Murray

Murray v. Colgan

Caution
1892 Cal. LEXIS 705·94 Cal. 435·29 P. 871
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 5, 1892No. 14602California672 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Vanclief, J.

This was an application to the superior court of the city and county of Sacramento by the appellant, who, pursuant to an act of the legislature of March 31, 1891 (Stats. 1891, p. 283) was appointed state superintendent of ramie culture, for a writ of mandate to respondent, state controller, requiring him to draw his warrant for the salary of the appellant. A demurrer to the application was sustained upon the sole ground that the appropriation for the payment of such salary is in violation of section 34 of article IV. of the constitution, which reads as follows: “No bill making an appropria *436 tion of money, except the general appropriation bill, shall contain more than one item of appropriation, and that for one single and certain purpose to be therein expressed.” As no amendment of the application could avoid this ground of objection, judgment passed for defendant; and plaintiff brings this appeal therefrom.

The title of the act making the appropriation is as follows: “An act to encourage the cultivation of ramie in the state of California, to provide a bounty for ramie fiber, and to make an appropriation therefor; to appoint a state superintendant of ramie culture, and make…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.