Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1939 )

OFFKx OF TiiEATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
lR ILDc .YAmi
.-“-ma
Ho n.Charloy b&hart
State Treaeorer
Austin, Texus
Dear k!r.Lockhart:
By your letter of J
4365 of the RsrisedCf+i
procedure for the lssaan warrants by the
Ct6te Cmptrolle of this Cepartzent
upon the follow1
plichte warrant
sense that the
paid by the Treasurer?
wsrrsnt IS 165Pml, it?
oller to write a let-
original, or does
Qt0J6RtlCa~1yStop pay-
he payee ha6 In his po66esslon both
nd the dapllcats warrant, is it in-
<” If in question
three either the orlgfnal
or the Cupiicate om be paid, doep the &OLCS of
which is ta be paid lie tith the payee, the Traasur-
er, or the State Conptroller?w
&tie18 4365, B. C. S. 1925,,it ES f0llC``S:
*The Comptroller,whet satiufied that any Orlgi-
nal warrant dram upon the State Treasurer has been
lost or deetroysd, Or uhan Amy certificate or other
808, Oharh7 Lookhartt b60 6.
•~WAW 0rttwbt0en08~ •~JWO&b 7
Itb 0
ltr a stb g
bati OS tha Stat0 hamboat hat, is luth o r fs %a
e4
frao 8 duplioato arrant fn lko or the orfghul
wur?Ont 0T l daplloatr Or a Oopr d 8uob oertiSloat*,
or~8thmrovidoaoa H imlobtdnoir In 110~ of ruoh
otfgful~ hut a0 mob duplloatbwarrant,or other
bribemaeor lndebtedners, ahalllmrtae anti1 tha
lppllomt ha8 riled with the Omptrollar hl~ arfl-
&tit, stating thut ho f8 thetmo maer of ruoh
lnstrua6nt, aDa tht the aa8* im 1x1Saot lost or
4eBtrOfub ,and ihall all tllo rlth the Ocaptroller
hfr bond in double the amount of tha olalm with two
or 8ore good and mtllfloiont eQrotlo#, payableto
the Governor, to + approved by tt, Comptroller,
and oondftloned fliatthe &pplloantwill hold the
Stat0 hatiers ab return to ttiaOcmptrollmr,upon
d-nd being Jmde thararor, uch duplloatam or
OOPibS, or the amount of money oeacad therein, to-
gethar dth all aorta that may locrue against the
State on oollecting the ~83~. After the laauanaa
of 6aiU dupllcata or oopy if tha Coaiptrollsr6hOUld
ascertain that the eana uaa improperly lsauod, or
that t3e applicant or party to wholrr the same was
lseued was not the cwner thereof, he shall at onoe
demand the return ol said duplioate or oopy if un-
p&id, or the mount paid out by the Stata, if so
psfd; and, upon talluro of tbo party to return aanio
or the amount of money -1184 tar, muit shall be
InatItuted upon said bond In Travis County."
Anrworiq yOur rlrst quertloa, me am of opinionthat the
irauance oi thi duplioate warrant does nof %n all InstancaB
rold the original warrant in the ranse that the original
oanaot over be lugally pa!Q brthe Treamrer. A reading of
the ontIr* prorlsians of Artlrlr 4355 would srom to lndioatr
that it was tha latention or thr Leglalaturo that the OrbiMl
warrant rhould be paid fr lt should turn up In the hands of
an innooentholder, and that the State should proceed over
an6 against the holder of the duplicatewarrant upon hfa
bodl for the reoovary oi the mbunt paid out bn the dEPlicat4
rarraat by the Stat6.
Tour second question lo'an``areda8 r0ii0+76: when a
duplicate warrant Is Issued,it 18 not neoeasary for the
Comptroller to write a letter atopplng PaJmpnt On the orWna1..
Since a duplicate *arrant 1~ only authorized to be 188``4
no*. Ohmlay Lo&hart, 96&r 8.
k&n the Barptrollor br boea e8tlriled tht tbr orlglul
ha bwa lad or domtro~tl, 1t im dirfirult to loa OT
\udorrtaldto whar the aaptrolle? might addrem 8uch l
httor step p tiq PayMEt On the O?& iBd. T h O ;ONWiOO Of
tho dup llmto uarrant lutaatlrmlly rtopr -pant on the
orl&ml, lnwhr a8 the orl&ml ruJ be p*ronted for
payment by a perwa not ln lnaorent ltooldor thereab. And
by tho twm %umoaat bolder,waa used in our rmply to
r o ur
quontione, wemm 4 person wh oh ml
ro p uirth
edo
origiaalwarrantfrom tha pay.8 thereof, not a persom who
has eopulnd the orlp$aalwarrantthroughmaas other than
by rirtue OS a lauful waigmoat fram fha origl~l 9ay.a.
or from 4 ptrwa to whom luoh orlglnal:warrantwas lawfully
l6rlgaed by the original Qayee.
overly your third quaetlon, you are advised that
Artlola4668 oonttmplttos thet when the 98~00 prersatrboth
the ox-i&al and the dupliocitewarinat,or bar iB hl*
po4sssslan both the originaland the duplleato warrant,
that the original warrant thall be paid and the duplloato
nrraat ahall be, at the sass time, wrrmdarod. It both
thr original ad the duplloatewarrant turn up ln the hen68
of the orlgtnalpayee,.
it becomesquite apparmt that tha
&plloet.s must neoteserfly htvt been improperly fewed;
therefore, the last etnttros of Article 4365, requiring
the Camptroller in such ln~tanos to mt ome demand tha ro-
turn or the duplicate, lr unpaid,governr.
In ritw of the anewtrto your third qusstlon, it beoomer
unnsceseary to answer your fourth question.
Yours very truly
R. W. Pblrohlld
AE6iet.Wlt