Weekly journal-miner., 1915-07-08
MUDDLE MAY MEAN
 THIRD EXTRA SESSION

PHOENIX, July 2.-Whether or not a third extra session of the leg islature will be necessary to provide for the expenses of the state govern ment, attorneys will not say, but they admit that they do not see how the courts are to sonstrue the general appropriation bill so as to make pro vision for many of the expenses of government without allowing the most extravagant .>1ropriations for others. For ins .dnce, if the courts should hold one way, some of the state institutions and offices will be left without funds; if the courts should take the opposite view, they will be left with much more money than it was intended to appropriate for them, Thus, one view would leave a road fund, of $500,0OO, the amount intended to be appropriated. The other opinion would leave fund of $1,OOOOOO.
 One thing seems to be agreed up on, and that is that there will be no state school fund, nothing for the next two years for free text books.
 Two opinions have been prepared. one by former Attorney General Bull lard, at the request of State Auditor Callaghan, and the other by Attorney General Jones, which has not yet been presented to the auditor, so that it has not been made public. It is understood, however, that the opin- ions agree, on most of the essential points. They agree that the governor was without power to veto the repeal ing clauses of the appropriation bill; that is, those clauses intended to wipe out statutory appropriations. The attorney general thinks that the legislature had no right to insert those clauses in the appropriation bill. Former Attorney General Bull lard is inclined to think that the leg islature could do so-that the repeal ing clauses were gcrmane.
 Both agree that if the governor had contented himself with vetoing those clauses, leaving the appropria- tions, no harm would have been done. But in striking out the appropria- tions on the theory that the statutory appropriations would continue, whole items have been stricken out.
 The opinion of Mir. Bullard is pre- ceded by 12 propositions of law, among which are the following more important ones:
 "Thc governors right to veto a part of the legislative enactment is limited to items of appropriation where several items of appropriation are contained in one bill.
 "The governor may not veto any part of the bill which does not con stitute an item of appropriation.
 "Thc governor may veto an item of appropriation, but not any part ot an item of appropriation.
 "In case the governor approves the substitute appropriation and vetoes the repeal of the statutory appropria- ton, his approval stands, but his veto, being a veto of the law which does not constitute an item of ap- propriation, is, for that purpose, in effective, and the entire section of the appropriation so sought to be partially vetoed stands.
 "Where the item consists of re- peal of the statutory appropriation and the creation of a substitute ap- propriation, and the governor vetoes the whole section, the effect is to kill the substitute appropriations, and the repeal of the statutory appropri- ation remains effective. This must be so, for the reason that the pro vince of veto is to destroy and not to create legislation.
 "Thc governor cannot veto any thing but an item of appropriation. He may veto an item which is the result of the repeal of continuing appropriation and the adoption of a substitute appropriation, but he can not veto the repeal Of an appropria- ton, because said repeal in itself docs not constitute aR item of ap- propriation, but on the contrary de- stroys one"
 Mir. Bu1lard finds that many of the items of the appropriation bill are unconstitutional, and fer that reason hc advises that the auditor withhold payment as to them For instance, he says that the legislature had no power to create the office of assist ant attorney general. It provided a salary for a nonresident office and repealed law that made no appro- priation. The opinion concludes with