The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1872-08-13


Of certificates for the legislative expenses
Of the sespion of 1901 rests in part
on tho ground already noticed as taken
by the plaintiffs, and, in part, on the
proposition that the proceeds of tax
can only be applied, under tho Constitn-
ton, (Const.. Art. II, SEQ. %; Art. IN.
Secs. 2, 4, 12.) to the ordinary expenses
of the State Government for the fiscal
year to which the law authorizing such
tux relates.
1t will not DO necessary to consider
these propositions, broadly, in order to
dispose of the present question, SO far
as 1t relates to a further payment of Ger.
tificates for Legislative expenses of the
session of 1870-7l, for these are peculiar
features, relating to the appropriations
forthls specific purpose, aflOrtliug ground
for dispOsing OF that part of plaintiffs
motion.
The expenses of the Legislature for
the session of 1S707I are clearly or.li-
nary expenses Of the fiscal year 1870,
and the moneys received under the tax
levy authorized to meet the apprupria-
tlOns for the last named fiscal year are
clearly applicable to the pa, ment OF such
claims, providing appropriations for that
purpose wero made ny the Legislature.
AS has been already stated, there has
been received into the Treasury, during
the present fiscal year. II sum, on ac-
count of the tax levy for the fiscal yeur
1870, III excess of the amount paid by
the Treasurer on account of legislative
expenses of the fiscal year 1870. There
can be no question that the appropria-
tions made during the present fiscal
year, for the payment of the Legislative
expenses of the preceding fiscal year,
are valid, at least SO fur as it regards
funds derived under the tax levy of that
year, RAd received into the Treas sury
durin9She present fiscal year. AS, there
fore, that fund is not exhausted, the
question of whether the proceeds of the
tax levy for the present fiscal year can be
charged under the appropriations to
the legislative expenses of the preceding
fiscal year, cannot be regarded as fairly
presented for decision under the facts of
the case, as it stands before me.
The next question to be considered is
whether authority exists for the Treasu-
rer to make future payments on account
of current or permanent printing.
No provision was made for this object
of expenditure by the general Appro-
priation Act Of 1871-72; nor is there
any legislative action OF that session
brought to notice that can be construed
as an appropriation either in substance
or form.
The Constitution provides (Art. 2, sec.
%, that "no money shall be drawn from
the Treasury but in pursuance Of an ap-
preparation made by law" This clause
is again repeated in Art. 8, sec. II.
1t is contended, OH behalf of the de-
PENDANTS. that certain legislative pro-
ceedings. taken in the session of 1870 II,
amount to an appropriation for this OBJ
ject, within the sense and meaning of the
Constitution, 80 as to authorize the Trea-
surer to pay accounts for current aud
permanent printing, that have accrued
during the present fiscal year.
The action relied on ia as follows: By
an Act passed January %. 1871. "a
stat, 532,) the Clerks of the Senate and
House Of Representatives we're author
lied to contract for the permanent and
current printing of the General Assem-
bly,. subject to the approval OF such
contract by the Senate and House of
Representatives. Section 4 directs the
Treasurer to pay all accounts for such
work out of any moneys in the Treasury
not otherwise appropriated: Prorided.
That the bills for snoh work are duly
certified by the Clerks of the respective
houses.
1t appears by the reports and resolu.
tons Of the General Assembly for the
years 1870 and 1871, (p. 1926 that a
contract was made, under tho authority
of the last mentioned Act, and was ap-
proved by resolution of the Senate. on
the 9th of February, 1871, with which
the House of Representatives concurred
on the 7th day of February, 1871.
The contract is as follows: 1.-The State
of South Carolina. This memorandum
made and entered into at the city of
Columbia, on the first day of February.
in the year of our Lord ono Thousand
eight hundred and seventy one, by aud
between the Republican Printing Com
pany, on the first part, aud Josephus
Woodruff. Clerk of the Senate, and A.
.. Jones, Clerk of the House of Repre-
sentatives of the aaid State, on the
second part. witnesseth: That the said
Republican Printing Company do hereby
agree to publish and priut the work
hereinafter described, at the prices and
for tho considerations hereinafter to be
named, to wit: The daily journals,