Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1942 )

OFFXc& OF !IXE&TTORHfXOEpDpRAL OFTEXAB BUSTS% Cterald C. Mann AttorneyGeneral HonorableC. D. Siolplonrr, Co``ptrollor sttigty 2bartt 1 DserSlrl~ Ritt~n~e;tFuel oontttruotion No. 04938 op5.nion of ma- compaw : . We have your lettsr.ofFebruary19, 19433re- qwstlngour oplniorkoonstruiagoertaiapr,rovislcms of a oontraatbfotween Tha Mollleater Fuel Companyand The Stateof Texas coveringthe flsaelyear 1942-43,from whleh letter we quoter ~%he MoAlesterFuel Capany, dth enoral 02ftoeaet EWlerCter,Oklahcmatand wi%l other offlaerrat 3002 sunlus street Dellat,Texas and also at R0okiW.e Teas &as the oonWa& for iurniehLnglign& to l&e Unlversltyof Tsaaars year 194243. In pore for the fittaal Y t&arm la .nota pro er one aoctordlqto dttrunderof;sndingo P theoontraot. Tha q3m- pttnyhas replIedthat the ahergeIs e one In aooordenoewith thc~a4tntraote we have your offloial ad-rho on the n * + +,w HonorableC. D. Slmnons,Page 2 provisionsof the aontraotln question Pertinfant are the followinga "The Party oftthe First Part hereby oontraota, binds and obligates%tself to furnishto %%iversity of Tems 6f the State of Texas ~omftE~ioTtyooitheBeaartdPartt;hroughallt: the perladooveredby this eontreot, w*+** * + * * All lignite to be of go@ gram ta ot.not lass thfl 10 on Page 3 HonorableC. D. Sialptoas, "The said Uhlversltyof Texas end the Stats of Texan agree to pay to The laiilesterFuel Companythe sum OS One Dollarand Seventy-three Cants ($1.73) per ton F.O.B. Austin,Texas f'or each and every ton of llgnltedelivereduuder this oontreat. The above prlaa of Oua Dollar end Seventy-three Cants ($1.73) per ton for all Ligtitkdeliver&dunder~thisoontradtshall "It la understoodend agreed that in the *Vent the unitedStates of Awrlaa or the State of Teht imposesa .saverenoo hx or other direat tax on Ligniteduring the liie of this ~o&tra&, aad the Sellerhas to ay the tax, that SW& tax will be added to tEe Sellers priae on L+ nlte. n * * ** "It is furtheroontraotedand agreed that* breaahof the terms of this oontraut, "1chisaoutraothas bean gntaredinto by authorityoi?e~rasolutioudurJI~entered iut@ by the Board of Controlof the State of Terns, HonorableC, D. SImmoas,Page 4 after cellingfor bids and advertisements thera- EXHIBIT At Conditionsof ProwsaL a@ sDeaifL'ioationa for llanL* . %XHIBIT Bt Id of MoAlesterFuel CO~IJ~Q.~ phesis ours) Tha pertinentpart of the bid referredto In the above quoted -p?or;tions of the oontraatreads. The general pule that writings whlah am either. enuexed to or referred tie in a aontre& will be am&rued as e part 0~s the aontraotis well stated In 17 C.J.6. 716, 8eoI 29% A cursory examinationof the oontraut,~fromwhluh wo have quotbdoo ioualy,diaoloaes the feat that almwt every provlaiontierein oontelnadis referableto end dependentupon the terms end aondItionsof the *%paaifiaations, proposalsendbid*nhiohare "medee pert" thereofby reSinmoe end are enwxed theretaes Erhlbll% With&at suah axh%bItsit la crlearthat the eontreatis lnaomplete. Werower, the aontreqtoontaipa its own 8peaiilorule of construction req&r%ng that the exhibitsshellbe eon- atruades pert thereoft "the terms of this * * * oontreot shellbe aonstruadto inoltade spealfiuetlons, bids and propose18oonneotedthercrvith end heretoettachedW. HonorableC. b, Simuons~Page 5 It is fundauentalthat 3.naonstruingcontraots effeotail1 be iven to all provIsionsthereincontained, If possible. If is likewisefundamentalthat the expressed inteotof the c6ntraatingpartiesmst be given effeot. We think that under the rule of uonstruationlaid down In the aontracti&elf, the provlslonsaontainedin the specificationsbid and proposalsmst be given the sam *eight,and that &ey are of equal rorae and effeatof any other provisionsoontalnedIn the aontraat. Unless thke 3.8 some ambiguityor eonfliatbetweenthe variousprovisions of the aantract,no construatlonis needed. We find no such aonfliatand no suah ambiguityes to justirya aon- structionof the aontract. It is clear and expllaitwith referenaeto the matters thereinoontalned. 