SECTION 18. The governor, lieutenant-governor, secretary of state, controller, treasurer, attorney-general, surveyor-general, chief justice and associate justices of the Supreme Court and judges of the Superior Courts, shall be liable to impeachment for any misdemeanor in office; but judgment in such cases shall extend only to removal from office and disqualification to hold any office of honor, trust or profit under the state; but the party convicted or acquitted shall nevertheless be liable to indictment, trial and punishment according to law. All other civil officers shall be tried for misdemeanor in office in such manner as the legislature may provide.

Const. 1849, Art IV, Sec. 19.

SECTION 19. No senator or member of assembly shall, during the term for which he shall have been elected, be appointed to any civil office of profit under this state which shall have been created, or the emoluments of which have been increased, during such term, except such offices as may be filled by election by the people.

Const. 1849, Art. IV, Sec. 20.

The summary proceeding for the trial of civil officers for misdemeanor in office mentioned in section 772 Penal Code, and the manner of the trial without a jury, is within the power of the legislature. Woods v. Varnum, 85 Cal. 639.

SECTION 20. No person holding any lucrative office under the United States, or any other power, shall be eligible to any civil office of profit under this state; provided, that officers in the militia, who receive no annual salary, local officers, or postmasters whose compensation does not exceed five hundred dollars per annum, shall not be deemed to hold lucrative offices.

Const. 1849, Art. IV, Sec. 21.

The word eligible refers to the capacity to hold, as well as to be elected to office. A person who was duly elected to a civil office under the state, and who was eligible to be elected and hold the same, can no longer hold it, after he has accepted and become incumbent of a lucrative federal office. People v. Leonard, 73 Cal. 230. The section is referred to in construing section 4, article X, with reference to salary and expenses of state prison directors. People v. Chapman, 61 Cal. 263.

SECTION 21. No person convicted of the embezzlement or defalcation of the public funds of the United States, or of any state, or of any county or municipality therein, shall ever be eligible to any office of honor, trust, or profit under this state; and the legislature shall provide, by law, for the punishment of embezzlement or defalcation as a felony. Const. 1849, Art. IV, Sec. 22.

SECTION 22. No money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law, and upon warrants duly drawn thereon by the controller, and no money shall ever be appropriated or drawn from the state treasury for the use or benefit of any corporation, association, asylum, hospital, or any other institution not under the exclusive management and control of the state as a state institution, nor shall any grant or donation of property ever be made thereto by the state; provided, that notwithstanding anything contained in this or any other section of this constitution, the legislature shall have the power to grant aid to institutions conducted for the support and maintenance of minor orphans, or half orphans, or abandoned children, or aged persons in indigent circumstances-such aid to be granted by a uniform rule, and proportioned to the number of inmates of such respective institutions; provided further, that

the state shall have at any time the right to inquire into the management of such institutions; provided further, that whenever any county, or city and county, or city or town shall provide for the support of minor orphans, or half orphans, or abandoned children, or aged persons in indigent circumstances, such county, city and county, city or town shall be entitled to receive the same pro rata appropriations as may be granted to such institutions under church or other control. An accurate statement of the receipts and expenditures of public moneys shall be attached to and published with the laws at every regular session of the legislature.

Const. 1849, Art. IV, Sec. 23.

The state possesses power to appropriate funds for the celebration of the anniversary of important events, and may confer such power on municipal corporations. The appropriation of $300,000.00 to erect buildings and maintain exhibit at the world's fair Columbian exposition, and providing such appropriation be disbursed through a commission to be appointed by the governor, was not unconstitutional. Daggett v. Colgan, 92 Cal. 53.

This section is referred to in connection with the division of monies between Los Angeles and Orange counties, the monies being due under the provisions of the act of March 15, 1883 [Stats. p. 380], relating to appropriation of money for the support of aged and indigent persons. Orange Co. v. Los Angeles Co., 114 Cal. 392.

This section is referred to as in substance a repetition of or in unison with previous legislation of this state in Ingram v. Colgan, 106 Cal. 116.

Where there is no other valid objection against an act of the legislature appropriating public money, it is sufficient for the act to state that officers thereby appointed shall receive a salary of two thousand dollars per annum, payable monthly out of any money in the state treasury not otherwise appropriated, without the language "there is hereby appropriated the sum," etc. When the legislature has clearly indicated its will as to the claim which is to be paid, and the fund from which it is to be paid, the constitutional requirement is satisfied, and no particular form of words is essential to make the appropriation valid. The act of 1889 [Stats. p. 421], providing for the appointment of three engineers as examining commissioners of rivers and harbors, and fixing a salary of two thousand four hundred dollars per annum for each, payable monthly, and traveling expenses, to be paid out of any money in the state treasury not otherwise appropriated, designates with sufficient clearness the amount to be paid, and the fund from which it shall be drawn, to constitute an appropriation. Humbert v. Dunn, 84 Cal. 57.

It is a general custom, but not universal in this state, in passing appropriation bills to employ the words "appropriated out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated;" but neither in the constitution nor the codes is there any requirement that such act shall specify the fund out of which the appropriation shall be paid, nor is such spec

ification usual. The act of March 14, 1889 [Stats. p. 149], appropriating the sum of $100,000 for the support and maintenance of the mining bureau, is sufficiently specific, and is not void because it fails to designate on what fund the warrant is to be drawn. Proll v. Dunn, 80 Cal. 220.

The act of March 15, 1883 [Pen. Code, Sec. 1388], providing for suspension of judgment against criminal minors, and for their commitment to non-sectarian charitable institutions, and authorizing the court to direct the payment of a limited sum out of the county treasury of the county where such criminal proceedings are pending in favor of the institution to which the minor is so committed, is within the police powers of the state, and does not involve any unconstitutional appropriation. If the minor be sent to the county jail its expense would also be paid from the same treasury. Boys' and Girls' Aid Society v. Reis, 71 Cal. 627.

The act of 1883 [Stats. p. 380], providing for the sum of $100 to be paid to private institutions maintaining as many as ten aged indigent persons, rendered the provisions of the constitution self executing as to such aid in favor of counties, cities, towns, etc.; and said cities, counties, towns, etc, because entitled to the same pro rata whether they maintained as many as ten such persons, or more, or whether they were maintained in one building or not. County of Yolo v. Dunn, 77 Cal. 133, following San Francisco v. Dunn, 69 Cal. 73.