Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1960 )

4710
THE ATTO R&Y GENERAL
AUS-ITN 11.-
WI&L W-ON
Am- GWIZECAL
Octobv z9 lg60
Honorable A. W. Walker Opin-ionNo. WW-952
County Attorney
Dickens County Re: Voting rights of
Spur, Texas persons who have
resided in the State
more than one year
but have-changed
their residence from
one'county to another
less than sti months
before the election.
,DearMr. Walkers:
Youhave requested an .opinlonon the following
'question:
Is it legal for a person who has been's
residen.tofthe State of'Texas'formore than
12'months but who has resided in Dickens County
for only one month to vote on State and National
offices in 'theGeneral Electlon'inNovember In
-the election precinct of his residence In Dickens
County, Texas?
In the brief accompanyingyour request you refer to
Attorney General's Opinion No. o-2666, dated August 31, 1940,
and ask in effect whether that opinion is still a correct
statementof the law. Citing Article VI, Section 2 of the
Texas Constitution,Article 2967 of the Revised Civil Statutes,
and the case,of Little v. State ex rel. Parsell, 75 Tex. 616,
90 Oii N 0 2bbb 1 th
~v~swfrZ~50~~8coLL.ypt~o~ot~~~%!?ii3~~~~s t~t~asFZZ~~
of the election may vo~teIn the helectionprecinct of his new
residencefor all state offices and for all district offices
whose districts Include both counties. The reason,for your
questioningwhether this holding is still correct Is explained
in the foliowing quotation from-your brief:
"My concern in this matter is based'on the
fact that Article 5.~15of the Election Code Is
worded differentlyfrom Article 2967 of the Re-
vised Civil Statutes, which was in force in 1940.
You will notice that Article 5.15 of the Code
Honorable A. W. Walker, page 2 (WW-952)
provides that the voter must make an oath that
he has resided in the county where he offers
to vote for six months, while Article 2967,
which Article 5.15 replaced,provided that
the voter must make an oath that he has re-
sided in the districtor county where he of-
'fers to vote for six months. In other words,
the words 'districtor' were left out of Ar-
ticle 5.15. However, Article VI, Section,2
of the Constitutionstill reads the same old
way. Also, see 15-B Tex.Jur. 387-388, Sec.
31, footnote 20. In addition, see said 1940
opinion and Attorney General's letter opinions,
JULY 11, 1932 (Vol. 336, p. 518), July 1, 1936
(Vol. 372, ynwO), and August 6, 1938 (Vol.
382, Pi.617 .
At the outset it should be observed that the only
-placeat which.a person may vote 3s eat the place of his resl-
dence at the time of the election. (Throughoutthis opinion,
residencemeans legal residenceor domicile;8s~distinguished
from actual 'placeof abode while absent from one's domicile.)
When a person changes his residencefrom one.countyto-another,
he immediatelyloses his right to vote In the county of his
former residence,either by absentee~ballotor by.returning
to the county to vote~on election day, even thoughhe.may not
be able .to.votein the county of.hls new,resldenceuntil he
has fulfilled'therequisite length of residence to permit
~h$mto vote,there., Art. VI,.Sec...2,.Tex..,Cons,t.,;.
Arts. 2.06
and 5.05,.'ElectionCode; Sartwelle.v~.Bunn;120~~S~W.2d~130
(Tex.Civ.App.,lg38).
.Thenature of the rlght.of.suffrage~~ (frequently
called a privllege~ratherthan .a right)'@ stat&in the.fol-
lowing -.uotationfromthe..oplnion InSolon v; &ate, 54 -Tex.
,Cg.ni.
&! 1, 114 S.W. ; 349,.352~(1908),~wj1ic+&Jso cites~numerous
other support$ng~.authorlties:::..~ 1,~ '.
,"#&;
&&;,;mre is It& & ;&& ,;tio '~$& ,;&
~:.not.a necessary or~flxed'In&den% of~,.diti$&shippo .-
oti:lnhereht:dm each and every individual,:,but::~that_
voting is the.exercise, of.p.ol.itical-
.power,..arid
hog.
one Is entitled to vote,~unlessthe people .in their
sovereign capacity,have conferred on hlmthe right
to do .so. .Itmay be 1ald;down asa~general proposi-
tlon'thatthe rightof suffrage.may.beregulated and
modified or withdrawnby the.:au~thorlty~,whlch,con-.
,.
ferre~dIt,.*.+ * ,In the,:case :of.State,~v~."Dil~on,.32
Fla. 545i 14~'So:. 383; 22 .!L.R.A.'
