The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1895-08-03
EXPERT LEWIS.
SAN ERANrISCn Ii1iu % |

SAN Francisco, July 80, 1895.
Hon. T.. 2. COiga1a. State Controller,
observation-disclosures SIR: | am in receipt
of your favor of the Goth instant con-
corning the appointment OF Thomas
A. Lewis as expert to the State
Board of Examiners, and request
ing an opinion from me as to the legality
ofsuch appointment. AS l understand
your letter, you question the authority of
the board to appoint an expert as, ia your
opinion, there is no Statute creating the
office of expert to the Board of Examin-
ers," nor amy law authorizing the APP
pointment or employment of such Of
icer,"
In this l think you are mistaken. The
law imposes q large number OF duties
upon the State Board Of Examiners.
among others those of counting the
money In the treasury, examining the
books and accounts of the Controller and
against the State. The counting of
money and the examination of books re-
Qures the skill of an expert accountant.
Cove vs.. Baehr, AZ Gal. p. 370.)
Furthermore, for the proper auditing Of
claims it frequently becomes the duty of
the Board of Examiners to make eX-
tended Investigations into the conduct
ana management Of State institutions.
This also requires the skill of an expert.
Then, too, lin the matter of approving
and rejecting claims against the State the
Board Of Examiners acts judically"
(Cahill VS.. Colgan, 81 Pacific Reporter, p.
6l7, and cases cited; and where an APP
pointment is essential to the proper exer-
else of judicial duty, the court con-
cerned has authority to make it." (Am.
and Eng. Ency. of Law, vol. 10, 4l9;
citing In re- Janitor. 80 Wis. 40, and other
cases..
For the proper exercise of the duties
imposed upon IL by law the employment
by the Board of Examiners of an expert
is absolutely essential. This necessity
was recognized by the Legislature when
they made an appropriation TO pay the
salary and travelling expenses OF an eX-
pert SO employed, just as, in numberless
instances, the Legislature has recognized
the necessity for the employment OF por-
ters and other attaches of the various
State offices, whose employment rests
on the ground of necessity only, and has
made appropriations for the payment OF
their salaries.
| am therefore of the opinion that the
| law vests the State Board OF Examiners
with an inherent power to appoint or en-
ploy an expert, and that the appointment
or employment OF Thomas a. Lewis as
such expert was within the scope OF the
| inherent power possessed by the board,
and was valid appointment.
that in the general appropriation Act OF
1895 provision is made for the salary of
an expert to the Board of Examiners,
and for his travelling expenses" but that
you are also aware and the records of
the last Legislature will show, that the
bill creating the office of expert. author
izing his employment aud fixing his
salary failed OF passage"
In this you are laboring under slight
misrepresentation as TO the facts. The bill
to which you refer was one making many
| material changes in the duties and pow
ers of the Board of Examiners, and Incl
dentally providing for the employment
of an expert. That bill was defeated be-
cause OF the changes it proposed in the
duties and powers of the board; but the
Legislature, recognizing the Inherent
power vested by the law in the board to
appoint an expert, and perceiving the ne
cessity tor such appointment, made pro-
vision for the payment OF his salary and
expenses in the appropriation bill subse-
quently passed. Respectfully,
w. f. FITZGERALD,
AttOrney-General.