Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1942 )


Menu:
  • .   , ..
    Ronorable F.d Gunn
    Criminal District  Attorney
    Kilam County
    Cameron, Texas
    Dear    Sir:                          Opinion No. 0-4F15
    Re:   Legality of issuance        of tax
    receipts on Sunday,        and related
    matters.
    Your letter    of January 1, 1943,     requesting       the   opinion
    of   this      department    reads as follows:
    "You will note the questions    in writing from
    the Tax Collector   of Milan County, and my answer
    in writing,  giving  my opinion  on same.
    “Please  give me your opinion    on the     questions
    for     the benefit   of the Tax Collector."
    The letter    of the Tax Assessor-Collector          presenting     the
    questions        on which    you desire our opinion     reads      in part as
    follows :
    "The law gives Tax-payers   up to, and including
    January 3lst of the following     year for which taxes
    are assessed,   to pay their  State,   County, and Voting
    Poll Tax Receipts,   without  penalty.
    "January 31st,    1943 falls    on Sunday.    In this
    case,    in your opinion,     will,it  be legal   to issue Tax
    receipts    and voting    Poll Tax receipts     on Sunday,
    January 31st,     or will    it be legal  to issue 1942 Tax
    receipts    without  penalty     and 1942 Voting Poll Tax
    receipts    on Feb. lst,    1943?
    If. . .           9,
    . . .
    Under our statutes,    taxes paid on or before  January 31st
    of the next succeeding     year, for which they were assessed    are not
    delinquent.    In other words property     taxes do not become delin-
    quent until   after  the 31st day of January following    the year in
    5onorabI.e    Ed Gunn,        Page 2                          0 -4315
    ::?Lch they are due.          (Houston     Oil   Company of Texas       v.   Eoward,
    255 s .w. 340 .)
    Chapter 2, Title     7 of Vernon’s     Annotated Penal Code con-
    ta.ins the statutes    commonly referred      to as the Sunday laws.
    Under these statutes     certain    labor done on Sunday is a. criminal
    offense.    After carefully     considering     these statutes   it is our
    opinion   that they do not prohibit        an officer   from performing  his
    ,official  duties   on Sunday.
    We quote      from Texas     Jurisprudence,       Volume   39,     page 877
    as follows :
    “At common law, Sunday is dies non jurid icus
    (a non juridical       day);   and it was stated      in an
    early case that no judicial          function   can lawfully
    be exercised      on Sunday.      The statute ,declares      that
    no civil     suit shall    be commenced nor process
    issued or served on Sunday except in cases of in-
    junction,     attachment,     garnishment,    sequestration,
    or distress      proceedings.      The act formerly     con-
    tsined    the same prohibition       with respect     to legal
    holidays.
    ”. . .   . .   . . .
    “Neither    the Constitution        nor’ the civil    statutes
    lay any restrictions         upon the Governor nor upon any
    ‘of the heads of the state departments              with respect       to
    Sundays or legal        holidays;     all public    officers     may
    keep their      offices   open on Sundays and holida,ys,            and
    perform all ministerial           duties;    but it 1s their      pri-
    vilege    to refuse     to function       on those days,     if they
    elect.”
    We quote      from the    case    of   Stephens   v., Porter,      
    69 S.W. 423
    ,
    as follows :
    11
    . . . There is no law in Texas prohibiting              the
    commissioner        of the general      land office   from holding
    his office       open on Sunday or any legal holiday,            or
    from performing         official    acts on those days.       Neither
    our constitution         nor our civil      statutes  lay any such
    restrictions       upon the governor        nor upon any of the
    heads of the state departments,              probably   because    Ft
    might sometimes be necessa,ry            for them to perform their
    official      functions      on those days.      Cur criminal
    statute      (Pen. Code 1895, art.         196) provides    that any
    person who shall          ‘labor   on Sunday’ shall     be fined,
    O-4915
    ,c.+,c    ‘Labor     ’ Is defined        as follows:       'To exert
    G.sEular        strength;        to exert one's       strength    with
    ;oainful       effort,       particularly      in servile     occupations,
    to work; to toil,'                Webst. Int. Dlct.        821.     The
    term as       used     In    the   criminal    statutes    does    not
    apply t0 an Officer                8ng8,ged in the performance           of
    his official           duties.        The common law did not ;z?ohibit
    officers        from doing ministerial             acts on Sunday nor
    on holi.days.           It    declared     that Sundae was dies non
    jurldicus,         not a judicial         or court day, but our
    statute        (Rev. St. 1895, art.            1180) has modifl&          the
    common law by simply declaring                    that 'no clvll       suit
    shall     be comeaced.,           nor stf111 any civil        i>rocess be
    issued or served on Sunday, or any legal                       holiday,
    except       ln cases of injunction,              attachment     or seques-
    tration'.           This exce:?tlon        operates    as moS:if'ication
    of that law, according                 to a wellknown rule uf' con-
    struction.           Under this statute           It has been held
    that a sale under execution                  and sheriff's       deed
    made on a legal              holiday    was valld~.      Crabtree      v.
    Whlteselle,          
    65 Tex. 111
    .          See, also,     Railway Co. v.
    Rardlng,        
    63 Tex. 162
    , where it was held ;>ro:Jer and
    valid for a district                court   totry a cause on a legal
    holiday.          In Insurance         Co. V. Shrader,       
    89 Tex. 35
    ,
    
