Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1882-05-13
PEGS SALARIES AND MILEAGE.
The Illegal Pay OF State Prison Directors
Under Review

anu cAuAustlNc OElCl VI VIC <AbtOAhcg- ~
fled in the case of the People VS.. A. II. Chap
man, involving the constitutionality Of the
Act giving the State Prison Directors 500
per month and mileage fees:
APPELLANTS BRIEF.
In the Supreme Court Of the State OF Cali
fornia-The People, appellant, vss A. II.
Chapman, respondent.-The defendant in
this case is q member of the State Board Of
Prison Directors fer the State of California.
Under the Act entitled An Act TO define,
regulate and govern the State Prison OF Cali
fornia," approved April -, 1880. the defend.
ant received and appropriated the sum OF
s., 1913 40, as mileage, claimed to be his
reasonable travelling expenses as such ID.
rector. He also received the further sum OF
1886 Is. paid to him as such Director, under
an Act of the Legislature, entitled IAN Act
to amend Sections IL, II, Is and 20. and to
repeal Section 80" of the aforesaid Act, APP
proved March II, 1881. This latter sum was
also received and appropriated reasonable
travelling expenses Of said defendant as such
Director.
At the trial plaintiff offered to prove that
uuder the former Act the rXpenses of the de-
PENDANT did not exceed 5000, and that under
the latter Act the said expenses did not ex-
coed $500. This being true, the defendant
has received under said Acts of the Legisla-
ture the sum Of IS. 209 Is in excess Of his
actual expenses The Court sustained an OBJ
lection to the offer thus made by the plaintiff,
TO which ruling an exception was taken.
Judgment was rendered for the defen dant,
and this appeal is prosecuted for the same.
l. Section of Article y Of the Constitu.
ton provides: THE members of the Board
shall receive no compensation other than
reasonable travelling expenses incurred while
engaged in the performance of official duties,
to be audited as the Legislature may direct.
The language used in this provision is plain
aud unambiguous. The amounts which the
Directors may receive are expressly limited
to " expenses incurred while engaged in the
performance of official duties" The word
"expenses," ss used in the section, can have
but one meaning, particularly when con-
Btrued in connection with the words in
CURED while engaged in the performance of
official duties" Immediately following it, and
qualifying and limiting its meaning.
Expense means that which is expended,
laid out. or consumed. Rendered in view of
the definition of that term, the section means
that the Directors shall receive nothing other
than the amounts which they have expended,
laid out or consumed while in the perform
ance of their official duties. The term "ex-
pense" was used with a view of distinguish
ing the amounts to be charged and received
from salaries. Constituting the word to mean
" salaries" and the section becomes ridicu-
lous; thus construed, the section would
authorize the Directors to receive travelling
and other salaries incurred while engaged in
the performance of official duties"
The amounts to be allowed to the Directors
must therefore be limited to expenses. and
those expenses must be reasonable. Using
the term reasonable as basis, counsel for
defendant in the lower Court sought to show
that the word "expenses," as used in the
Constitution, did not mean actual ex-
penses." If not actual, it must mean i'm
aginary expenses; and hence the construc-
ton would be, that the Directors are entitled
to their reasonable imaginary expenses IL
Cured while in the performance of their
official duties. This being true, to what ex-
tent may the Imagination be exercised with
out violating the provision of the Constitu-
ton? The term itself necessarily imports
expenses that are actual, and the word "rea-
sonable must be construed to limit rather
than expand the meaning CT the sentence.
The demand must be for reimbursement of
expenses and under the constitutional pro-
vision the Legislature may limit those ex-
penses to a reasonable amount.
By this provision of the Constitution it is
provided that these expenses are to be
audited as the Legislature may direct" The
powers of the Legislature are, by the section,
limited to the providing of system by which
"expenses may be audited. Under the
pre.ense of directing the method of auditing
expenses, it is not competent for the Le2isla-
ture to defeat the declared will Of the people
by providing a salary or compensation other
than expenses for the Directors OF the State
Prison, and it remains only to be seen whether
the several Acts of the Legislature under
which the said money was received by the
defendant provided such a system of auditing
expenses as is contemplated by the Constitu-
ton.
The Act of 1880 provides 1.-THE Directors
shall receive no salary or compensation for
their services, but shall be paid for travelling
and other expenses while engaged in the dis
charge OF their duties, twenty cents per mile
for the number of miles actually travelled"
statutes 1880, p. 20, Sec. II
The statute of 1881 provides 1.-THE Di-
rectors shall receive no compensation other
than ten cents per mile for travelling ex-
penses, and 500 per month for other expenses
incurred while engaged ia the performance of
official duties" statutes 1881, p. so, Sec. II
1t is submitted that neither of the above
provisions directs the method of auditing the
Expenses of the Directors, but that, on
the contrary, the former provides system of
fees, in the form of mileage, to be paid with
out reference to the amount of expenses in
Cured, while the latter provides for fees and
q salary. The 800 per month, mentioned in
the Act of 1881, must be paid to each Direc-
tor whether he performs any service Or incurs
any expense or not.
If we were to concede that, under the pre-
tense of directing the method of auditing the
expenses, the Legislature might make the
provisions above quoted, why might not that
body, in advance of any expense incurred
''audit" the same at the rate of $50 per mile
or 81 900, or both with such a concession,
where would be the limit of the legislative
power? The provision of the Constitution
was adopted with view of placing limit
upon the power of the Legislature-of pre-
venting and prohibiting that body from
authorizing salary or compensation other
than expenses to be drawn by the Directors,
and the construction adopted by the Legis-
lature, and here commended for by defendant,
would utterly and practically defeat that liza
itacion.
The word audit" means to examine and
adjust, to settle and adjust an account
IWebster's Dictionary, Unabridged. The
power of the Legislature is therefore limited
by the words Of the Constitution to directing
the method in which, and providing the
tribunal by which, the accounts for reason
able expenses of the Directors shall be ex-
amined. settled and adjusted. This is the
effect of the plain words of the Constitution
Under q proper system of auditing the
actual expenses of the several Directors would
be made to appear Of record in the proper
department of the State; but under the pro.
visions Of the above statutes the amount of
their actual expenses must remain forever
unknown, because no proper method of ascer-
tainment has been directed by the Legisls-
ture. Accuracy in accounts is one of the
first requisites of economic government, and
in providing for auditing" of accounts
the Constitution had that principle in view.
If the mileage and salary did not equal the
amount of reasonable expenses OF the Direct
ors, or if that mileage and salary exceeded
that amount. the provision of the Constitu-
ton was violated, and the only appropriate
method by which the amount of those ex-
penses could be ascertained, in order that
they might be compared with the salary and
mileage, would be the system of auditing re-
quired by the Constitution.
Under the system which the Legislature
has undertaken to provide, no inquiry into
the amount of actual expenses is authorized,
z 1