~,124,~~,,.~n~,~treatrng
:
this general subject, the court ~say:;:',~'The:
wrightto
!
4711
Honorable A. W. Walker, Page 3 (WW-952)
vote Is not an inherent or absolute right found
among those'generallyreserved in bills of rights,
but Its possession is dependentupon constitutional
or statutory.grant. Subject to the limitationscon-
tained In the.federalConstitution,the elective
franchise is under the control of the sovereign
power of the states, expressed in Constitutionsor
statutes properly enacted. Where a Constitutionhas
conferred the right and prescribedthe qualifications
of electors, it of course is paramountuntil amended,
and the'heglslaturecannot change or add to~them In
any way; 'but,where the.Constitutiondoes not fix the
right of.suffrageor prescribe the qualificationsof
voters, it is competent for the Legislature,as the
representativeof the lawmakingpower of the state,
to do so. These principlesare well recognizedand
fully established by authority in this country.'"
The extent to which the Federal Constitutioncontrols
the right of suffrage is summarizedin the following uotatlon
rrom Voting and Election.Laws,by ConstanceE. Smith 9Oceana
Fublicatlons.InC.~, Em 11 (see, also; 18 Am. Jur.,
:Xlectlons,gg 46, &';-2g C.J.S., Elections, gg 5-8):
'* * * !IheConstitutiongrants to the state
legislaturesthe power to prescribe 'the times,
places and manner of holding electionsfor senators
and representatives,'and also the.power to~deter-
mine the manner of appointingpresidentialelectors.
These two grants of power coupled with each state's
unquestionedauthority to control all elections for
state offices endow the states with decisive control
. over all elections; for, while it is true .thatthe
Constitution,reservesto Congress the right to make
or alter regulationsfor congressionalor senatorial
elections, Congress has only rarely exercised this
power and then only in very limited ways. * * *
"One reads the ConstitutionIn vain for a con-
crete definition of who shall have the right to vote;
there is only the declarationof the 15th and 19th
Amendments that a citizen may not be denied the right
to vote because of race, color, previous condition
of servitude,or sex. A section of the 14th Amend-
ment defining citizens as 'all persons born or nat-
uralized in the United States and subject to the
jurisdictionthereof' is relevant, since citizen-
ship Is inall states a requisitefor suffrage.
With the exception of these broad restrictions,full
responsibilityfor determiningvoter qualifications
comes within state jurisdiction;** *.'
Honorable A. W. Walker, page 4 (WW-952)
Subject to the foregoinglimitations,It is thus
seen that in electionsfor federal offices as well as for
state offices, the State may,grant or withhold suffrage as
it sees fit and may impose whatever voter qualifications
It chooses.
Article VI, Section 2 of the Texas Constitution
provides:
"Every person subject to none of the fore-
going dlsquallficatlons fiontained In Section 1
of Article Vg, who shall have attained the age
of twenty-oneyears and who shall be a citizen
of the United States and who shall have resided
in this State one year next preceding an election
and the last six months within the district or
county in which such person offers to vote, shall
d a qualified elector;** *." (Emphasis
Prior to 1951, Article 2955 of the Revised Civil
Statutes, which Is now Article 5.02 of the ElectionCode,
contained this identicalprovision. Article 2967,:.R:C.S., ~,
which is now Article 5.15 of the Election Code,~provlded
that a voter who moved to another~county after receiving his
poll taxreceipt or-exemptioncertificatecould vote in the
precinct.ofhis new residenceby making oath "thathe then
resides.in the precinct where he.offers.tovote..and.has re-
sided for the last six months in the district 'orcounty in
which he offers to vote and twelve months In the .State."
When the Election Code was adopted in 1951;.the words "dis-
trict or" were dropped from Articles 5.02 and 5.15 of the
Code. (In the historical comment under Article 5.02 of Ver-
non’s Election Code, It is stated that the word "district"
was omitted becaus~ethe word district is too indefinite.)
The Constitutionfixes the qualificationsof an
elector, and the Legislatureis powerless to add to or take
from these quallfic&.ions. Solon v. State supra. Ko
Schneider, 110 Tex. 369, 218 S W 479 221'S W ,8b07f&);
Texas Power and LightCo. v. Brownwoo: Publil Service Go.,
1sw 1 5 (Tex.Civ.App.lg.37
&<&*2~de~&dent School District' $?Gefe fj6; )' WW
2 2d
08 (1956). Accordingly,~the
- _. Constitution &d no; the stai-
utes‘must.belooked to in determiningwhat residence require-
ments are Imposed upon voters, and forthis purpose the omls-
sion of the words "districtor" ~fromArticles 5.02 and 5.15
of the Election Code may be disregarded. Your question,
therefore, is to be answered on the basis,of the 'residence
requirementsset out in Article VI, Section 2,of the Constitu-
tion.
