400
and that the officer administering the Government, or acting for the Governor during his absence, becomes ipso facto entitled to it, and should receive it without being required to satisfy the Treasurer that he has actually expended an equivalent amount in public entertaining. He points out that if the Treasurer's contention were correct, it would apply equally to the case of the officer acting for the Governor as to that of the Governor himself, and that the officer acting for the Governor would have in every month to arrange to spend exactly 1/12th of the $7,000, if he wished to avoid being out of pocket, for in no month could the Treasurer pay him more than 1/12th of the $2,000, and in months where he could not "satisfy" the Treasurer that he had expended that amount he could only draw such smaller amount as he could show that he had expended.
This Mr. O'Brien urges is hardly...