I fully appreciate the deference due to a construction placed upon the Constitution and statutes by successive Governors of this state, whose wisdom, zeal and patriotism in the discharge of their duties cannot be questioned. Nevertheless my examination of this subject fully convinces me that while the authorities are not entirely reconcilable, the letter of the law, both constitutional and statutory, sustains the above conclusion. If such be the letter of the law, how much more strongly does the spirit of the constitutional inhibition demand the same construction. The reason for the inhibition is a wise one. The evils it is intended to avert are too obvious to require enumeration or description. That no evil has arisen so far from an opposite construction of the provision is no assurance that the state and its institutions can pursue the same course with impunity in the future. While it is to be hoped that the same patriotism and integrity which prevented evil in the past may continue, the Constitution forbids us to rely solely on that hope.

Very truly yours,

D. M. CAMPBELL,

Attorney General.

By DAN B. CAREY,

Assistant.

IN RE

SENATE BILL NO. 20.

A bill to provide for the taxation of Gifts, Legacies and Inheritances is a bill for raising revenue and must originate in the House of Representatives.

State of Colorado,

Attorney General's Office.

Denver, Colorado, February 10, 1899.

TO THE HONORABLE SENATE

Of the Twelfth General Assembly of Colorado:

I am in receipt of a resolution passed by your honorable body and transmitted to me by your secretary, which resolution reads as follows:

"Whereas: Section 31 of article 5 in our State Constitution provides that all bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; and

"Whereas: Senate Bill No. 20 by Senator Roe, A tax upon Legacies, is a bill for raising revenue;

"Therefore, be it Resolved, That a copy of Senate Bill No. 20 be submitted to the Attorney General for an opinion as to the constitutionality of this bill if introduced in the Senate and requesting an opinion at the earliest possible date."

The resolution is accompanied by a copy of the bill mentioned therein.

In response thereto I have the honor to submit the following:

Section 31, Article V, of our State Constitution, reads as follows:

"All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose amendments, as in case of other bills."

Your resolution requires an opinion as to whether or not the bill referred to is such a bill as must, under the provisions of the above section of the Constitution, originate in the House of Representatives.

The tax contemplated by the bill is not, properly speaking, a property tax, but it is rather as its name indicates, a tax on the right to inherit, and to the extent to which it operates it may be considered a regulation of that right.

Judging from the effect of laws similar to the one here proposed, which are in operation in other countries and in other states of this country, the expectation may be reasonably indulged that the provisions of the bill, if put into operation, would produce no inconsiderable amount of revenue, which amount would increase as the years go by. The bill itself contemplates the production of revenue and provides for its collection and payment into the state treasury.

Of course not every law which produces revenue is a revenue law. Bills for other purposes which may incidentally produce revenue are not within the meaning of this constitutional provision. While laws of this nature are frequently advocated and commended because they regulate the right of inheritance, and because they act as a restriction upon the acquiring of property by those who have not earned it, yet I am satisfied that the court would hold that the main object of this bill is to raise revenue, and that it must originate in the House of Representatives.

I arrive at this conclusion independently of the language of your resolution above referred to. Referring to that, however, it seems to set at rest the question as to how the Senate viewed this bill in that regard, "Whereas, Senate Bill No. 20, by Senator Roe, a Tax Upon Legacies, is a bill for raising revenue.” This is the language of your resolution, and if it is to

be taken as a correct statement of the purpose of the bill, of course settles the question as to where it should originate.

Very truly yours,

D. M. CAMPBELL,
Attorney General.

By DAN B. CAREY,

Assistant.

IN RE

RELIEF BILLS.

The General Assembly is inhibited by Constitutional provisions from passing Relief Bills.

State of Colorado,

Attorney General's Office.

Denver, Colorado, February 13, 1899.

Sir-I am in receipt of your official communication, under date of January 30, 1899, transmitting a copy of Senate Bill No. 126, entitled "A bill for an act for the relief of the widow and children of M. Ernest Conrad, and of the widow and child of Sumner Whitney," in which you request my official opinion upon the question of the constitutionality of the same. It appears that M. Ernest Conrad and Sumner Whitney were both killed while attempting, in the discharge of their duty, to effect the arrest of a gang of outlaws.

The question presented by your official communication is:

"Whether or not this appropriation can, under our Constitution, be made by this legislature, or whether any relief can be rendered by the General Assembly to these unfortunate people?"

I quote from your communication as follows: "The Senate judiciary committee is of the opinion that such appropriation as this bill provides for would be in violation of sections 28 and 34 of Article V, of our Constitution."

I also note your statement that the sad condition in which these people have been placed by their sudden bereavement "so appeals to our sense of patriotism and justice that we are unanimously desirous of recommending this appropriation if it is possible to do so."

However strongly the unfortunate condition of these people may appeal to our sympathies, I have no doubt that the members of, your honorable committee will agree with me that the question to be determined is one of the constitutional power of the legislature, and one which cannot in any way be affected by individual desires or sympathies.

The Constitution of Colorado contains the following provisions:

"No bill shall be passed giving any extra compensation to any public officer, servant or employe, agent or contractor, after services have been rendered or contract made, nor providing for the payment of any claim made against the state without previous authority of law."

Section 28, Article V.

"No appropriation shall be made for charitable, industrial, educational, or benevolent purposes, to any person, corporation, or community not under the absolute control of the state, nor to any denominational or sectarian institution or association."

Section 34, Article V.

The following references and quotations will show the construction which has heretofore been placed upon the above sections of our Constitution by my predecessors and by the courts of this state.

The General Assembly in 1889 made an appropriation of $2,500.00 for the purpose of meeting cer