The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1915-10-10

the state revised. A commission of
five persons was provided for, and the
members of this commission were ap-
pointed by Governor Haskell After
working on the code for some time,
there arose dissension among mem
bers of the commission eliminating in
a separation into two distinct fac
tions. Brownlee, Hayes and Thomas
composed one division while Harris
and Day comprised the other faction.
Each of these divisions undertook to
prepare "A code.
by the terms of the bill creating the
commission the work was to be com
pleted and "ready for submission not
later than the first day of December,
/ 1909" A very liberal appropriation
was made to take care of the expense
of the commission. When the time
| limit was reached, no code had been
prepared as provided for At the
special session of the legislature held
in the spring of 1910 a resolution was
passed which undertook to safeguard
the people against any further e1-
pense on account of the code, and
matters remained in this shape until
the legislature convened in January,
1911. At that time both of the factions
appeared before the legislature, each
with its code. The code as prepared by
Harris and Day was in manuscript
FORM while the Brownlee-H HayesTh
as code was in printed form. Prior
to assembling of the Legislature and
before the work of either faction had
been approved or accepted, the state
board of affairs had contracted with
the Stephens Publishing Company to
print a certain number of the Brown
lee Code. This was the status of af
fairs when the legislature convened.
After much wrangling over the mat
ter, committee was appointed to go
over the work done by the commits
sion. This committee reported in ia
vor of the adoption of the Harris and
Day Code and the legislature acted fa-
vorably upon that report.
Then was begun the effort to have
the state pay for the printing of the
ee-Hayes-Thomas code, and for
all the salaries, rents and expenses in
cured after the time fixed for the
completion of the work 1t should be
understood that if the work had been
done as originally designed and with
in the limit fixed by the legislature,
the money appropriated at the time
would have been sufficient to pay the
cost of the code. The legislature in
1911, in order to allay all feeling in
the matter on the part of the gentle
men who composed the commission,
passed a bill appropriating the money
claimed. This bill Governor Cruce
promptly vetoed. The matter was
dbhlh Dtlblt Nllt III
and a bill was again passed appro-
priating portion of the money claim
ed, and it met with the veto of the
Governor. Governor Cruce took the po-
sition that the state neither legally nor
morally was bound to pay these claims.
That they were made without author
ity of law and that if officials of the
state exceeded their authority and in
CURED debts, the state should not
pay them. His contention was that a
servant of the state, no matter what
official position he occupies, can no
more bind the taxpayers of the state
when he acts beyond his authority,
than a farm hand can bind the farm
er for whom he works when he acts
beyond his authority. The present
legislature again passed the coveted
appropriation bill and the governor, |
with a song of "Cruel Economy" on |
his lips, signed the bill while the tax
payer Will foot the bill.
We talk of reducing expenses of |
state government and lessening the
taxpayers burdens, but just as long
as the legislature and the governor
use the peoples money to pay claims .
contracted without authority by Of .
fcials and employees of the state, the
cost of government will increase. If
the business of the average individual .
was conducted along the same lines
as the business of the state. the bank.
ruptcy courts would be badly over
worked For the good of the people
and the welfare of the state we hope
that this newly discovered and strange
] ,l,r