Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1940 )

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN --=- Eonorrblo Bamom Oil.8 Comclrsioner, Geaeral Land Ofiiao Awtln, Tmxar Dear Mr. aUes1 pinion upon the sire to we In opolal fund aooru- Ootad in 1931 orrem SOT ed along the hth bee.ee east aide of tb Paahandlo the rest 8ldO or tlm sttste were adjudged to b looated finaldecree of the Supreme SO Stntcr eatered Marah lT, 1930, In tat0 of oklahom8 1. The state of The Aot sete Sorth ooaditionr and re letions whioh rhall govern the #ale of suoh land, and Tn Seotlon 2 provides es r0il0mt -The of the dsaeral Coxmni,rs:oner Land Offloo, t& Attornr7 Ceaeral, and the uovsrnor are herrby designated and ooastituted a Spcola i Lax16 Board to aaoorhin the p emOn# lltitled to pumAare said la&Ire Said Board 18 htreb- authorized to employ a6 many a8 three Qerron8, Hon. Besoom Oiler - Pa&r 2 ii deemed neo er eer toyl88lstin asoertaln- fag the boas iid8 o i almntr of 8aId land8 a8 8hown by the pub110 reoordr aad under the 1~8 or the State or Oklahom, and to make ruoh 8urve78 and l.ave8tlgatIon8 88 m87 b8 n80088ar7 to earn out the provl8Ions of thlr Aot, and laid Board 18 hereby luthorlsed to adopt luoh rulon re,platlonr aad form8 a8 it may deem erped Ient.’ Seotlon 5, in part, provide8 a *Any olaImaat to any portion of raid land8 who would havo had title to 8~ had It been looated la Oklahoma, may make applioatloa to the ConmLsIoner of the Oeaeral Land Offloe to pur- ohase the land claimed. Suoh applloatlon 8ball * be aooom?enIed by field note8 of the treat claimed, together with a fIli* fee of One ( 1.00) Dollar, 6a examlar3tlon fee of Fifteen (.15$ 3 Cent8 per aore, and with suoh other Iafonmtloa a8 the Land Board may require to be given, Inoludlag oer-tlfled ooplea of all munlmeat8 of title under the laws of Oklahoma.w Seotloa 6 provides, ‘The exmiaatIoa fees provided for Ia SeotIon 3 of thlr Aot shall be deposited In a apeolel fund to the oredIt.of the Land Board oreeted in Saotlon 2 of thlr Aot, and 8eIa ftmd~ shall be wed to derrajr the expense8 lnoident to the enforcement of thlr Aot. ThIr had rhall be dlrbursed by the Board with vouohera drawn on th8 State Treasurer aad rlgaed by the Oovernor and oouaterslgaed by the Land Commll~loa8r. Aay 81~8 remaining la auoh fund after all lxpea8es shave been pald rhall be tramferred to the Pmmanent Sohool Fuad. The amount of mon8y aoorulng to the State of Texas for the rale of the land a8 provided for In Seotlon 3 hereof ehall be plaoed to the credit of the Pemanent Sohool Fund.” The method you desire ‘to apply in the hendlIag of the exminatloa fez8 provided for Ia Seotlon 3 18 8tated in your letter a8 follows: “. . .lt Is our desire to plaoe oaoh ..“&a. “PO”“rn tiLLem - r3pe 3 spplIoaat~8 remlttanoe of exsmlnatlon recs to this OfriO to the oredlt Of th8 8ttOr7ie ati appolnt~d b7 tha Spealal Lama Board, w r th tha Stata Treasurer, la a 8u#pm#@ l#OOPnt known as a ~Speolal Iand Board 8USpen8O Aocouat *. Tbn upon I flat31 doterminatIoa or the amount duolaoh attorney for th0 8erVloe8 p%rfOrnml we would dlrrot tho State Treasurer, by a rouohor duly #I&aed by the Gatornor end oounter- Sig~iOb b7 the Land COI&S``OYBT, to pay the r%- apeotlvr sunw due oaoh attomoy, 0ttdlllmvrlse 4ny othor 8ooottnt8 dw agalmt Said ruad.” Tha I.e ialature ha8 not, within the last two pears, 8peol?loa k ly approprlatsd the epeolal fund or%at%d by suOh erambatlon fees to the