Show STATE Ar FAIKS two opinions by the attorney attorney several bishop has furnished two opinions to state auditor richards in response to questions aub bitted by the latter office one of these was the following under which law the old or the new should district court stenographers be paid for services rendered during the quarter ending march 31 1896 to this question mr bishop replies that all laws relating to tho subject prior to the admission of the are repugnant to section 1 of article 21 of the constitution for the reason that fees are provided for therein in my opinion he continues the territorial laws relating to this subject matter are repugnant to the constitution and therefore would not be carried forward or continued in force under it and therefore to upon the admission of the state into the union if this be true we are required to look to some future legislation legi in reference to this matter and the only thing we i find concerning it is the act of the first legislature entitled an act providing for the employment of stenographers of courts etc which took effect march this act however cannot be said to be retroactive in any sense the result therefore ia that no law relating to compensation of court stenographers was in force from january 4 to march the day upon which the act of the first legislature supra took effect while the matter may not be en free from doubt I 1 am of the opinion that thare ia no authority in law for the payment of court stenographers for Bor vicea rendered in criminal caama since the admission of the state and until the taking effect of the acts aforesaid of tho late legislature and that it would be a question of doubtful propriety for you to issue warrants and I 1 adlisa you not to do eo these parties can present their claims to the next legislature for allowance and payment the other question of the auditor waa IB the state auditor authorized to draw a state warrant for the entire appropriation of in favor of tha university of utah at any time when applied tor the attorney general in reply calls attention to a conflict between the act for the government of the university and the item of the general tion act making an appropriation for the university ih first providing that tho fiscal vear of the shall begin on anly let and that for the institution shall be drawn pro rats quarter yearly in advance the appropriation item is for the year only hu concludes aa followay fol lowa the as to whether the hoard 0 redenta are to draw abo entire appropriated the general appropriation bill depends apon the effect to be given to section 8 cf said act in this section it beems to da termine the manner in which appropriations of this kind may be drawn that is quarter yearly in advance |