Evening star., 1901-04-12
LAW PHRASES CONSTRUED
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED
TO CONTROLLER TRACEwELL.
Auditor Petty's Inquiry Regarding
Words Found in District APP
preparation Bills.

Controller Tracewell has rendered a de-
cision to the District Commissioners on
points contained in a letter addressed to
the Commissioners by Auditor Petty and
forwarded to Mr.. Tracewell, calling for a
construction of certain phrases in act maxi
ing appropriations for the District Mr.
Petty quotes some provisions of the act OF
March L, 1901, making appropriations for
the government of the District for the fis-
cal year 1902 He says in the letter:
"a question has arisen as to the construc-
tion to be placed upon the words expenses
incidental to said work in the first
quoted paragraph, and contingent expenses
in the second quotation which makes it i'm
portant to know what are to be regarded
as expenses incidental to the construction
of a given piece of work and what must
be considered as contingent expenses of
the several offices.
ITO make clear the point upon which
information is requested, 1 will cite a few
illustrations, to wit:
THE appropriation for contingent ex-
penses provides for surveying instruments
and Implements In the work of construct
ing county roads a transit Is needed. Can
the cost of this instrument be charged to
the appropriation for construction of coun-
ty roads In connection with which it will
be mainly If not wholly used, or must it
be charged to contingent expenses?
Other Instances.
"Blue prints and drawing instruments
and materials are required by the super
intendent of plumbing in making plans for
changes of plumbing in school buildings.
Can these items be charged to the special
appropriation for necessary repairs to and
changes in plumbing In existing school
buildings as incidental to that work?
Printing of specifications, purchase Of
record or time books anu cross-sections
for. and prosecution Of, the work Of con-
structing bridge across Rock creek. Can
they be charged to the appropriation for
the construction Of this bridge on the
ground that they are incidental thereto?
These citations, being of representa-
tive character, 1t Is believed that a deter
mination Of their status in this connection
will furnish the desired rule for guidance
l have the honor to recommend that the
matter be referred to the controller of the
treasury for his opinion upon the questions
at issue
Controllers Decision.
In his decision the controller says:
THE appropriation for contingent ex-
penses Of the government of the District
of Columbia, after specifically enumerating
various items. provides for other general
necessary expenses Of District offices, and
under the well-known rule OF construction
tnlS De nelQ TO re eX-
elusive. unless there Is another apprOpria-
tion which is available for the same object.
L find nothing in the act which authorizes
the use Of any other appropriation for the
contingent expenses of District offices. but
the same act requires the use of another
appropriation for the purchase of articles
similar in kind to those named in the ap-
preparation for contingent expenses, and
which. under ordinary circumstances, might
be considered part of the contingent ex-
penSeS of the District offices.
The section first quoted by the auditor
provides that all expenses incidental to or
necessary for the proper execution of sew
er, street, road work, or the construc-
ton and repair of buildings and bridges, or
any work authorized by appropriations,
shall be paid from and equitably charged
against the sums appropriated for said
work.
Mandatory Provision.
This provision is mandatory, and when
ever it applies to any particular item of
expense, the specific appropriation for the
work, and not the general appropriation for
contingent expenses becomes exclusive. The
ed in determining what appropriation is
chargeable with certain expenditure Is
whether the item is general necessary
expense of District office or an expense
incidental to or necessary for the proper
execution Of the work.
In the one case 1t is payable from the
appropriation for contingent expenses
while in the other it is payable from the
sums appropriated for the work 1t is
very clear that the appropriations are not
cumulative or interchangeable, and that
the facts of each expenditure must govern
the use of the particular appropriation.
1t may be stated as general rule that
the law requires that all expenses prima-
rily or exclusively incidental to or neces-
sary for the execution of the appropriations
must be paid from the sums appropriate ed
M frNrr 4 ha ! xINx~
for contingent expenses. This Is only ap-
plying the rule that an appropriation made
for a specific object is exclusive, although
there may be another appropriation which
In the absence of the specific appropriation
would be available"