Where money has been drawn from the treasury without authority of law it can be recovered back again. People v. Chapman, 61 Cal. 263.

SECTION 23. The members of the legislature shall receive for their services a per diem and mileage, to be fixed by law, and paid out of the public treasury; such per diem shall not exceed eight dollars, and such mileage shall not exceed ten cents per mile, and for contingent expenses not exceeding twenty-five dollars for each session. No increase in compensation or mileage shall take effect during the term for which the members of either house shall have been elected, and the pay of no attache shall be increased after he is elected or appointed.

Const. 1849, Art. IV, Sec. 24.

Constitutional and legislative provisions on this subject have been uniform in this state. Ingram v. Colgan, 106 Cal. 116.

SECTION 24. Every act shall embrace but one subject, which subject shall be expressed in its title. But if any subject shall be embraced in an act which shall not be expressed in its title, such act shall be void only as to so much thereof as shall not be expressed in its title. No law shall be revised or amended by a reference to its title; but in such case the act revised or section amended shall be re-enacted and published at length as revised or amended; and all laws of the state of California, and all official writings, and the executive, legislative and judicial proceedings shall be conducted, preserved and published in no other than the English language.

Const. 1849, Art. IV, Sec. 25.

The amendment of a statute does not have the effect of repealing it. A second amend

ment to the same statute without referring to the first amendment operates as an amendment of the statute as it then exists. So held with reference to the amendment of the "Vrooman Act" of 1893 [Stats. p. 172], which refers to the original act of 1885, without referring to it as amended in 1889. Fletcher v.

Prather, 102 Cal. 413.

And the amendment of section 2619, Political Code, by act of March 30, 1874 [ Amended Codes, p. 116], by striking out the words "all roads used as such for a period of five years," repealed said clause as to the whole state, although the amending act provided in terms that the amendment should apply only to certain counties in the state. Huffman v. Hall, 102 Cal. 26.

The subject of the Bank Commissioners' act [Stats. 1877-8, p. 740, and amendment; Stats. 1887-8, p. 90] is sufficiently expressed in its title. It is not necessary that the title of the act should embrace an abstract of its contents. [Abeel v. Clark, 84 Cal. 226; Ex parte Liddell, 93 Cal. 633.] People v. Superior Court, 100 Cal. 105.

The act of March 14, 1889 [Stats. p. 168], providing for street improvements, and making the warrant, assessment, etc., prima facie evidence of the regularity and correctness of assessments, does not contain more than is expressed in its title. Dowling v. Conniff, 36 Pac. Rep. 1034, approving McDonald v. Conniff, 99 Cal. 386, and Perine v. Erzgraber, 102 Cal. 234.

The act of March 6, 1889 [Stats. p. 70], relating to opening, widening, etc., of streets expresses more in its title than is required by the constitution, and is a valid general law. Davies v. City of Los Angeles, 86 Cal. 43.

The county government act, 1883 [Stats. p. 300], sufficiently expresses subject in its title. Orange Co. v. Harris, 97 Cal. 600.

The title of the county government act of 1883 [Stats. p. 299], "to establish a uniform system of county and township government," embraces but one subject, and that subject is sufficiently expressed in the title. Longan v. County of Solano, 65 Cal. 122.

The point was raised in Leonard v. January, 56 Cal. 1, that the title of the act of April 27, 1880 [Stats. p. 527], known as the county government act, amending and repealing section 4000 and others of the Political Code, did not express the subject. Other objections were also made, and the decision does not indicate whether all the objections raised, or which of them were sufficient, but the act was declared unconstitutional.

There is but one subject expressed in the title of the act of March 11, 1889 [Stats. p. 111], entitled "An act to establish a state reform school for juvenile offenders, and to make an appropriation therefor," and providing for the committal to such school of any boy or girl between the ages of ten and sixteen, who has been convicted of an offense punishable by imprisonment in the county jail or penitentiary, and for offenses punisha

ble by imprisonment in the county jail, giving the court discretion to commit the offender to such jail. And although such act could have been enacted as an amendment to the Penal Code, it is not void. Ex parte Liddell, 93 Cal. 633.

An act entitled "An act amendatory of an act for the better protection of stockholders in corporations formed under the laws of the state of California, for the purpose of carrying on and conducting the business of mining" [Stats. 1874, p. 866], required monthly itemized accounts or balance sheets to be posted by the directors. Held, the subject was sufficiently expressed in its title. Francais v. Somps, 92 Cal. 503. Citing People v. Parvin, 74 Cal. 552.

Information charging defendant with having in his possession a lottery ticket, and setting out a copy thereof in Chinese characters, without a translation or allegation of the meaning in English, is defective in substance. People v. Ah Sum, 92 Cal. 648.

Section cited on construction of statute in Donlon v. Jewett, 88 Cal. 534.

The statute of 1889 [Stats. p. 32], providing for a "general" vaccination in the state, and which, in the body thereof related only to the vaccination of persons attending or desiring to attend the public schools, is not local or special because applicable to a class of persons, and the subject thereof is sufficiently expressed in its title. Abeel v. Clark, 84 Cal.

The provision about amending or revising a law by reference to its title applies clearly to acts revisory or amendatory of former acts; it does not apply to an independent act. When two independent acts are incurably inconsistent, the latter will prevail. Pennie v. Reis, 80 Cal. 266.

The title of the act of March 7, 1887 [Stats. p. 46], to prohibit the sophistication and adulteration of wine and to prevent fraud in the manufacture and sale thereof, embraces but one subject. However numerous the sections of an act may be, if they can be fairly considered as falling within the subject matter of the legislation, or as proper methods for the attainment of the end sought by the act, there is no conflict with the constitutional provisions. Ex parte Kohler, 74 Cal. 38.

The act of April 15, 1880 [Stats. p. 268]. "to amend section 3481 of the Political Code" sufficiently expresses the subject of the act in the title. People v. Parvin, 74 Cal. 549. The acts of March 23, 1880 [Stats. p. 34], to amend certain sections of the Political Code, relating to revenue, sufficiently expresses the subject in its title. A title expressing the object of an act to be to "amend section "of a named code, "relating to" a particular object treated of in the body of the act is a compliance with the constitutional requirement. S. F. & N. P. R. R. v. State Board of Equalization, 60 Cal. 12.

The act of April 23, 1880 [Stats. p. 389], to Dromote drainage embraces subjects not ex