Vandalia Whig and Illinois intelligencer. [volume] (Vandalia, Ill.) 1832-183?, 1833-04-17

uOhCCOI IHC ICCclpC VI Iuc iuuuS VI clIcCIS
of the state bank by Hall, by virtue of the
act of the legislature of the 23d January.
1929, or any subsequent law of the state.
imposing on Hall, the late treasurer, the
duties of cashier of the state bank, could
be introduced as legal evidence to charge
them with liability, in case of misappli-
cation of such effects OF funds of the bank
by the late TT easurer; and this is, as I'M
derstand the only point to be examined
and determined.
In the consideration of this question it is
necessary to rccur briefly to the constitu-
ton of the state. aereating the office of
treasurer, and the zact of the legislature
defining his duties. The office of state
treasurer is created by the I'd section of
the I'd article of the constitution; and the
act of the 9th March, 1919, defining the
duties of auditor and treasurer, was the
only law in force at the time of the exc
cution, delivery, approval and acceptance
of the bond. The 7th section of that act
requires the treasurer to give bond in the
sum of $4,000, and the residue of its
provisions relate to the performance of
duties in regard to the fiscal operations of
the state treasury, and nothing else.
Under this law then we are to determine
the liabilities Of the sureties, and whether
they can be held responsible for other du-
ties cast upon the treasurer by the act of
1929, after the execution, approval and
acceptance of the bond.
Without examining a question which
might here arise, as to what duties might
thus be cast upon the treasurer and their
appropriateness, it will be sufficient to en-
quire into the character of the act of the
23d January, 1929, entitled Gan act to
amend an act supplementary to an act es-
tablishing the state bank of Illinois" ap-
proved January 18th. 1925.
BY the seventh section of that act, it is
declared that ''the treasurer shall discharge
all the duties required of the cashier of
said bank by the act establishing the stale
bank of Illinois, From this provision, it
is manifest that the Legislature cast on the
treasurer the office of cashier of the bank
de .facto. Having thus by law imposed
this new office upon him, and exacted new
liabilities and new duties. of a character
not only unconnected with the office of
treasurer, but of diversified and entirely
different nature, can it be conten ded that
the sureties in his bond, are Justly and lie
gally responsible for his want of fidelity in
the discharge, of this new duty? 1t will
be recollected that the cashier of the state
bank was required by law to give security
in the sum of $50 600, and why, or
the transfer of his duties additional Sc
Icurity from the treasurer was not required
is not for this tribunal to determine. Nc
increase of the treasurer's bond was re
quire d. and it is inconsistent with the idea
derived from the requirements of the law
creating the bank, to suppose that the
sum Of $40 O00 required by the treasu
rer's bond. would have been deemed suffi
cient, when these new, and important. and
responsible duties were thus transferred
by the transfer of the Office of cashier.
The question then presented for consid-
Grafton and decision here is not, whether
it is within the bounds of legislative COM
potency. to impose additional duties on
the treasurer connected with his office,
nor whether those duties are appropriate
or not; but whether by law there has not
in fact been cast on the treasurer an addi-
tional office, and he required to discharge
the duties required by law of the former
incumbent. If this be so, then it cannot
be doubted that such of the defendants as
are mere sureties of the treasurer. cannot
be held responsible for the acts of same
individual, in the performance of the du-
ties of the office thus cast upon him.
But if there can be doubt entertained as
to such an Interpretation of the act of 1929,
and whether or not it did not cast on the trea
surer a distinct and additional office and the
performance of its duties, still there is no rule
Of law better settled-one which has more gen
orally received the sanction of judicial trihn-
nals-than that the laws in force at the time
of the making of contracts, form a portion OF
heir essence, and that they must be considered
as entered into with reference tn snch laws, and
so construed. The act of Oath March, 1873,
defining the duties of treasurer, was the only
law in existence at the time of entering int
the bond, and by it the rights and liabilities
# the respective parties must be ascertained
md determined. The sureties, when they
signed the bond and ent red into the covenan
could not be supposed to look elsewhere to as
GER ain the nature and extent OF their liability.
They saw that $4,000 was the extent, and
that the duties which were reOuired If the trea :