1tspeolf@aUy providesthat In the event of au lnareaseor deareaseIn freightrates or of Federal taxes thereon,that the prioe providedfor in the eoattiaotshallbe increasedor deareased acoordinglp. therefore advfaeyou that if-the frei f Vtilel rate has increasedor 1f the Federaltaxes thereon e Y8 increasedthe sellerls entitledto add Such Auareaset0 the priae of the te end the pur&aser uuder this aon- treat,Ss.obllgated~ Y pay such additionalan&m!&, W veraely,~if suoh.rekesor taxea should be dimepjed then the purahaaerwould be entitledto have the advantageof such decmase in the price peld? Our ittentionMa been aalled to the cases of JohnsonV* Grand Fraternity+255 Fed. 929 and Delanray ve Fefnt%rsSiiate~ 115 8.8. (26~ 736, We think that ?3enlc, neitherof suuhoeaes la In paina here, The Jc&xrison 0888 is authorityfor the generalpropesitlonthat the state- ment%hat the exhibit14 #made a art" of a tm&raati; ir not aontrolling,a@ that~where,&It pZ’OViS$~lN of the ,&an- treatand those of the arhlbitare in ednflictt the prbc visionsof the aontraotwill oo&reL Th* Ddla~y O~SI) did not involvean exhibitat all but a eneml referenae ta oontraotsbetwen other parties,and fhe ooart h&d HonorableC, IL Binanon5, Page 6 that suuh generalzyferenoeoould not have the effectof substltutlng the provlslo~ of the oontraotreferredto Yor the speaifieally expressedprovisionsof the oontract." We have neitherof suah f#ltuationnpresentedhere. On the aontraryt the contraatbeforeus speolflaally rovldesthat it shall be oonstruedto "iAaiUdespeoiflcatlona, Ids, and proposalseonuectedtherewlthn.We can no more ii disregardthis provisionof the ooatraatthan we 06~1dis- regardany Other prOVhiOA theIWinoontained, It has alla0been suggestedthat the portionof the bid providingfor the add%tionto t&e sellingprioe of .an lnarease,offreightrates or Pederaltaxes is %n ao~- fllctwith that portionof the oontraotwhloh providesthat lf State or Federal%everanae taxes or other directtaxes" are leviedupon llgnite",~ and sellerhas to pay such taxes the mount so paid shall be added to the sellingprice be- cause It .lssaid that only ``~evcmnce or other dlreat&es on lignite*were %A the m$nds of'the aontraatingpatiies and that such revision superuedebthe said provisionIn thebld. To &a we cannot agree for the reason that it is oboioua~that a Federal.tax upon fzelghtrates mentionedln the bid is neithera %mveranqe tax",norIs It any "other dhwt tax upon llgA%W. The two are altogetherdifferen aAddietiAt?t*Furthermorehaving lnoludedthe provW.en for the addltlonof such transportation taxes in the bid whiahjunder the speclflolrnguageof the aontraot,must be construedae a part of It, It ,wasnelther~neoessary nor desirableto reiteratesucrh~provislon in the addltlonal writ+& Aguln it Is sugge8teathat the Z?OV.tSfOA ~Shat"all tracesrtatlon’aharges must be prepaid4y the geller.,lrIn OOACLp" at ulth -theprovlsianthat lnoreasedFederaltrans- portationtaxas'shallbe added to the price, The bid was ~made.FcO.Birtustin,Texa& It dleems fairlyobvlouathat all partleato the oontraat,at all times,axpeatedmtlLer to pey euah izansportotl6n tiger. Thla, however doe8 not, ia the leastBkilitate agnhUt 0Ur co``hIsioAiha% ther? in no%kfllat In auuh provisions. It ls'equallyas xonorableC, 9, %BEWSU% Pm 7 obviousthat if the pax-tier, hadUoAtemplatedpaymeAtof transportation ehargeaby the buyer there would have been ho reasonand ho jU8tificratioA for adding an increase in such charges to the sellingprioe,nor would there have been any reason for the provisiondeareaslngthe selling prlae in the event of a dearease in euah aharges. n?ustingthat the above fully answersyour in=- quiry,we are Very truly yours : ATTORWHYOEWSRALOF TEXAS By /is/ Forler Roberts i?ow``ler~tts