Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1820-12-09
RICHMOND. DECEMBER 0. 1870
For THE ENQUIRER.

law.
Many important questions were brought be-
Tore u by adjournment or otherwise. most of
which were decided. ard the rest necessarily
coaiinmed. But the most interesting and that
which principally ensa: ed pubiic attention, and
occupied the time OF the court. was the motion
against the late Treasurer John Preston, and
MS securities. or their bond entered into tue
18th OF January 1919. for the deficit in the
treasury. which was discovered at the time
ut his resignation in January 1920 and for
which the last Legislature directed "a prosecu-
lion. Other motions against the same individual
ana h's securities, for former years, could nor
De taken mp for want of time
The case came before the court on Tuesday,
the 2ist nlfimo. The act Of Assembly (making
distinction between this and other cases OF
public defanlIers,) directs Jury 10 assess The
damages; or TO try the issue, il one is rendered.
All the defendants. except Preston himself.
Joined in their defence, aud ofler ed three rleas
Tue FIRST averring in substance, that the. late
Treasurer had faithfully accounted for all the
pubic monies which came TO his hands, in
virtue OF his Office, whist their responsibility
iAsted the second. differing only Ii om the
t1rmer. IN setting out the sums which did ac-
'ua;iy come To his hands, as they alleged -
ava The third denying the right Of the Com.
monwsalih 10 take any bond from the Treasu.
fer alter his fir, I election in 1909.
The Counsel for tho Commonwealth. the
Attorney General, Mr. Nicholas aud MIR. Ionl.
uIn aemn!red TO tue last plea. aud moved the
court TO REJECT the SECOND on the ground that
u d'iicied IN no important respect from the
hisi plea, aud that The act of Assembly which,
permits deieHdanis to p!sad :" a. many Sc.
sefai matters as they may think necessary for
their defence" does not allow them 10 make
me same defence in different pleas
The Counsel for the defendants Mr. Wick
nam MI Leigh. Nj. Sianard aud Mr.. Girner,
DENIED tins distinction aud it's application, con-
tending thai Ibis was like the common case of
piradin. general performance ia an action or
covenant aud a special performance in various
ways which a defendant might always do, uh-
pp1 In
| ~ which case he might be restrained The plea
was received by the court
The question upon the demurrer turned up-
| on The rishi 10 take more than one bond FROM
Tue Treasurer Tor, Il the law only required
tiat one should he taken the first bond cover
Ed all delnquencieS, and all the rest were iIl,-
| gal.
| The act of Assembly at that time in force.
directed that the public Treasurer upon his
| hrNt election, and before he entered INFO The
duties oi his office, should give bond" &c -,
~ ans" gave amotion against the Treasurer: by
Tue succeeding Treasurer, npon the lords &c.
| The treasurer was 10 be Annually elected and
| TO continue in Office tor one wear.
The Counsel tor The defendants insisted, that,
the words upon hi> first election were 10 be
| taken IN contradiction TO a second or Ie.riecs
ton, and confined the right 10 take bosd
| fiom The Treasurer 10 his first coming into
! once, which construction was sire ttenedv
a. they ailedsed, by The Legislatures altering
Tue law Al the late revisai so as 10 make il read
the public Iieasrrer at his first cleo ton, and
ereTy gar thereafter shall give bond" tSe 80.
| hinch ing'hcns gument was urged on this
POM by The counsel on both sides, aud by MIR.
T. Randolph and Mr.. s. Taylor, who appeared
,aI ih+ 81 cu,iiitS in the ii II bond aud OF course
IT, .i".'''" ion OF the
aFt-Dul III would BE- impossible on tins or au,,
oihar question which occurred il. The case 40
state lie arguments Of counsel, without swe.
iing thisarIicle fai beyond the limits prescr,b-
I eel 70 Il.
| The court were of opinion that the intention
81 tht Legislature was. that the treasurer
shpn'h annually, immediately utter his election,
| ara before he sniered on the duties ut his
once, Gi,e bond, and that the words above
qno'ed taken in connection with Others used in
| ih' act aud with the fact that THIS was an an.
nnai oihce. sufficiently indicated this iDten.
| ION. OF conrse they sustained the demurrer
| 10 HE third plea.
To The other pleas there were after some de-
lay Ieplicaii0us aud rejOindeis which in effect
pui IN issue the tact OF what sums of money
| actually came 10 the hands of John Preston iu
virtue of i'is thee, dining the term for which
the LET ndanis were bonnd. Ii was admitted
| on all sides, That they were only responsible
| for such SINUS, but the contest turned on tile
| na'nre OF The evidence 10 prove hoW much ac-
| tua'iy came 40 his hands.
On the part of The Commonw calii The
| books OF the treasury, the reports OF commits
| tees OF The Legislature and the reports of tie
| treasurer 10 the legislature, were given III eyiA
| dence.
! Dy them il appeared that on the 18th of Jan.
| 1919, Preston admitted in his report OF that
date, thai Here was in The treasury tile fret
| O! Tue preceding October. 800 1O2 IS
Taking this datum ana computing The re-
| ceipis aud disbursements up TO the 18th Ot Jan.
| 1919. the date OF the bond iu question, there
ought TO have been in the treasury OF that
Gay .....''..... .................:.S 0lo Az 23
By The same computation, there ought to
| have beeni The treasury on the 18th OF Jan.
! 1870; when Prsaton resigned his office
tS33s,207 or
| But the Commonwealth proved that
| there was actually on that day in
| the treasury only The sum OF. 250,lO7 ~
! Leaving this sum which constituted
the fist item of The Commons
weai'h's account. ............S 5000 80
| BESIDES this, Tie Commonwealth
| proved thai 10 the year 1914 Pres
Ton had received as treasurer The
sum OF = 80 900, which lie failed
| 10 enter The books Of the
treasury. ........... $4,000
That III March lSiG he received Oh
public account for interest on
treasury notes, the fur her sum of
5 $40 OF which he made no entry. $50
| And in july 1916 The further sum
OF s 3D5 10 on the saIue account,
with The same OMISSION. .5,30S 20
That he received a. agent of the Lii
| ierary Fund in 1878 dividends OH
their u 5. Bank Stock 10 the a.
mount ni. 'S..'. $500. '.2,lOO
| And III 1919. fui before the date OF
the bond, on the same accOnut...,
| Added to which il was proved that
| errors ir addition had been made
on The treasury books against the
Commonwealth but all previous
TO the year 1916, TO the amount of. "a ,4SS 0S
s 1856 BIC II
| Making the aggregate of s 1886 ~, the
whole amount vt the COmmoBweaitlIs CLAIM.
| As to the Two last iteins, The court Oh motion
| directed them 10 he struck from the account,
| being OF opinion that when the directors OF the
| Literary Fund drew any sums from the treas
my and vested them in stock or other thing,