purpo8es for wh1Oh they em authoxlzed to b% used by iWSol% S330a. TIKI question presented 18 wh%th%r or not th% imthod proposed for &:sbur#In~ the fund In questlcm IS in vlolatlon or Artlole 8, Sootion 6 of th8 Texea Con- StitUtiOa, whloh provide8 thatt "No money shall be drmn from the Treasury but la pursuanoe of spaoifio approprIntlons made by law! nor shell any appropriation of to:e;f bs made for s loqq- term than tm years, " The QIWiOUS opIaIoas of thIk``d%partment ar% umnlmous In holding that speoial funds, 8ubstantially Slmiler in nature to the fund provided for by Artial% 8330a, are rubjeot to the rOViSiOa8 Of Artiola 8, Seotloa 6 of the Comatltut s on, for the reason that SUOh fnw.ls ooxmtltut% Wmey drawn from the Treasury* within the msning of the oon8tItutIonel provlsIoa, and that suah fund8 oau only be disbursed by speoifio appropriation sffeotlve for a tern no lone.or than tvm yeara. In Opinion No. o-700 of thI8 department, ad- dressed to Bonorsblr 2. H. Thornton, Jr., Chair-; Can- mittes on Appropriations, House of ~epresentatlves, dated May 5, 1939, this ruestlon was exhsustlvely rOVI%'2:ed with respeot to a greet nwnbe.- of spuoial funds ox-sated b t&e b&iSl.3tUT%, zany Of whioh SwdS am substantial 17 rlnilar to the Bxemlaetloa Fee Fuad rovlded la Artlal% S330a. It was there held that B #pee s ii0 appropriation was neoO8sar for suoh Sp%OIal fWd8 before they 00ula lo&ally b% d I %bWS%d. . 42 Hon. Besoom Ollea - Page 4 In OpI.aIonNo, O-320 0s this department, dated May 4, 1939, addrrssed to Honorable Jo% KunsohIk, oom- mI8sIon%r of Labor, It wa8 deoldod that a epeolal fund d%8i~aat%d by the Legislature as the State BoIl%r In- sp%otIon yuzkd oould not be disbursed without a speolflo appropriation and that ruoh appropriation oould not be lffeotlve for mare than two years ln the future. The 8-e holding was mad% in Opinion ~0.0-1176, apprOV%d Auguet 23, 1939, addressed to Honorable Walter C. Woodwsrd, Chelrman, Board of Insuraaoe Comm.l88Ioaer%, with reepeot to %xemlnetIon tses ooorulng fran Insuranae oompanles whloh had been examined by the Board of tisur- aaoe ConunIsoIonera. A oopy 0s Oplnloa NO. O-320 referred to above 18 herewith enoloaed. Copies of tha other opinions referred to will be mede avalleble to you, should you dealrs them. A repetition of the argument and oltatlon of authorities Inoludsd In those oplnlons will not be made here. fn vlew of those opinions, whloh m believe to be oorroot, we muat advlse you that the examlnstlon fee fund in question is State m:ney wlthln the meaning of Article 8, Section 6 of the Constitution, end es there has been no apeolflo apgropriatlon of suoh fund within the last two years, Its dlsburaezent In the manner you outline would be Illegal. In Conferenos Opinion No. 3048, eddre.saed to Honorable Tom C. King, State Auditor, It was, in etfeot, held that Artlolo 43e8, as amended by Chapter 242 of the Aots of the 4206 Legislature, does not euthorlze the pleolug In e suspense fund ln t&e State Treasury fees suoh a8 the eramlnstlon fees In question, the 8tatus Of suoh fees not being undetermined, and no dispute or protest having been made by the pertles who paid suoh fees. A oopy of Opinion No, 3048 Is elao enclosed herewith. For the reasons stated, you are advised thst the method proposed In your letter for the handling Of Hon. Bacoom Oiler - Peee 5 the feea in qucrtlon doe8 not oora~ly with the law. Your8 very truly ATTORNEYWIXRAL OF TEXAS Robert E