RECENT STATE CONSTITUTION-MAKING 85 



constitutions of Alabama and Virginia. In the constitution of Wash- 

 ington it is provided that the governor may veto separate sections or 

 items of any bill. The effect of these provisions is to increase greatly 

 the responsibility of the governor in all legislation. This fact will tend 

 to attract to the office able and conscientious men who will furnish a 

 counterpoise to the vagaries of the legislature. 



The most advanced stage of this power to veto separate items has 

 been reached in Pennsylvania. In the constitution of 1873, this pro- 

 vision was inserted: "The governor shall have power to disapprove of 

 any item or items of any bill making appropriations of money, embracing 

 distinct items, and the part or parts of the bill approved shall be the 

 law, and the item or items of appropriation disapproved shall be void, 

 unless repassed according to the rules and limitations prescribed for the 

 passage of other bills over the executive veto." 



At different times the governors have construed this section as giving 

 them the right to veto, not only items, but also parts of items, that is, to cut 

 down the amount of money appropriated for any certain purpose. In 1899 

 Governor Stone vetoed in this way $1,000,000 of an item in the appro- 

 priation bill granting $1 1,000,000 for the public schools. The governor's 

 construction of this clause of the constitution was sustained by the supreme 

 court in a decision on April 22, 1901. 1 This is an interesting decision, 

 and whether or not it will be sustained in the other States having similar 

 clauses in their constitutions will be watched with much interest. If it 

 should become a part of the established constitutional law of the American 

 States, it would place in the hands of the governor the sole authority to 

 determine how much money should be spent and for what purposes. As 

 the general appropriation bill seldom reaches him until after the legisla- 

 ture adjourns, there is no possibility of passing it over his veto. His power 

 is therefore practically absolute. In 1901 Governor Stone of Pennsyl- 

 vania vetoed forty- seven items and partly vetoed or cut down one hundred 

 and thirty- two other items. 2 A governor of Pennsylvania who is willing 

 to assume the responsibility will have little trouble in making his influ- 

 ence felt in the expenditures of that State. 



1 Commonwealth v. Barnett, 48 Atlantic, 976. 



» R. H. Whitten, New York Stale Library Bulletin, No. 72, p. 38. 



