Show Claims Between Departments of State Protested Attorney Generals General's Of Office fie Gives Ruling on Question Raised by Director Thatcher Director Preston A. A Thatcher o otho of the tho department of finance and purchase purchase pur pur- chase on Tuesday forwarded to th the state board of examiners vouchers voucher for claims of W. W Hall Farr against the state land board without hi hIs hIs- approval The letter of ot Director Directo Thatcher follows I beg to hand you herewith three thre laim aim vouchers of ot W. W Hal Farr Far against the state stat land board as follows follows fol tol- fol- fol lows covering transportation tion and expenses to Washington I D. D C. C during February and March Marc of ot this year for tor expenses expense during May expense Items item during April These claims are in connection with the defense of ot states state's titles and as Mr lr Farr Fan Fanis Is an o othe ot of the attorney generals general's office and 1 in view of the attorney generals general's opinion a copy of ot which Is herewith I am of the opinion that tha these those items of expense are no not proper charges against the statland state stat land board ASKS INFORMATION Director Thatchers Thatcher's letter asking the information Is dated June 26 and reads thus Hon lIon Harvey H. H Cluff putt attorney general It has come to my attention attention atten atten- tion indirectly that you have questioned ques- ques the legality of a state department department depart depart- ment or Institution honoring bills o of oC another state department or Institution institution covering expenses in connection tion with services rendered the de do- do or institution so billed I Ishall Ishall shall appreciate It if it you rou will le leme let me inc have your written opinion on this subject giving citations on which such a conclusion Is based It is desirable that I have your findings at once as I am withholdIng withhold wIthhold- Ing action on claims against ap approprIations appropriations appropriations ap- ap which lapse on June 30 1925 The opinion of ot the attorney general general general gen gen- eral to which Director Thatcher calls attention Is dated June 26 1925 and is as follows Answering your communication of present date relative to the le legality legality le- le of a state department or Institution in institution institution In- In honoring bills of another department or institution coverIng coveting expenses In connection with services rendered the department or institution institution institution so billed wilt will say that it is the opinion of ot this office that such procedure is not proper In other words we are of ot the opinion that moneys appropriated for tor the maIntenance maintenance maintenance main maIn- of one state department cannot be used for the exposes in incurred incurred incurred in- in by another department Unless unless unless un un- less the money for those expenses is specifically provided for tor In the ap ap- ap- ap This opinion is signed by J. J Robert Robertson deputy attorney general ANOTHER ER CASE ARISES In another letter dated June 30 Director Thatcher writes the state I board of ot exam leIs leI's thus I beg to hand you OU herewith a copy of the attorney generals general's opinion with reference ref to one department honoring bills of another department for ex expenses expenses expenses ex- ex in connection with services rendered In view of this opinion I respectfully draw your attention to the fact that the state auditors auditor's office Is now auditing the road ac accounts accounts accounts ac- ac counts for tor which they expect to bill the road commission The expendi- expendi ti h re on the part of ot the road commission commission com com- mission would according to the above referred to opinion not be legal egal This Is to draw your attention so that further expense may not be Incurred in this connection If It It is if not the intention of ot the auditors auditor's office to charge for this audit then he Is materially exceeding his salary salary salary sal sal- ary appropriations a n matter which should h have ve prompt adjustment HOLDEN GIVES VIEW Tuesday John E E. Holden state auditor a a. letter to the board of examiners calling attention attention attention atten atten- tion to the letter of the director of finance and purchase regarding the audit of ot the tho state road department as follows My Iy attention has been called to toa toa toa a letter written to the board of ot ex examiners examiners cx- cx by Mr It P P. A A. A Thatcher in on R. R Claims Between Department f of 0 State Protested Continued from page pare 1 1 reference to an al audit being belg made by this department o of the state road accounts account accountS cov covering the last four years We Ve understand that Mr Ir Thatcher Thatch Thatch- er has taken the stand from an opinion given by the attorney general general general gen gen- eral in reference to his own de department do- do that It was Illegal for him to charge the expense of checking claims against the various departments departments departments depart depart- ments and institutions of ot the state Because of this opinion he feels that it is illegal for fot- this department to make an audit of the state road and have the state road pay the ex expense ex pense penso of this audit audi HOLDS TO AGREEMENT We Ve wish to call cal your our attention to the fact tact that the audit my office Is iv I making was authorized by you OU gentlemen gentlemen gen gen- temen and that your authorization was isa transmitted to the state road department with wih the tho understanding that they would pay the expense orthis or of this ibis audit The men making the audit have been employed from the outside and it I will be necessary for forthe forthe forthe the state road to reimburse the state slate auditors auditor's office for the expense expense expense ex ex- ex- ex pense of this tills audit as agreed to by bythe bythe bythe the board of examiners E Evidently you ou gentlemen realize that the charge as originated by the finance and ond purchase department Is different differ ent Ent from the tho expense Incurred by this office in making an audit of the road accounts It I appears to me that Mr 11 Thatcher in calling caling your attention to the illegality of this audit Is assuming assuming as assuming as- as suming that the board of examiners did not have the tho authority to authorize authorize authorize auth auth- orize the audit and therefore as assumed ns- ns authority not delegated to tho the board Kind Kindly I be referred to section compiled laws of Utah 1917 giving the board of examiners authority to 10 arrange for Cor the audit of any til al accounts |