Section 10, page 323 of the Laws of 1905, reads as follows: "There shall be appointed by the State Board of Land Commissioners, not less than three appraisers of State lands, who shall be under the direction of the Register of the State Board of Land Commissioners, and who shall be paid not more than fifteen hundred dollars per annum for such services. There shall also be appropriated the sum of three thousand dollars per annum for the purpose of defraying the expenses of said appraisers when visiting the different portions of the State in the discharge of their duties." A similar inquiry has received consideration by the Supreme Court of our State in In re Continuing Appropriations, 18 Colo., 192. The court, in passing upon the question, confirms the right of the legislature to make continuing appropriations, and points out that such statutes last beyond the biennial period for which the Legislature sits. Such appropriations are subject to repeal and modification by suitable legislation of a later General Assembly, but until repealed or amended they are to be given full force and effect. I desire to call attention, also, to the opinion of the Hon. David M. Campbell, at page 233 of his Biennial Report for 1899 and 1900. I make the following quotation from this opinion: "Continuing appropriations do not differ from the specific appropriations made by the General Assembly at its biennial sessions, except that the General Assembly, by the use of apt words in making the continuing appropriations, relieves itself from the necessity of re-enacting the statutes and making specific appropriations for specific purposes at each biennial session." It seems to me that the language of section 10, Session Laws of 1905, page 323, is clear in designating the sum of three thousand dollars per annum for the purpose of defraying the expenses of these appraisers. If the vouchers drawn against this fund show that the amounts stated are for expenses, you will be justified in honoring the vouchers and drawing warrants for payment of the same. Yours very truly, N. C. MILLER, STATE LANDS. A discussion of cash fund provided for by fees in the State Land Board and the right to pay the same into the treasury and draw warrants against it. January 13, 1905. HON. A. E. BENT, Auditor of State, Capitol Building. Dear Sir I have your inquiry concerning the right of the State Board of Land Commissioners to authorize vouchers to be drawn on the fund arising from the collection of fees in the Land Office. "The State Board of Land Commissioners shall provide by rule for the amount of compensation of appraisers, which compensation shall be paid by the person or persons applying for the land." 3 Mills' (Rev. Sup.), section 3631-c. This statute authorizes the board to direct the Register to collect from applicants for land, fees to cover the compensation of appraisers. The Legislature has seen fit to make appropriations to cover the compensation, leaving it to the Land Board to take care of their expenses. This the board does by the collection of fees from applicants. There is no provision for the conversion of this money into the State treasury, but it is the simplest way to handle it, and when it is placed to the credit of the Land Board, it is subject to draft for the expenses of the appraisers. "All expenses incurred by the State Board of Land Commissioners, or by any person employed by said board, in accordance with the provisions of this act, shall be paid by the State Treasurer on warrants drawn by the State Auditor on vouchers approved by the said board." 2 Mills', section 3648. I do not think that the foregoing section is relied upon as authority for the payment of expenses incurred by the Land Board. * "The said board is hereby authorized to collect the following fees in connection with the business of the office, to wit: * * The funds arising from the above fees shall be paid into the Land Commissioners' general fund, and may be used for the purpose of encouraging immigration and such other purposes as the State Board of Land Commissioners may direct." The latter section is sufficient authority for the Land Board to draw warrants upon the fund created by the collection of fees for the payment of any expenses incurred by the Land Board in pursuance of its business, as it may see fit. We pay most of the expenses of the appraisers and some clerks out of this fund, which is a legitimate use of the fund, without any appropriation from the Legislature. Generally, I may say that any money that goes into the treasury can be paid out only upon appropriation by the Legislature, or under some statute like the one I have quoted, which authorizes some State board or State officer to draw upon a particular fund. You have, in the State of Colorado, certain funds, such as the military poll tax fund, the commissioners' general fund, the boiler inspector's fund, and, possibly, some others. Express au thority is given to the certain offices to draw on these funds for the payment of definite expenses. The mere fact that a voucher is drawn upon a fund and signed by certain officers will not justify