Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1951 )

Boa. Bgd Bapjepbruch
County Attorney
mntegw county Reo Valtdity oS a oma-.
Xontagw, Texw ra ’ ccurt war
tingwv justlao
vlthout cor-
reaponaingly obangiq
the boundmieo of eleo-
Dear Sirr tlon prealnota.
“On January 10, 1949, t& Ccamlesion-
era Court or Montague County, Texad, cn-
tered an order ol?e8ting 4 Imv Jostloe
Preolnots ia.xon``conn~,.-. in
lieu 0f the a p3Oti0t8 ~hbh .VIW in OX-
isteoce at that time.
., .,I
9ix croatbag ths 1) ww~Jwtioe Pro-.
cinata, the~Camiseicme2?e,Corrrt omsred
cartab Xlectlon Precinct llws, thereby
plac%ng said eleotion preclnots m parte
thereof intwdiffersatJuet~8e Preallots.
“In the elesatf0aa or 1950, sJwtl& Of
the Petage rrrrm elected ioPt& bm MMII
And there were aorutable~ eleatea fa
Jwtiae PrecXadte Roe. I, 2, -3 anh”k!mmi
uaa no candidate for tlm offiaeof oamtable
ln molnct Ho. 4.
%a Croat the 4 m Jwtlce Pre-
olnctI3, tha c 2x esioww Court failed 30
oreate ney eletition preoinc$8 tc oorrespdnd
with the boawWlerr of aili 4 JurOlos ?ra -
ai.aats,ana h8ve the eleotica pmol.&ats en-
t%?ely within the bouuU8rtrr cf nWl Jxytloe.
mclnatr.o*
.
,:
!!ou. BE@ &4r~enWocb, page 2 (V-1218)
.
:
2
pOl#CFBOOtiWXQ4a~%8t&. VheAtRlb 6OU'tWa8
onoe established, no legislation ‘vas wedoa. ,...
to enable It to e%ePafu m ptnfem g%ven w
the above p~ovlslolr, to tlI.vUs the ooulity ia- .
to preolnctfi, The clipeotion is plsin and
sMple, and wl.thout oandltion w restriction
exoept that a8 to the nmfber of pmcticts, ft
$6 said fast no p.WaedkaWIS prescribe by
which the power is to be ereroieetl.~ Z! any
wad needed the statute supplfed it, when Al3
required ti$atthe prooeedfigs of’ the 0-b
., .:.
,..’ ‘.’ should be recorded in it8 tinutS book. Rev,
art.1554. This vai3 all that var3
.. . .
at* l%gfj, :
.’ neoesaaw. The power to divide the county
into jwtioese ppeoinota is also given by the
statute, but not fa terms do explfclt as thy ’
used &n t&s conetitutlo% Rev,+ SL a, u-t.
There oan be no doubt that both consti-
tut Cmalad statute oonSer the paver, dnU the
7
. .
zmly question fs au to it8 extent. ft ia cork
tended that a limitation upon the power ,%s
.
roturd in th0 0wdmuti0w pti810n feag
the terma of office
of proofnot offlaers f sml
b that, sinoe.they are to hold for tramsm,
it r0n0vs tat the poDs0inot8 #tlmot by 0-a
.durIrgthe terms, bssmme ths powsbtoalter
thsn woukl practfoally enable tba ooyrt to de-
stroy the affIae. The lgaguage oft& oansti-
tatIcy exgrsssos no.sush 1ImItatioxl. Ths ai-
.lrIsIcuaIstobsmds vrpllt&ms totIm.' Ths
W&8011for the avI8Ioh Is toiiw th* oamveni-
8n88 of tbrr peO$lp; mna the Jud@ both as to
tima and oouvenlenoo, 18 tb 00uA Ths lirni-
tatibo 0twmd0 ra * b ylp p x ld (IQowquir8
ld
t&k3lnseptlon In ths 0onstitutItm of a proviso
uhIoh ths 0ouPt seanot r08a into it. ms only
lidtat%QU I-00@ 80-l: t0 Mi0&S t& SC-
‘, qe ths power. Bat lImitet1w nqullwJ u may
M $a~, ,and a008 not allw xp thah eight,
$LP8d.Wt8r Rlt fw it 'the aoanty algIlt hew
been 0Ut Up intO MI’ m ~OlEAdk 88 tb OOUl’t
MY mQjk3P t0 .8~bl%Ob:o m it th8 intOlktiOU-
Is maa0 ,mQke malfert t&it rtbbin ths uats,
tbrsf+lla%IstOeetemlao&ldrr\lbrra Ash’
th sy
em ~tlm a wee
me& a r t wa abawler%88 betmen
o i~a me,‘O
Worn sbmgfbaapd~dsiiar~ lsaviagall o?
