Assistant