    32 S.W. 872
    , 
    33 S.W. 112
    , 30 L.R.A.                      492, 59 Am.
    St. Rep. 25, it was held by our supreme court that
    an application             for writ of error received            by the
    clerk     of this court on Sunday, and so lndorsed,
    but not filed           until     Monday, must be considered             as
    filed     on Sunday and valid.               The reasoning       of our
    supreme court           in the three cases cited           leaves no
    doubt in our minds that the application                       of lorter
    to purchase          section      58 in this case was not void
    by reason of its being received                    and filed     in the
    general       land office         on Sunday, but was as valid             ln
    all respects           as if received        and filed     on any other
    clay In the week."
    Under the Texas statutes        every person subject    to pay a
    poll tax must pay said poll tax before            the 1st day of February
    next ;,recedlng     the election     In which they desire     to vote.    Art ic li?
    2963, Vernon's      Annotated    Civil   Statutes   places  a mandatory duty
    unon the Tax Assessor-Collector           to stamp on the face of any ‘solI.
    to:: receipt    Issued after     Janua~ry 31st of any year the ?,i?rde '%ldsr
    I!;2t Sntitled   To Vote".     Certainly     this provision   would be violated
    w!,er12 the Tax Assessor-Collector          Issued a poll tax receipt     after
    .TG:XGGY~31st without      the notation      thereon as prescribed     by said
    statute.
    Honorable     Ed Gunn,        Page 4                            o-4815
    In view of the foregoing      you are respectfully        advised
    that it is the opinion    of this department     that a poll tax
    receipt  bearing  the date of January 31, 1943, would entitle
    the holder thereof   to vote,    if not otherwise    disqualified,
    even though it was issued on Sunday.        You are further        advis&
    that a poll tax receipt     issued on Monday, February        1, 1943,
    must be stamped by the Tax Assessor-Collector          "Holder Not
    Entitled  To Vote",  and that the holder thereof        is not entitled
    to vote.
    With reference       to property   tax receipts      you are advised
    that the Tax Assessor-Collector          can legally    collect    property     tax
    on or before    January 31st,     1943, and issue his receipt          therefor
    without penalty.        In other words property      taxes are not delin-
    quent until    after    January 31, 1943, that is property          taxes for
    the preceding     year.    On February 1, 1943, property         taxes that are
    unpaid become delinquent        and the Assessor-Collector         of taxes is
    not authorized     to collect    said taxes and issue a receipt           there-
    for without    the penalties,     etc.,   as prescribed      by statute.
    Trusting   that   the   foregoing      fully    answers    your   inquiry,
    we are
    Yours   very   truly
    ATTORNEYGENERALOF TEXAS
    By s/   Ardell    Williams
    Ardell    Williams
    Assistant
    AW:mp:wc
    APPROVEDJAN. 9, 1.943
    s/ Gerald C. Mann
    ATTORNEYGENERALOF TEXAS
    Approved     Opinion   Committee     By s/GWB Chairman
    

Document Info

Docket Number: O-4815

Judges: Gerald Mann

Filed Date: 7/2/1942

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017