Macon beacon. [volume] (Macon, Miss.) 1859-1995, 1871-04-01

IMToaEANR arINIoN n IIn

AT1oRSE3 GINS eRAEs 0FHcEs !
III sargh
l III IT'S Erce neyY AseeSai
legxfaa M lat9s
Sin / 4 e4epeo I
Ia your onmaN I, Ifo state ns
9pinion nj ~ fhs liability oI
mblic oilicee e aecount tor pub
! lie moneys 8ith which III ETA,
trustod hypyiraue Of his 0ia ast
(which, without his fault, lixg
been taken from his posspssfc /
larceny d robbery.
My opinion ii that in such CO
SEES, the officer and the surciios on
bis boEd arc absolutely and nm
conditionally liable for all the
iiunds thatgo Into his hands and
are not afterwards paid over az
required by law, no matter what
may be the extnse. | recolIect
no case III which this view Of the
law has ever been questioned iii
the appellate courts Of any OF the
States. 1t has, however, bcanau
pcatedly contested and decided M.
the Supreme Court Of The United
States, not upon any special
stdttte but upon general legal
principles and grounds Of public
policy; and the doctrine Is now
well settled, that the case Of Off
GERS who receive public money,
under bond to collect and pay
over, performs fulfil, etc, differs
from that of ordinary bailees; LIST,
because the forcillc taking Of the
money from an officer, whether
BY robbery or otherwise, is not
within the conditions OF covenants
of his bond, and constitutes no
to q suit on that instrtl-
ment ; and ID, because public pol
icy forlids that such d defense
should be allowed.
| cannot, otherwise, 10 well
state tho reasons for this view OF
the subject as in the language Of
Mr.. Justice Mclean, in the case
OF US. v. Prescott, ct III. How
U. -. Supreme Court Reports,
page 57s.
He said T: Who condition of the
bond has been broken, as the de-
Prescott, failed to pay
over tho money received by him,
when required so to do; and the
question is, whether he shall be
'XontrAted from the condition Of
lis bond, on tho ground that the
money has boon stolen from
lin
"The objection to this defense
$, that it is not within the condi-
ion of the bond and this would
ecm to be conclusive. The con-
rait was entered into on his part,
nd there is no allegation of fail (,
ire on the part Of the govern
nent. How, then, can Prescott
g discharged from his bond?E,
10 knew the extent OF his obliga-
ion when he entered into it, and
70 has realized tho fruits Of this .
litigation BY the enjoyment off
he office. Shall he be discharged /
liability contrary to his own
Spress undertaking? There is F,
9 principle on which such q de- I
'nse can be sustained. The OBJ ,
to keep safely tho public ,
IL absolute, without any |
ondition5 express or Implied !
nd nothing but the payment Of
when required, can discharge :
c bond" 4 4 y x X Il !
: : "pubIic policy requires !
hat every dcpositary Of the pub /
l. money should bo hold to alt
trict accountability. Not only :
hat he should exercise tho high /
st degree Of vigilance, lat that 4,
nc should keep safely the mo- ,
.eys which come to his hands. !
my relaxation Of this condition !
iould open q door to frauds, {
which might be practiced with !
mpunity. A depository would !
ave nothing more to do than TO !
ny his plans and arrange his !
roofs, SO as to establish bis loss.
Fithout lachcs on his part. Let
ach a principle be applied to our
ostmasters, collectors Of the cus- !,
receivers Of public moneys, I
nd others, who receive more or !.
,ss Of tho public funds, and what !,
'sscs might not be anticipated i
the public2 No such princi- !
lc has been recognized or admit !,
ID as q legal defense. And it il i
clicved the instances are few, If,
any can be found, whore \
ny relief has been given in such -
sscs by the interposition Of Con !,
ross. =
AS every depository receives =
g Office with 4 full knowledge !,
dts responsibilities, he cannot, !;
case Of loss, complain of hard. :
lip. lilo must stand by his
3nd, and moct the hazards which
. voluntarily incurs. Ii
hIhe question certified to us il ii
lswcrrd, that the defendant. q
Id colt, and his sarcties, arc not q
ischargcd from the bond, by q
.lOnioas stealing of tho money, G
ithout any fault or negligence II
! the part of the Depository q
d, consequently, that no such Il
A