Lewistown gazette. [volume] (Lewistown, Pa.) 1843-1944, 1861-02-21
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 81, 1861.

ance; there was no puClIc notice show lnr
anything to b. due. The Auditor titn,-
raj IS required by law to have such balan-
ces entered as liens in the county where
the officer resides, and to bring su!t. This
was neglected nor was any notice publish
ed in the newspapers as is required by law
No notice was given Of this balance due
the Commonwealth until the DIST Of Feb.
ruary, 1856, nearly three years after the
first settlement 1t appears that Mr.
Strunk i the only solvent surety on the
6onds-that the other parties areinsolvehs
worth nothing.
1t the time when the Auditor General
should have entered up the lien and com
menced suit, which he is bound un ler the
law to DO within six months, tile other
surcties were solvent; they had real estate;
aud there was a reasonable probability that
The money could be collected from all the
>uretics
Alr. Shunk is farmer liyinE in the
( county Of Mitfiin. He never had any no.
tice Of this balance due the Safe until
! several years had elapsed. If the provis-
ions Of the law had been complied with,
+ he would have received notice and would
have been enabled to reimburse himself for
any liability. But the Auditor General
neglected to comply with the law. Thus
there is in favor Of Nr. Struuk very
strong equity Had the requirements Of
the law been fully complied with, Mr.
Heiglers property, as we'll as the property
Of the other sureties, could doubtless have
been made liable. As the case now stands
Dir; Strunk Is unable to be reimbursed.
He never knew anything about this liabil-
ty or the deficiency in the account Of the
treasurer till some three Or four Years after
the settlement Of the account. If he is
now held responsible, his property will be
sold and he will be ruined man Under
these circumstances, as ne received no no.
tlce, as the officer of the State did not
comply with the conditions Of the law,
think the case has strong claims upon us
and should be passed.
M. Iejier. This seems to me strange
proceeding. If the Auditor General ne
elected to give the proper notification, by
which neglect these sureties suffered, that
would be proper case for the considera-
ton Of the courts. 1t does not, as think.
constitute good reason for special relief,
as contemplated by this bill. To exone-
rate the surety in this case would, ! con-
slider, be bad precedent
III. Borth0i0mcW. In answer to the
gentleman from Erie (Mr Teller | would
state that the reason the surety cannot OBJ
tain relief from the courts is that no laches
operates to defeat the ella m of the Com
monwcalth. Notwithstanding the Lapse of
time, the Commonwealth can sue and re.
cover. Mr.. Strunk cannot have any rem
cdy in court Of law But the circum-
stances OF the case are such as to raise
strong equity in his tavor-an equity
WHICH should induce the House to pass
this bill Had the officer of the State Civ
en- that notice which the law required. Mr.
Strunk could have saved himself to a great |
extent, because at that time Mr.. Xeigler |
aud the cosureties had property which |
could nave been made liable | think the |
circumstances are such as to commend this |
TIL TO our sense of justice aud right
-Hr. liilson | would Ike to inquire !
whether some other of the sureties besides |
George StPunk had not at the time real es- !
tate upon which the bonds, when filled up, |
became liens and are still liens.
Hr. Gtd6oncy. This case has been full |
ly examined By the Committee Oh the Ju-
dietary, general, and they have reported |
1t unanimously with an affirmative recon-
mendatIon As the questions involved are |
purely OF legal nature; this affirmative |
accommodation would, should suppose, |
be almost sufficient to induce the imncdi- |
ate passage Of the bill.
la reply to the gentleman from Beaver
Mr.. W llson) | would say that two of the |
suretles IN this case received some intima-
ton that there was deficiency in the ac-
count OF Nlr. Ieigler--a balance of large |
amount due the Commonwealth; and in |
consequence, they assigned their property, |
so that they would not become responsible |
for this detalcation.
Mr.. wilson What ! wish to inquire is
whether Aachariah Rittenhouse and Sam
uel BeIford had not real estate at the time
the bonds were entered up, upon which (.
real estate those bonds became liens.
Mr. Gtbboncy. 1 do not know as to
that tact; but the whole responsibility fell
upon DIR. Strunk, the other two sureties
beng found to be worth nothing. The
claim was entered against the sureties of
Daniel Zelgler; but Mr.. Strunk was the
only solvent party. As has been stated, if
the Auditor General had promptly entered
up the bond, it would have become a lien
upon the property of the treasurer, Daniel
Aeigler; and 1t was in evidence before the
committee that Daniel Zeigler put bis
property out of his bands between the time
the settlement vas made with MIN and The
time when the notice was given to the sure
ties. 1t was in evidence that the property
thus assigned by Elr. Zoigler, would lave