In re Continuing Appropriations

• Decision Date: 06 February 1893
• Citation: 32 P. 272,18 Colo. 192
• Parties: In re CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS.
• Court: Colorado Supreme Court

32 P. 272

18 Colo. 192

In re CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS.

Supreme Court of Colorado

February 6, 1893

Submission by the senate of a resolution inquiring into the legality of 'continuing appropriations.'

The resolution is as follows: 'Senate resolution: Whereas the constitution, in section 33, article 5, provides that 'no money shall be paid out of the treasury, except upon appropriations made by law;' and whereas, certain acts of the general assembly have provided for continuing appropriations, instead of specific appropriations, from the general or special funds in the hands of the state treasurer particularly the military law, the insurance law, the supreme court library law, the acts providing for the support of state institutions, etc.; and whereas, doubts have been raised as to the constitutionality of such continuing appropriations, and it is uncertain whether or not specific appropriations should be made by this general assembly for the carrying out of the objects and purposes specified in such laws: Now, therefore, be it resolved by the senate that the supreme court be, and they are hereby, requested to decide the question whether or not it will be necessary for this general assembly to pass specific appropriations for the support of the state institutions, the militia, the insurance department, the purchasing of books for the supreme court library, etc.; or whether or not the continuing appropriations made in such laws are sufficient for the payment of warrants drawn upon such special funds in the hands of the state treasurer.'

HAYT, C.J.

The purpose of the clause quoted in the question propounded is to require legislative sanction for the disbursement of the public revenue, where such disbursement is not specifically directed by the constitution. While it is necessary that something more than a duty to pay must be shown, no set form of words is necessary to constitute an appropriation. It is sufficient in this regard if the legislative intention clearly appears from the language employed. In no instance will an appropriation be inferred from doubtful or ambiguous language. As to those appropriations designated in the question as 'continuing appropriations,'--that is those the payment of which is to be continued beyond the next biennial session of the legislature,--we see no constitutional objection thereto. The power of the legislature, except as otherwise restricted by the constitution, is plenary over the entire subject. The power can, however, only be exercised subject to the provisions of ...