Arizona republican., 1902-06-08

dollars (S6,250.00). or so much thereof as will be necessary to be expended by the governor as rewards for the appre- hension of criminals. or escaped pa tients from the territorial insane asy- lun1. and for ether expenses incidental thereto. for the printing of election and ether proclamations, and all necessary expenses
 3'The governor is hereby authorized and empowered to offer rewards in his discretion, provided, that no reward offered or paid shall exceed five hun dred (S5O00O). He may. in his discrc- tion. pay for services in arrestins or pursuing criminals or escaped patients when in his judgment the public good will be promoted thereby.'
 The evidence shows that the war rants were drawn on this fund for con- tingent expenses of the governor, for supplies. for furniture for his office. for typeWriting and similar expenses. The contention of the plaintiff is that warrants could not legality be drawn on this fund except for expenses con- nected with the rewards for the appre- hension Of criminals, and for escaped patients from the insane asylum, or for the printing of election or ether proc lamations. The contention of the de- fendant. broadly stated, is that the words all necessary expenses includa any necessary contingent expenses of the governor; and inasmuch as it Is not shown that the expenses were not necessary contingent expenses of the governor, or that the expenses were not for public purpose and legitimate. the auditor was justified, on the requi- siticn Of the governor and the advice of the attorney general, to issue the warrants.
 The statute is not new one. The preceding legislatures for many years past enacted at each session a statute approDriatfng q like amount for re- wards and for printing proclamations. None of these statutes. though worded like the statute Of 1899. contained the words and for all necessary ex- penses;" these words were added fc1. the first time in 1899. The plaintiff in- sists that these words must ba con- strued to mean all necessary expenses ejusdetn generis as rewards for the ap- prehcnsfon of criminals and the print ing of election and other procIama- ttons: and Ee cites a long list of au- thorities which apply the rule known 2s Lord Tenterden's rule. viz. where there is a particular recital in Q deed. and then general words follow. that the general words shall be qualified by the particular recital: and his conten- ton is that that is the rule to be ap- piled here.
 That that is undoubtedly the general rule in instruments such as deeds. wills. policies Of insurance, and the like, there can be no question: but there may be a question whether such q rule can properly be applied in it's strictness to legislative appropria tions. It is common knowledge that ire quently such appropriations are made by means of riders attached to bills with which they have no connection whatever; and in many instances, IT seems to me, such rule could not be applied to such legislation.
 The object of interpretation and con- struction is, of course. to ascertain what the intent of the legislature was. IT the intent of the legislature was to change the old statute and to broaden II. and such intent clearly appears. then no rule of construction or inter- pretation is either necessary or proper: for the intent of the legisla ture should not be limited or controlled by the un- necessary application of any maxim In determining whether such intent so appears, the whole statute should be read together. and all of it given it's appropriate force: and if the specia! terms refer to different and distinct