Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1877-12-14

From Communication to the Rutland Herald.
Is the Auditor of Accounts the Leglslatures
The recent remarkable letter of the audi
tor of accounts. announcing his intention
OF making an additional appropriation for
the State board of agriculture may well
suggest the above question.
| Among the fundamental principles of
Onr State government and of all free gov
ernments are the separation OF the three
departments, and that neither shall exc
cute the powers properly belonging to the
other " that the power Of suspending laws
''ought never to be exercised but by the
Legislature, and that mo money shall be
drawn out of the treasury unless first ap-
propriated by the Legislature" recur-
renee to such fundamental principles,
though erjGiDed by our constitution, seems
to have been neglected by the auditor lie
annOCncos his purpose not to execute the
law, but to execute what he thinks the
farmers of the Legislature meant to do, but
did not. The only question presented for his
action is, What is the Law? and not, " hat
were the intentions of the farmers or other
members of the Legislature?
In constituting the act. we must be gov
erned in seeking the intention of the Legis-
laturs by the record. This bill on its face
is in the interest of reduction of expenses.
1t takes away the salary OF the secretary,
except such sums as the board may allow
1t reduces the compensation of its members
one-halt d,scontinues the publication of
the reports OF the Dairymen's association
separately, and publishes only twenty-five
hundred copies of the report, (limited to
four hundred pages) annually instead of
forty five hundred copies unlimited in
quantity bionnially and the annual reports
nt tho N - ra1pn.-r h.
expenses Of publication nearly ne-half, and
finally provides that the entire expense of the
board shall cot exceed twenty-five hundred
dollars using nearly the language of the
old act, but leaving out the words per
annum.' This appears by comparison
OF the acts of 1870 and 1876. Now
in regard to the present law. The farmers
were not unanimous. The original bill as
reported by the agricultural committee and
as it passed the House. prov ided ior an an
nual salary of s 900 for the secretary and
expenses when detailed for duty out of the
State, and also provided for the employ
ment OF experimenters' and that the ex-
penses should not exceed So SOC per annum.
An amendment was offered in the House by
farmers, but rejected, reducing the salary
OF the =, crctary and limiting the entire ex-
pense OF the board to twenty-five hundred
uOllhIs-sO IL appears lndt some ldrmerS
were in favor of reducing the appropriation
in the House. When the bill came to the
Senate its main features were rejected and
as result a conference committee was ap-
pointed who reported the bill as finally
passed. This committee consisted of three
lawyers, two farmers and one banker and
farmer-hve of the committee had served on
an average three terms each in the general
assembly, and four of them as members of
both Houses.
Now it seems ridiculous and absurd to
say that committee composed of such
members and acting on this bill alone,
were so ignorant of the use of language as
to be unable 70 express their meaning and
that not one Of the six should discover that
the words per annum" we're omitted; but
even il the committee were so ignorant and
stupid, the auditor has not the power to
supply their omissions. The only conelu-
sion that can be justified by the facts of the
case is that the auditor in his action has
assumed illegal power and has usurpei lsgis-
latiye powers.
We trust tina. tho day has not yet come
in this State when an officer will be justified
in plain violation OF the law because good
may result. Let Us hold our Ulcers to
rigid accountability. and, if our laws are
detective, wait with patience until the de-
iects can be removed in legal manner.