4712
Honorable A. W. Walker, Page 5 &W-952)
Voters who have moved from one county to another
within less than six months precedin an election must be
broken down into two categories: (17 those who have re-
sided for six months within a district which Includes the
county of their former residence and the county of their
new residence (under present governmentalorganization,
the district may be either a congressional,senatorial,
representative,judicial, supreme judicial, or State Board
of Educationdistrict);,and (2) those who do not have six
months' residence in any one of these various types of dls-
tricts. (Throughoutthis opinion it is assumed that the
voter has resided in the State for one year and is other-
wise qualified to vote.)
Little v. State ex rel. Parsell, 75 Tex. 616, 12
S.W. 965 (1tQC) d fines the voting rights of.persons In
the first categ&ye In that case, complainthad been made
to~the followingjuryinstructlon:
!By~the language 'who shall have resided In.
the State one year ~nextpreceding an election,
and the last six months in the dlstrict,orcounty
in which.he offers to vote,' is meant at.any State
or district election a person would be ,qualifledto
vote for State or district officers if he possessed
none of the dlsqualif$cationsmentioned in paragraph
2'of this charge, and had lived one ~year'inthe
State next preceding such election, and'.thelast six
,monthsin thendistrict in which he offered to vote;
but at an election held for the purpose of~locating
a county seat, and to elect county officers only,
the test as to residence in order to be.a qualified
elector would be one year in the State next preceding
such election, and the last six months in the county
,ln which he offered to vote."
The Supreme Court held that the instructionwas not erroneous,
saying:
'We think the court correctly interpreted
the language quoted in the charge. It is found
fin section 2 of Article 6 of the Constitution.In
our opinion it admits of no other reasonable con-
struction. When construed as meaning that a resi-
dence for six months in the district should qualify
an elector to vote for district officers, we have
no difficulty in determiningwhich district Is
meant; but if we should say that such residence
gives a right to vote for county officers, we should
be at a loss to know whether It Is the congressional,
judicial, senatorial,or legislativedistrict in
which the voter was to reside in order to acquire the
Honorable A. W. Walker, Page 6 (WW-952)
qualification. If such had been the intention,
the kind of districtwould have been named, or
there would have been some language in the pro-
vision indicatingsome rule by which the question
could be determined. Besides, the construction
claimed by appellant that six months' residence
in the district entitr ed the voter to vote for
county offices alsg WOUld have rendered the words
*or county' superfluous,because every county in
the State is, and will in all probabilitycontinue
to be, a part of some district. Since the dls-
trict Includes the county, it was unnecessary to
have used the word county if it had been intended
that a residence in the district should give the,
qualificationto vote for county officers."
Article VI, Section 2 of the Constitutionwas also
construed in United States v. Slater, 6 Fed. 824 (Clr. Ct.,
D. Tex. 1881). which held that a voter who had resided for
six months in a congressionaldistrict but less than six
months in the county could legally vote for congressmanand
for all state officers. The Court said:
"Dut if, being a citizen of the United States,
a residence of one year in the state, and the last
six months next before the election within the dis-
trict, will give him a right to vote in the elec-
tion precinct in which he resides, for what officers
can he vote? Cur present constitutionprovides,
(article6,.~ 3:) 'All qualified electors of the
state, * *~* who shall have resided for six nionths
Immediatelypreceding an electionwithin-the limits
of any city or corporate~town,shall have the right
to vote for mayor and all other elective officers.'
It is clear that a residencein the district for six
months does not give the right to,vote for city or
town officers,unless the residencehas been In said
city or town;'and,by parity of reasoning, such resl-
dence would not give the right to vote for county.of-
ficers unless said six-monthsl~residence had been ',
within the county; and, by a like parity of reasoning,
such residence would give the privilege of voting for
district officers and for state officers, he having
the other qualifications, and having resided the re-
quired six months in the district,and the required
one year In the state, next before the election, and
duly presenting himself In the election precinct in
which he resides. And this rational conclusion is
made irresistlbl~ystrong by the previous uniform
practice of permittingqualified electors~of.the
State to vote for state and district offices, where
4713
Honorable A. W. Walker,~page'i'
(WW-952)
their residence was not such as to authorize
them to vote,forkcounty offices at the time and
place of ,thelroffering to vote."
