Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1912-12-07
Recommendations for the Improvement
And Management of Public Revenue
Suggested By TIE State auditor

IA, S. l.. 1911; Sec. SAL, R. c. 1905;
Chap. 107, s. l.. 1907.
This method of making payemnt OF
these appropriations should be cor
rected so that payments may be made
s. only OF. itemizea statements,
The Abuse Of the Emergency Clause.
Under Section 376 of the Revised
Codes Of 1905, the time of taking eff.
feet Of an appropriation is positively
stated. Nearly every law enacted in
North Dakota bears what is called an
Emergency Clause" This is espe-
cially true of the appropriation laws.
Usually there is no reason given for
Clause. | believe that an appropria-
ton or other law should not bear the
Emergency Clause unless there is
some good reason for the law becom-
ing effective ION and after its pas
sage and approval"--and the reasons
should be stated.
Section 81 of the Constitution Of
North Dakota also provides that
No act of the legislative assembly
shall take effect until July LIST, after
the close OF the session, unless in
case of an emergency (Which shall be
expressed in the preamble Or body OF
the act) the legislative assembly
shall, by a vote of two-thirds of all
the members present in each house,
otherwise direct"
Faults With Appropriation Bills.
An appropriation bill should be
clear and concise on the following
points: .
!. 1t should state positively what
expenses are to be allowed out Of
the appropriation.
2. The amount of the appropriation
should be clearly stated.
8. There should be no question
about the date on which the appro-
priatjon is to become available.
4. There should be no question
about the time such appropriation is
to cover.
"Unlimited Appropriations.
In this state we have a large num-.
Der Of appropriations which come un-
der this classification. By this We
understand the laws which provide for
certain expenses, but which do not
specifically state the amount which
such expenses shall be limited to.
On November IS, 1905, the supreme
court Of North Dakota handed down
an opinion holding unconstitutional
the Capitol Commission law. The
decision will be found under "Rusl
VS.. Bulge" in Northwestern Report
er, No. 105, on page 40. In this opin-
ion II supreme court holds posi-
lively that the legislative assembly
cannot delegate the power of appro.
priation to any other person, or COM
mission. In the Capitol Commission
law provision was made for the build
ing Of a new executive mansion. The
capitol commission was limited to
spend a fixed amount for the capitol
and the executive mansion, but no
limit was placed on the amount to be
expended for the mansion, and the
court held this was an unlimited
appropriation.
Following l am listing a number Of
appropriations which are in fact "un-
limited appropriations | believe
that these should be taken a + Of at
the coming Legislative assembly meet
ing, by being included in the Gen
eral Appropriations Bill" There is
hardly any excuse for making unlim-
tied appropriations, for the expenses
Of this state are pretty definitely set
tled,.as the4needs for each appropria-
ton is known from experience. The
amounts shown are the total amounts