Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1909-12-30
full TEXT
CONTINUED from. page 81

! section TIA to four mills on the dol
lar. The debt limit is fixed by the
constitution at 100000 If the chap
ter in question is adequate as an ap-
preparation, and as there is no limit
| to the number of such acts the leg
islature may pass ON the number of
rewards or similar demands which
may be made on the treasury cannot
be foretold, the entire revenues of
| the state might readily be exhausted
in their payment. The amount accru-
| ing to claimants may, and naturally
will, far exceed the anticipation of
| the legislators and no check be fur
nished upon the officials or protection
given the treasury. The purpose of
! limiting by law the amount which
may be expended for definite pur-
pose and requiring that it be stated
in the act relating to the particular
subject, is to enable the legislature
and state officials to appropriate in
advance the total amount of appro-
priations made so they may be kept
within the power of the state to pay.
Under the provisions of our constitu-
ton we are forced to conclude, par
ticularly to prevent the practical null
LITIGATION of section TIA of the consti-
tuition, that legislative act, in order
to constitute an appropriation au-
thorizing the payment of funds or the
drawing Of a warrant, must fix limit
on the amount which may be paid
out under the subject covered by the
act. Had the legislature used Ian
guage in addition to the terms OF
chapter 139 which placed a limita-
ton upon the total amount which
might be paid to claimants as re-
wards, the objection would doubtless
be obviated, while creating an objec-
ton on the part of the state to pay,
does not authorize payment. The act
does not set apart any definite or as
certainable sum for the purpose of
paying these rewards nor fix any lin
it above which payments cannot be
made. From careful consideration
of the authorities on the subject and
of the terms of our constitution, we
think an appropriation, in the sense
that that word is used in our consti-
tuition, is the setting apart from the
public revenue of definite sum of
money for the specified object in such
a manner that the officials OF the
government are authorized to use the
amount so set apart, and no more for
that object. Many authorities are
found on the subject of appropriation
but only a few of them are apple"
able to the question here being con-
sidered A great number relate to
the subject of salaries OF state Off
cials where fixed either by the legisla-
ture or In the, constitution. Gener-
ally the fixing Of a salary Of state
official is held to be an appropriation,
but authorities on that subject do
not meet the question before us. Sec
ton o. of article 4 Of the const1tu-
ton Of California is like section 1856
of the constitution Of this state. The
legislature of California passed an
act giving a bounty Of five dollars out
OF the general fund of the treasury
for each cayote killed or destroyed
BY any person., The act contained no
limit to the number of bounties
which might be applied for or paid,
nor upon the amount, of money which
might be expended in payment Of
such bounties., In Ingram VS.. Col
gan, Col. 11s. 3S Pac. s15, 2S L. r. A.
l91, As Am. st. Rep. 221, this act was
passed upon by the supreme court
or California which held that 1t did
not constitute an appropr ton That
court uses the languages THE fund
from which the bounties are to be
paid is explicitly designated but the
amount Of money in the general fund
devoted to the payment of these
bounties is not specified. The lam