Later decisions of our courts have establishedthat
voters who have resided In the county for six months may vote
in elections.of political~subdivlslons within the county
.whlch'aredenominate.d,:~~as~
"districts"without having six
,months
~I.
residence:~ln:.lthe
pollt.ical
~s'ubdlvls,ion:
~':
Warren v.
Robinson,'32“:S.W.~2d
871 '(,Tex:Civ'.App.
193O);'Shawv. Taylor,
'14bS W.2d 452(Tex.Civ.App. 1940); Cranier v. Graham, 2b4
S.W.2h 135 Texc;Civ.App. 19%; error ref Duncan v. Willis,
157 Tex. 31 ; 302.S.W.2d 627 (1957). In-&e last-cited case,
which Involved a'school'dlstrictelection, the Supreme Court
clarified the meaning of "district"in Article VI,,Sectlon 2
of the'Constitutlon,~8s follows:-
"Petitioners'.asslgnmentagain raised the
mooted constructionof the word 'district8ap-
pearingin ~the-con~stltutional section..'In Little
v..State..~exirel. Parsell,~:"j'5Tex. 616, 12 S.W. 965,
this~Court construed the term 'dlstrictl~ :asmeaning,
a.pol~itidal subdivis~ionembracing&e. ormore' counties
and'%& 6ne..~referring a"county such
to subdivisions..of.,
as the school districthere involved~.".:,This.,construc-
tlon ~w~~~. .Creme,r
~&LB~,~ssi?d~~~ln vt Graham;',Tex:Civ.App.
264 S.W.2d~l35;'136'wherein~it'was stated't@t .~%vhether
.~ .‘.” rightly or wrongly, ithas,been decided~fiy.,th-e‘Supreme
.‘_
Courg-,thatthe word "district"asused finthe..phrase,
disJunctively..withrthe 'word,"county.~is ..me~anlngless,
'
and that the ~authorltles supportthe.rule,that tan
.electormust be a resident of the..State for one year,
resident of the county for six months;..,and a resident
of the subdivisionof the county fiuch:as a'schoal'
districg,whereln he votes at the time'he Votes, but
'notnecessarilyforsix months.' 'Applicationfor writ
of error.ivis 'refused~in the Graham case and we regard
the constructlon"of.theconstltutlonal'phrase as set-
tled. See Cremer.v. Graham, supra, and authorities
cited therein. This constructionundoubtedly ac-~
counts for the deletion of the words 'districtor!
from Artlcle~,5.02 of~the Election Code: Under the
rule above~,set forth the courts below were correct
In holding that the'five persons above ,mentionedwere
entitled to vote at the election in question.although
they may not have resided In the Glenwood School Dis-
trict for a period of six months prior to.the date of
the election."
In Duncan v. Willis the Court 'tooknote of the deletion
Of "districtor" from Article 5.02 of the Election Code without
expresslypassing on what effect it had ondlstricts.,embracing
Honorable A. W. Walker, page 8 (W-952)
one or more counties. The Court's use of the expression
"mooted construction"might suggest that it thought the con-
structionof "district"had become moot by virtue of the
deletion, but this evidentlywas not the Intended meaning.
By discussingthe constructionwhich should be placed on
the constitutionalprovision,the Court recognizedthat the
word "district"continues to have force despite its deletion
from the statute.
It is our opinion that, under the foregoing decisions,
a person who has resided for six months In a defined,district
of the State which includesmore than one county, but has re-
sided less than six months in the county of his residence at
the time of the election,may vote for offices of the distrift
and for all offices which are voted on throughout the State,
but he may not vote for offices of districts in which he does
not have the six,monthst residenceor for county and precinct
offices.
The second category of voters--thosewho do not-have
six months' residence in a defined district--presentsthe ques-
tion of ~whetherby virtue of one.,year'sresidence In the State
they are entitled to vote'for~statewideoffices, although they
may not vote for district, county or precinct offices. Several
Attorney General’s letter opinions between 1930 and -19&Cheld
that they may vote for state offices, while others rendered
during the ssme period held that they-cannotvote for any of-
fice. ~The only authoritiescited In support of the holding that :
they could vote for state offices were Little v. State and United
States v. Slater., There 1s strong argument in favor of the view
that this should be the rule, but we are faced with the fact
that the Constitutionstates the residence qualificationscvn-
junctlvelyas one year's residence in the State and six months'
residence In the district or county. To be a qumfled elector
for any~office or for sny,election,a person.mustfulfill both
conditionsof residence. Neither the language of the Consti-
tution nor the statementsmade in the cases',construing this
provision justify the concluslon,thatthe six months' residence :;
in the district or,county is waived as a qualificationfor Voting:
in state elections.
