. _.-._ 

OFFICE OFTHE AITORNEY GENERAL OFTAUSTIN 

lfonorablo &ford D. httlo 

Stat0 Auditor mnd Etiioionoy Exput 

Aumtln, Tous _ 

Dou Sir: 

Oplnloll lro. o-&lll 

Ret x&hod 0r huull~ 

approprlatloaa rrdo 

rtaP Gutera movu~uo 

Tund to hl@ar in8titutions 0r boning. 

we quot. in ruu bolor your latter or October 7, 

19w. aakin the opinion or thi8 aopartment with reruenoo 

to rueh mttorr 6w3orlbad thuelnt 

vt~hg the OOWB~ 0r OUT audit 0r a 

higher lnrtltution of 1ouzil.1~ ror the pamt 

rlnal year, outola uaumal pnotloem have 

ocmoto our attomt1on. 

*ihim orrioe derlrer your opinion l m to 

diether or not 84 0r the three roilorin(l 

tramaotlonm arm oontrmy to lawi 

*au0 NO, t TAO 00u0y in question 

roorirod l l ppropritatlon rrcm Outoral Perl nua or the atatr by the 4ith Le&dature. 

A outaln miount ~08 0utiri04 a8 due an 

uployeo, aad 8 Oonex-81 Rovoauo Warrant or 

the atate m8 lamueU, pepble out ;~.t~m~- 

stltutlon~r State l pproprlmtlon. 

tution, dtu reoelpt or the rurutt, r0d 

thett he l qloyee warn not duo the warrant or 

my portion 0r it, and pr0oeed.e~ to deposit 

the warrant in the loatltutlon*a Looal iwad 

b ulk l o a o unt. 
Honorable Euford 1). Battle - Page 2 

*case No. 2. A General Rerenuo Warant 

of th8 Btats ~'68 iosuad to M employee for her 

Jsnuuy salary. Althou& the em~lo~a8 left 

the employ of th6 oollo@a on January lfath, t&o 

warrant oorered 60 antire l:onth'a 8alery. The 

employ08 dlsoouuted the warmnt and rooeired 

one-half (l/2) of it AIMI rrturnod the romlndor 

to the Collmga authorltlra, who depo8lted it in 

tha lnatltutlon'e loal fund bank l ooount. 

"OS80 No. 3. A Oewral Revenue Wurant 

or the State wsa lssuod to cm aa~ploym8 ror her 

Ootober salary. Although 6ho roalgned on 

Ootobor 15th, the warrant wae written to her 

for the entlro month, and shs cIl8oouated it, 

kOOplnc( one-half (lh) ror haradr and the 

other one-halt (l/2) we8 paid br the lnstltution& oashlsr to anothu ~plo~60, who aupyoseUy roplsed the original erplopo. 

*should rurthor lnr0rmdon ba u8erti ln 

an8mrlng them quutiona, plmsa let w ~DOIW.~ 

An appropriation 18 the 8ettlng spsrt rr0rn the 

publla retenue8 or a oertaln 8~81 oi money ror a 8poolrlod 

purposm, in 8uoh manxmr that the l xeo utlvorrioora a or 

the government are l utharleed to qply that money, and no 

more, to that purpose, and to no other. Words and Phr88*8, 

Permanent mltlon voD4m0 3, Paaao 819 et 800.1 atate t. 

More, 69 X. W. 3’)3, 376, 50 Nob. 88. 61 hr. Strto Rep. 

$1 YoComba v. Dallu County (Mr. mpp.) 136 8.8. (26) 

. 

Every appropriation ha8 th8 l rreot of oreating 

a 8poolJ. illad, mhloh 18 to bo expended OJIQ ror the 

purpo80 r0r rdrioh th0 appropriation wa8 made. To a r sw l 

WUrsnt wtinet th6 l pproprl6tion, o8ten8ibly to 8991Y 

the ruatls to the purpo80 ror wbioh th8y ere ~ovl&~~, UIA 

then to dapo8lt the non@r to tha or&it of the looal fund 

Or the oollege, 18 to apply the mfmoy SpprOpriStd to l 

purpose ror rrhloh it was not l uthorlaod by the hgielsturr. 

xt rollor thRt 680h 0r the rirat two r80t 6ltu6tforrr art 
Honorable Buford D. Battle- Page 3 

Out in y0U.r letter praaant lnstanoee of unauthorized ana 

therefore Illegal biTUSiOll8 of the pub110 mon.ye lnrolyed. 

With reapoat to the thlrd feat tituatlon preSOnted in your letter, you ara aA~laeA that warrant8 

against thr eppropriatlons made to pay the salaries of 

=91OlC~eS Of the V8rlOUlI dO9artmalItt3 an6 lnStltUtiOn8 

0r learning or thla State are in no lnstanoe to be Armm 

in faror of the department head or sohool authority; but 

in eaoh oaaa the warrant ageinst tbe approprlatIoa la to 

be drawn in favor of the peroon rendering the SeXTiO8 

for which the appropriation Ie prorlded, end Tar no 

tpeeter smount than le aotually due 8UOh person. The 

appropriation prorlaea authority for the department or 

aohool head to enter Into oontraots with referenoe thereto, 

but the money provldad la not to be drawn frm the Treasury 

by the Aepartmsntor eohool head and by bin diapersed in 

oaah to the l m9loyeea; the olalm of the employee for peymsnt fra%u the appropriation is to be pre8eIttOd to the Camp- . 

trollem on the lnstltutlonal ay roll, oertlfled cia oorroot by the 8ohool head, an6 the warrant Is to be drawn 

in raror of theaployee himself. See Articles 4344, 4350, 

4355, 4356, 4357, 4358 an6 4359. Revised Zirll Statute8, 

1925. 

It rOiiOW8 that In tha third lnstanoe given in 

your letter, the warrant should hare bean drawn in faror 

or the employee, as payee thereof, only for the amount 

l otually due her as salary, to wlt, salcry ror one-halr 

month, and a clelm Should here been prcoented to the Comptroller ror the lssuanoe of a separate warrant a&alnst the 

same afipropriation for the WOUnt Of salary CUS the employee &IO replaood her. The aotlon of the whoa1 Wtharitias in oertifyine: the OlSbibr the 1SSUCAllO~ Of 8 

wurant for an entire -;onth'e. salary to the original em9lw-, when only one-half nonth's salary was due to her, 

and in Aellverlsp, the warrant to the original employee for 

the full month's salary, proourlq oa8h frau the orlgIna1 

employee, the payee of the warrant, ror the one-half Lionth'8 

salary not due her, and paying oYer the oaeh Alreot to the 
Honorable Buford D. Battle - Pago A,