The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1899-05-18
THE QUESTION OF coNsTITU-
~ TIONALITY.

Wneu governor cage NelOeO the Olii
making an appropriation for the Ieim-
bursement OF Claus Spreckels, who gem
erously came to the aid of the people
of Monterey County. his act was criti-
cised as being wanting in the attribute
of ltberality The Governor, however,
is lawyer and is familiar with the or
ganic law Of the State, and no doubt
sufficiently familiar with the history Of
the Constitution to understand that the
existing Constitution was framed on
lines which preclude the possibility to
make appropriations for the benefit of
individuals, or of associations, corpora
lions, asyluns, hospitals, or any other
institution not under the exclusive
management and control of the State.
Prior to the adoption of the existing
Constitution, societies for the cultiva-
ton tof silk; bounties for the planting
of trees along wagon roads; for the cul-
tiwation of groves of mulberry trees in
order to promote the silk industry and
1s.lief for eleemosynary institutions were
scommon- But the present Constitution
of the State determined that money COL
1ected for the purpose of maintaining
the government Of che State should be
devoted exclusively to that use. Hence
the following provision. which is found
in Section % of Article ":
No money shall be drawn from the
treasury but in consequence Of appro-
priations made by law and upon war
Il 49,.
troller, and no money shall ever be ap-
propriated or drawn from the State
treasury for the use or benefit Of any
corporation. asylum, hospital. or any
other Institution not under the exclu
sive management and control of the
State as State Institution; nor shall
any grant or donation of property ever
be MAJ de thereto by the State.
The relief which, in his generosity,
CLAUS Spreckels afforded the destitute
farmers of Monterey County could not
be reimbursed without infraction of this
provision Of the Constitution That re-
lief was not under the direction and
control of the State as a State institu-
ton Hence any grant or donation
made for that purpose was outside of
the constitution
The question now arises as to whether
an appropriation for the purpose of
adding feature in the International
exposition to be held in Paris in 1900
is constitutional. This question was
raised as related to the appropriation
made for exhibition purposes at the
Worlds Fair held in Chicago. In the
Chicago instance the State rented
ground Of the Commissioners of the
Columbian Exposition, constructed
building and the ground so leased and
the building so constructed, with it's
contents, We're under the exclusive man.
agement and control of the State as a
State institution. The State set UP an
institu tdon in Chicago with its own
money governed by its own Commits
sioners and conducted it as a State
institution.
An injunction was sued out against
the Controller restraining him from
drawing his warrant in favor of the
Commissioners, but owing to the ex-
clrlsiveness of the control of the ground
tlhe State had rented. the building it
would construct and the contents Of the
building. the constitutionality of the
appropriation was conceded
1t Is to be sincerely hoped that no
constitutional objection can be lodged
against the appropriation for an exhi-
bition at Paris: but the Commissioners,
and the State Treasurer, and the State
Controller are upon inquiry as 10
whether the appropriation itself is con-
stitutionaL
When moneys We're expended under
the now famous Drainage Acti and the
Act itself was decided to be unconsti-
tutional, the State Treasurer was held
liable for the money which had been
expended by reason of the Act of the
LIE legislature.
With these posi- bilities in view, 1t is
pertinent to inquire as to whether an
exhibition made In an undistinguishab
way with the United States, which shall
be under the exclusive direction and
management of the Director General
acting for the United States, can by
any distortion be construed into an in
ssitution under the exclusive manage
nent and control of the State as a
State institution.
Printed regulations of the Paris Elk
position declare as follows:
Section u. Every foreign nation that
participates in the exposition shall be
represented by a delegate to the Com
missioner General. Such delegate shall
alone be empowered to treat with the
Commissioner General, the Directors
General and the Directors all matters
of interest to their countrymen, and es-
peciallyi those matters pertaining to the
division of space allotted to different
countries, to special buildings, to the
admission of products and to their
bt ing placed on exhibit.
Consequently the management of the
exposition will not correspond directly
with foreign exhibitors. An exception
may be nadet to this rule in cases re-
ferring to the centennial retrospective
exposition.
Apply this rule TO the case in hand.
Tie United States is a foreign nation
which proposes to participate in the ex-
position. The United States is repre-
scented by a delegate to the Commissions
er General at Paris. and such dele