Whether the commissioners for the construction of the Southeastern Hospital for the Insane may use the appropriations made for the benefit of that institution by the general assembly of 1905, for the same purposes which the specific appropriations of 1907 were made to cover, without thereby losing t

DEAF, INDIANA STATE SCHOOL FOR--TRAVELING AND HOTEL EXPENSES UNDER ACT OF 1907. June 3, 1907. Hon. Richard 0. Johnson, Superintendent, Indiana State School for the Deaf, City: Dear Sir-Replying to your favor of May 11th, in which you ask whether the legislature of 1907 confined traveling and hotel expenses incurred on behalf of your institution to those incurred within the state of Indiana, I beg to say that I do not so construe the statute. Substantially the same question has been presented to -me by the board of state charities, and I enclose herewith copy of opin- ion rendered upon the same. Under this construction of the law, the general maintenance fund available for the school for the deaf may, in part, be ex- pended for legitimate traveling and hotel expenses, although the latter are not confined to the state limits. (S'ee opinion dated April 23, 1907, to Hon. A. W. Butler.) INSANE, SOUTHEASTERN HOSPITAL FOR-APPROPRIA- TIONS OF 1905 AND 1907. June 5, 1907. I-ron. J. Frank Hanly, Governor of Indiana: Dear Sir-The question has been presented to me whether the commissioners for the construction of the Southeastern Hospital for the Insane may use the appropriations made for the benefit of that institution by the general assembly of 1905, for the same purposes which the specific appropriations of 1907 were made to cover, without thereby losing their right to use the latter also, when they shall become available. In 1905 the legislature provided as follows (Acts 1905, p. 31): "For the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this act there is hereby appropriated out of any funds in the state treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of five hundred sixty thousand dollars, or so much thereof as may be necessary, to be dxpended by the said board of commissioners as herein provided; of this sum sixty thou- sand dollars shall be available November 1, 1905: two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, June 1, 1906; two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, January 1, 1907." 204 The statute of which the foregoing forms a part a-uthorized the construction of "offices, buildings and such other structures as may from time to time be deemed necessary to the complete estab- lishment and equipment of such hospital for the care, treatment and safekeeping of patients, according to modern, advanced and practical methods, said hospital being constructed upon what is commonly known as the 'cottage plan.' " (Acts 1905, p. 28.) Section 5 permits the drawing and payment of warrants for the above construction. In 1907 the legislature made certain specific appropriations, aggregating approximately $559,000, for construction of cottages. There was no express repeal of the former statute, and nothing to indicate that the later appropriations were in lieu of those made in 1905. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, it may fairly be presumed the last appropriations were in addition to those al- ready provided. Accordingly, there will be no impropriety in the board utilizing the appropriation of 1905 for the erection and equipment of cottages, and the general fund need not be re- imbursed therefor from the specific appropriations hereafter avail- able under the act of 1907. GAS-WASTE OF-CRIM INAL LAW. REPEAL OF- INJNCTION. June 6, 1907. Hon. Bryce A. Kinney, State Gas Inspector, Marion, Indiana: Dear Sir-Answering your verbal request for my opinion, it is my conclusion that section 3 of the act of 1893 (Acts 1893. p. 300; being section 7512 Burns' Statutes 1901), as amended by the act of 1899, was repealed by the act of 1903 (Acts 1903, p. 212), as, while the exact state of facts has not been passed upon in Indiana, it would probably be so held in order to give effect to the fifth section of the act of 1903, and because there is no other construction possible to give any effect to that section. A similar case was so decided in another state (Greer v. State, 22 Tex. 588). The repeal of that penalty section does not, however, abolish criminal prosecution for the waste of gas: but the same may be prosecuted under section 534 of the public offenses act of 1905