you in paying it unless you are convinced that the voucher has been allowed by the officers designated by law to pass upon the same, and you should either require this action to appear in some suitable manner on the face of the voucher presented at your office, or you should consult the records and ascertain from them whethor or not its payment is legal. The mere signing of the voucher by certain officers does not furnish you with authority. Vouchers coming from the State Land Board should appear to have been allowed by the board, and you should require that the vouchers show this in some suitable manner. There is no authority for the chairman to approve bills, and the recital on the face of the voucher that it has been so approved, amounts to nothing. What you want is evidence that it was considered and allowed by the board. Yours very truly, N. C. MILLER, STATE LANDS. In the absence of collusion or fraud, the Register may postpone an advertised sale, by giving personal notice to those interested. December 4, 1905. HON. MARK G. WOODRUFF, Register, State Board Land Commissioners, State Capitol, Denver. Dear Sir-Application was made to this office for an opinion as to the power of the Register to adjourn an advertised sale of school land. It has been held that a sale may be postponed if it is done so for good reason, and without prejudice to the parties in interest. The decisions I have read relate to the sale of mortgaged property. The party in interest in such cases is ordinarily the owner or mortgagor. If the sale is conducted so as to obtain a fair and just price, it has been held that it may be postponed from the date advertised. Certain modes are pointed out to do this. It has been held that it is sufficient to wait until the day and hour of the sale, and then make the proclamation of the adjournment. In other cases it has been held that as soon as the necessity of adjourning the sale is discovered, a postscript shall be added to the advertisement published, changing the date and fixing a new one. One or the other of these methods is followed. I would sug gest that in case of adjournment both methods be adopted, and especially that the proclamation be made, because it is quite manifest that the purpose of the advertisement is to bring to gether those who desire to bid, and if a proclamation is made at the place and hour designated in the regular advertisement, no person can complain of not having had notice. All persons were to be there at the appointed hour and place, and if they learn that the sale is postponed, then they have notice, and if they are not there, they are not entitled to notice. Wade on Law of Notice, section 1092. Hosmer vs. Sergeant, 85 Am. Dec., 683. Hoffman vs. Anthony, 75 Am. Dec., 701, and extended note. Dexter vs. Shepherd, 117 Mass., 485. Allen vs. Cole, 59 Am. Dec. 416 and extended note. It will be observed that the legality of the postponement depends largely upon the absence of collusion or fraud. It is therefore necessary to take the greatest precaution and see that the rights of all persons are preserved in the postponement, unless there is a statute prescribing the manner of adjourning the sale. In the absence of the statute, it will be apparent that the fairness of the proceeding is subject to investigation by a court, and for this very reason, the adjournment of a sale is to be avoided, if it is possible to do so, because it is never a good plan to pursue a course of action which is later subject to judicial inquiry. Respectfully, STATE LANDS. N. C. MILLER, The formation of irrigation districts is rapidly appropriating all the surplus waters, and some prompt action must be taken by the People or else the State lands will soon be without water for irrigation. April 15, 1905. HON. MARK G. WOODRUFF, Register, State Board of Land Commissioners, Denver, Colorado. Dear Sir-I have your letter of April 12th, the substantial part of which is the statement that a large number of irrigation districts have been organized in the State in localities where there are State lands, and that the waters will be appropriated in this way, and that unless some means is provided allowing state lands to participate, these lands will become merely grazing lands. In reply I desire to say that I agree with you in this conclusion, and this is the contention I have made during the last two years. I am of the opinion that the state can protect itself reasonably well by leasing the lands and providing in the lease that water rights secured for the lands may be made part considera tion for the lease, and a provision inserted for the protection of the owner of the water right in case the lease is assigned or made to another person. In other words, the lease would provide that in case of a transfer the lessee shall receive not less than the cost of the water right from the assignee or new lessee. This plan, however, offers no relief as to the organization of irrigation districts in which the ditches are built by assessment and taxation of all lands. It is an impossibility to tax lands belonging to the State for this purpose. The State could make |