the, etbsla uus~d, tas &at is the 8sDs
a8~If en amWr, trek entamd rotting out aww
thb baw&e~ss or ths 'tmsmhbmd prsalncts, as
Wll8i those bharyrda
&IF’S 18 ~80dbSd, tkH 0OUl.d bs n0 SUbSfiXb
tlal objootfca to 806h e:: (L
'-Tlu of
pmmr
Face to
. -
. .
IQ* BQya arjslabruch, psgp 4 0J-l239)x
ThOOQIU?toIll 136 8.W.
ll& 1145 fTex.cIvoApp*'
:.
*ft appears ta be the unacubted dght
‘~Q?ooesafQwPs~o~tto~:the
‘wea Qf jwt%ae*s mOi?%8t8 at v&l&,
ptrd it hU b0.a hOld thpt. 8Uch OOWts my
eb&IshagrwainstaMcrraatsamvpmm
aIwtaupwet3 of the ow mbolfshe4aMa
~anothw,~tbatftuasiraakr?el
e t tbo oewt did not at ths tIms ml&s@
mot the VkbQlaooun 0 state vo, Rlgmby,
17 Texc.cIrdppo 171, bT3 sew, 27l*.
The Supreme Court
112 W. 193* 247 SOW. 263 (1
oa808 and made ths hollowing obsematlfm, at page 267:
*It Is thw aeon that them is no lid-
latica CQ the time vhen the COrmi88%owrs’
oourt luay divide a coumty into Qwtiss pm-
clncts , and that, aside fra the mxlmw akd
mlnlmm gslssarlbed In the CW~ltutIc& thoz’8
18 PLO i%IIt%t&iQU iBE t0 mbo The’.cOWtitU-
.tion @sfJ not State’ lww the povur or aIYIsIcsl
by the otmals8lsms~8* oowt shall be exercised,
w &3es the statute* lhai the quotaticmr *aa
: 'ths oplnioa by Jmlge Wl.Uams, suplp, it is
alwr tgtiyor slatlve aotloe was amoes-
rurJa Ai In that, ia the *bsowe or
mmambls 1eglslatSve aotlon, tbs ccamissiam-
esse.oourtmsyperf&stheduty e%wdupau
thW in theIF Crm yO7o 80 104 tit #al’-
rwmwoe da8 pot mount to a guess &me of
aoticm by the aco19pfssions~e a-t Is not
made bpsnasnt on state legislative astlod,
It is Inaoncelvablo that It should beg msde
dependeat upon te&eml aotfon, la the r088t
of tbr Dnitea States oewus, uuless Bbs Oabn-
~8tLtUtiCU~SrpPs8Sf~ SO stated, l&&oh i8 Wt
tbs awe.
%ere is no part of ths dut7 snjainea
W seotiim 18, et. 5, ae the adp~lss%owrs"
f
x%au.Boyd Ihrgeubruoh, page 5 (V-12i8f
court Whiah may be perfumed wltkiout oo.nai&m
ing the QOQU~tiOll, OONQYIti@ll5,aad i;lBttp1.'
tries,. not only of the ooimty, but of elncb
oontsmQlatetI 8llbdz0l8ion of the county: and
to say that the com&safcmers court must
fOllC3a the E.?lIIBUS
ZV3QOl'tR,WhiCh aZT$ifHI~b:
only every 10 foam, is to destsoy the very
. QUPQOSeOf the QOlfsPoonZ=eI'red On the dOi%-
missloner8' court to Qivlda the county fPO&
time to ti8m Pnto a etiflcieat number of
just320 prrcknats fm the aonmzienae of tbs
psoppe+
'It i8 QlRill i-l'& 8``tiCil~18, EUJt. 5, Of'
the f%ZM5titUt`` that kt8 Ql-fme QUPQOSO t.XInet
fixing daiiMta1~ tha number of justice pre-
alnat in any aounty, aad the aumBer of jas-
.tic6s In any ~tioular ps?eainct was, y it
. stat'la, *th6 aonvenienos of the
nmy b8 made to m6et tbs ~&iaiqlng needa of 9
P -W l
iS th’, 8816 88 t&It &O&Pbd in the pM1tOU8
pal%graQb of the dam8 uation-4aat is, for
the aonwmien~e of the people. ?Jo method of
@te~%I@ the QO#tl~tlOn.iS &VIIIl in thL8
sectFoll or elsewhllrn in the Coin3titutioil.