1If the~voterhas the six months' residence in the
district,he will be entitled to vote 'forstatewlde,offlces :
regardlessof whether an office of that district is being
voted on at the,electlon.:,For example, a person,who has
resided In a;state senatorialdistrict for six months may
vote for statesoffices in a year for,which no election for
State Senator Is held In the district.
4714
Honorable A. W. Walker, page 9 (WW-952)
Texas is not alone in denying a voting right to
persons who do not meet both state and local residence re-
quirements. In every other State, in addition to residence
in the State one must also have resided within a county or
an election precinct for a required length of time ranging
from 30 days to one year, with approximatelyhalf of the
States requiring 3 months or longer.2 Smith, Voting and
Election Laws, supra, pp. 15-19. That,author makes the
7?ollowingcomment:
"Althoughno one would recommend abandon-
ment of residence requirementsaltogether, It
is often contendedby responsiblecritics that
some state regulationsare overly stringent.
It is estimated,for instance, that over five
percent of the American voting population is
unable to meet the residence requirementIn
most elections and the implicationsof such
widespread disfranchisementin a democratic
society cannot be ignored. One has only to
look at the statisticsof populationmovement
In the United States, especially during and
since the second World War, to know that the
problem of disfranchisementof sizable portions
of the electoratecan only become more acute
unless residence requirementsare reduced to
reasonabletime limits."
We are keenly aware of the seeming inequity of denying
to citizens who meet the state residence requirement the right
to vote for statewideofficers because they have not resided
in some one locality within the State for a period of six
months. Rut to hold that a person may vote for statewide of-
fices on the basis of one year's residence'inthe State with-
out regard to the length of residence in the district or county,
it would be necessary to Ignore the second residence condition.
However harsh or unreasonablethis conditionmay be, the plain
.requlrementsof the Constitutioncannot be ignored. Relief
'mustcome through amendment of the Constitution. It is our
opinion, and you are so advised, that a person who does not
meet the requirementfor SIX months' residence In the district
or county is not entitled to vote for any office in the general
election.
2Californiaand Wisconsin permit new residents of the
State to vote In presidentialelections with less than the
normal residence requirements,and Connecticutpermits former
residents to vote by absentee ballot in presidential elec-
tions until they become electors in the State of their new
residence.
Honorable A. W. Walker, page 10 (WW-952)
Advertingto the category of voters who have six
months' residencein a district but not in the county,we
have noted that Article 5.15 of the Election Code omits
the words "districtor" in making provision for voting by
persons who have changed their residence since obtaining
their poll tax receipts or exemption certificates. This
statute now reads as follows:
"Art. 5.15. Removal to another county 'or
election precinct
"If a citizen after receivinghis poll tax
receipt or certificateof exemption,removes
to another county or to another election pre-
cinct in the same county, he may vote at an
electl.on;general,special, or primary, In the
precinct of his new residence in such other
county or precinct by presentinghis poll tax
receipt or certificateof exemption or his af-
fidavit of Its loss to the precinct judges of
election,and state in such affidavitwhere he
paid such poll tax or received such certificate
of exemption,and by mating oath that he is the
identicalperson described In such poll.tax re-
ceipt or certificateof exemption,and that he
then resides In the precinct where he offers to
vote and has res1de.dfor the last ~slx.(6)months
in the county in which he offers to vote and.
twelve (12) months in.the State. But no such
person shall be permitted to vote in a city of
ten thousand (10,000)inhabitants,,or more, unle~ss
he has first presented to the tax collector of
his residencea tax receipt or certificate,not
less than four (4) days prior to such election
orprimary election or made affidavit where he
paid such poll tax or recelved'suchcertificate
of exemption;and~the collector shall,thereupon
add his name to the list of qualified voters of
the precinct of his new residence; and unless
such voter ha,sdone this and his name appears in
the certified list of voters of the precinct of
his new,residence,he shall not vote."
The.deletlonof'referenceto residence,in the dis-
tr~lctraises two questions: (1) what form of oath shall
the election judge requfre of the voter, and (2)must the.
voter who has moved Into e city of lO,OOO.ormore Inhabl-
tants comply with the requirementfor~havinghls~name
placed on the list of qualified voters.