The &ts~tion Of the QOQUlatiOn'by ~UUS?~
authoz’Zty is llt?C0813W$ to 8et tn motion the
QPm68tI by which two~juutiaes -8 tP:bs ePeat-i
,@d,or a'vaaanayln.the officefilled by ap
QOiUtlWlXt . The COmWtUtionamta%n8 2merpIxm3
dh8action, either to the ek4mrate'm~ to the
to how w when thie ques-
18 t0 be Uetemsiued,nor IS
in the statutes therefor.
statUtS8; arts. 2241,
-'. not neW88EW7 t0
fhe aolai88iOnW8
eXEtbii9 ’ BOu& to 6xeroi8e
w ti th6 QaPara &VW-in tail QFO98iOn Of
the 0on8wttltlon.”
In At$orgey &‘IMWB1’8 ,opini~ v-1032 (1950), it
18.kitedi.
,-. .
Heat. Floyd Barjenbruch, page 6 (V-1218)
"In view of the foregoing you are advised
that the Cc4mnlseloner8~ Court of SabLne County
had the authepity t4 redi8trlOt ths jU8thX
eOinOt8 in the OOUllt~ 80 a8 t0 QFOVidO that
K e oounty would aensiet of four .jwtiag pre-
cincta rather than el *
‘96 SiW.2cl839 (Ter.Clo.A~. 1936
,_
In view of the foi%going, it ir our oplaion
that the Order Of the OOltUIli88iolXir8s
a$NA'tal-eat&~ new
jWt%oe QPeCinOtS i8 a nilid dXePai8e Of it8 pOWor ex-
granted by the pr~l8lom of Seotion 18 of Ar-
Oo'mtitu~ion Of Texas.
The aonaluaion we have pea&d ~abwe n&&es
unne,cessary an.an8wer to your remaining questiana.
48'S~.W.2tl3l5 (TexaOir.Agp. 1932) and
214 S.W.2d 473 (Te~.Civ.App. l&S),
.nOt t0 th6
aigplic&bl,a ~qLIO8tiOI8' QXWSellted.
These cases involved the validlt of OrdoSS Of the aas-
~;;``rs3cet$r; ;POati"fi new &oti``preoli&ok under
Wai 0. jO&P l'ItqUO8t ?niWOlVO8 all Ol'dOr
of the aon&alGn&``
clncta .udeF Section
k8. ;In this .ooanectiqm, say futaFe Opder~defXnln new,
slaation pmalncts dRI8t C&fcaDa to the &sly mea &dd ijua-
tiae ppecinat8 a8 prorfded in Ilrticle 29%.
.
Seatfen 18 oi Artiale V of the Ctinstf-
tUtiOn Of Texas aUthOPf~e8 t&O WWBl&d8fO12@~8D
court ~$0 abolish eristfnS~ju8tlas peainats~ '
and create new jwtiw'~Qlwcfwta at any tfme.
for the conveniqoa of the,peo~le, regardless'
~i!'f& tex=HtoPj to be ldaluded fn the pre-
The CdJ liIiI%trtiOn 011thi8 QOWeris
that &ems must be at least four zmd not aore
~H&r.+eyd Eurjenbruch,page 7. (V-1218)
.8X.% 639 (T8xSi~dUm
;.Att't2.n. OQ. v-1032
APPROVED: Toura very truly,
J. 0. Davcris, Jr. PRICE DAriIllL
CountyAfYairs Mvislan Attorney General
JesseP. Luten,Jr.
RevievingAssistemt
Oharles0. Mathews
pest &88iBtZlllt A88i8tant
JRtml?
i
I
.
I
. .