On the first question; it is-our .op,inion.'that
the
election judge should require the voter to make the oath
4715
Honorable A. W. Walker, page 11 (WW-952)
required in this article, substituting"district"for "countyn.
The electionsjudge should mark out on the voter's ballot all
offices for which he Is not entitled to vote, before per-
mitting the voter to mark his ballot and.casthis vote.3 In
electionswhere voting machines are used, the clerk attending
the machine should lock out the offices for which the voter
is not entitled to vote before permittinghim to close the
curtains'and~casthis vote. (Section 2 of Articles7.14, Elec-
tion Code, requires that the machine "be so constructedthat
a voter cannot vote for a candidate or on a propositionfor
whom or on which he is not lawfully entitled to vote.")
On the second question, it is our opinion that the
tax collector should add the voter's name to the list of quall-
fled voters upon the voter's request and upon being satisfied
that the voter has resided for six months in some district of
which the county Is a part. 'Whilethe oath which the voter
makes at the polllng.placewill disclose that he does not have
six months' residence In the county, the tax'collectormay
properly place a notation to this effect alongside the voter's
name on the list of qualified voters.
With the deletion of "district",this statute leaves
the tsxcollectors in a state of doubt as to their authority
to add the names of voters who have not resided in the county
for six months. It also leaves the voters In doubt as to
whether this statute Is applicableto them. "No such person"
refers to any citizen who has moved to another county or elec-
tion precinct after receivinghis receipt or certificate,but
it could be taken to refer only to such persons who have re-
sided In the county for six months efter the removal. If the
voter has attempted to comply with the requirementbut the
tax collectorhas refused to add his name in the belief that
the statute does not authorize this action, we think it is
clear that the election judge should neverthelessallow him
to vote upon satisfactoryproof of his qualificationsas an
elector and of the reason why his name does not a
the list of qualified voters. Att'y Gen. Op. V-1@3106;2).
Election judges have authority to administeroaths for the
purpose of obtaining such proof, and It would be advisable
3This procedure necessarilygives the election judge
an opportunityto see the number on the ballot which the
voter receives, contrary to the provision in Article 8.11 of
the Election Code that the voter shall be allowed to take his
own bal1o.twithout the number being known to the election
JUd43e.However, we are of the opinion that the voter should
not be furnishedwith a ballot which would enable him to vote
a full ticket, and he must surrender this safeguard to the
secrecy of his ballot if he wishes to vote.
Honorable A. W. Walker, page 12 (WW-952)
for the election judge to preserve In affidavit form the
voter's statementof the reason why his name Is not listed.
Where the voter has made no attempt to have his
name added to the list, the question becomes more difficult,
While the failure of the Legislatureto define Intelligibly
the requirementsimposed upon the voter should not deprive
him of his constitutionalright to vote, we have come to the
conclusion that persons with less than six months' residence
in the county are reasonablyput on notice that they must
comply with this requirement,and a voter who fails to make
applicationto the tax collectorIs not entitled to vote.
In order to be a qualifiedelector of this
State, a person must meet both conditionsof
residence set out in Article VI, Section 2 of
the Constitution;namely, residenceof one year
Snthe State next precedingthe election, and
residence the last six months in the district
or county in which he offers to vote.
A person, otherwise qualifiedto vote, who
has resided for six months in a defined district
of the State which includes the county of his
.former,residenceand the county of his new resi-
dence, but.,hasresided less than six months In
the county of his residenceat the time of the
election,may vote for offices of the district
and for all offices which are voted'on through-
out the'state,but he may not vote for offices
of districtsIn which he does not have the .slx
months' residenceor for county and precinctof-
flees. A~personwho does not mee.tthe require-,
mentfor six months' residence in the.distrlct
or county is not,entitledto vote for any office.
The only place a person may vote is in the
.county of his~residenceat the ,time..ofthe elec-
tion. Upon change of residencefrom.one county
to another;a person loses his right to vote.in
the county of his former res$dence,evan,though
he may.~beunable to vote in the county of his new
residence.
Yours very truly,
wILI.WILSOW
AttorneyGeneral~of Texas
4716
Hbnorable A. W. Walker, page 13 (WW-952)
MKW:bh
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
W. V. Geppert, Chairman
J. C. Davis, ,Jr.
,.,Rilqy
EUgene.Fietcher.
Robert H. Walls
Iola Barron Wilcox
RETIEWED FOR TH&Al'TORN~ GENERAL
BY:
Leonard Passmore