Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1873-02-22
THE MCLEAN DRFALoATIOS.

Decision OF Judge BeiskeIl-Ths
Ds,sle1,,ss 81 I'm ee - erer $500 SSl
OOoi
In the First Circuit Court this morn.
ing Judge Heiskell delivered a lengthy,
able aud elaborate opinion in the Nc
Lean defalcAtion case. The points
made by the Judge may be summed up
as follows, and embrace all the points
made by County Attorney Med DWELL,
who has prosecuted the case with ability
and vigor:
First, The court held that Villa m
Mclean and his sureties are liable for
all money collected for all State. county
and railroad taxes.
Second, The bonds taken from the
County Commissioners were valid bonds,
as we're also the bonds taken by Judge
Reeves, of the old Circuit Court.
Third, That all moneys collected for
taxes on unassessed property Of Mclean
would hold him and his sureties liable.
Fourth, That Mclean and his sureties
we're liable for the Tobey checks,
amounting to $4,000, and for the taxes
receipted for to the securities on his
bond, and not paid; on the grounds that
Mclean and sureties were liable for
moneys which he ought to have col
lected, as we'll as for moneys collected.
Fifth, That the lachss Of Esquire
Bleckley, Chairman of the County Court,
in not demanding yearly settlement
and in saying to some of the sureties
that Mclean was all right with the
county, would not discharge those sure
ties who went on his bond
Judge Heiskell decided that Mclean {
liabilities, in accordance with the SEIZED
ule made out by County Attorney Nc
Dowell, were as follows:
For taxes due the county, principal,
interest and damages for the year
1859 mot allowing commissionsl IS 1920 q
For taxes due the county, principal,
interest and damages for the year
1870 mot allowing commissions) ... A,I02 33
For taxes due the county. principal,
interest and damages for the year
1871 mot allowing commissioner. Sc, S0f %
Total. .sl9O.7Ss s.
Taxes due the State for the years
~ ,lOi W
Total amount due State and county. s2l7 ,s9l ~
1t appears that the taxes collected by
Mclean for the years 1869 and 1871 had
been paid over according to law. The
opinion OF Judge Heiskell was fortified
by citations of numerous State and Fed
eral authorities and almost followed the
line Of argument pursued by our able
Cou nty Attorney, Mr.. Mcdowell. 1t is
needless to say that the courtroom was
densely packed to hear the judgment Of
the court in this very important case--u
case defining the liabilities of the Official
servants of our county and State, and
the security of good citizens in promptly
paying the moneys necessary tC
maintain our State and county
governments. This prompt decision o.
the Judge, we may say one of the ablest
and most maturely considered docu
ments emanating from the bench fol
years, will go far to inspire confidence
on the part of tax-paying citizens in the
restoration of official efficiency, and 81
the same time public officers elevated tt
positions of profit and trust will realize
the terrible certainty Of prompt execu.
ton of the laws in relation to derelictiont
of these officers, which, since our late
troubles, have well nigh bankrupted oul
State and county.
1t may not be amiss in this connec
ton to advert to the vigorous admins
tration of the law by our very able
though compa ratively young, judicial
officers. The trite saying that the "Ju'
dietary is the glory of the Government"
is verified in these troubulous times.
The skies are clearing up. Brighter
days are about to dawn upon our hith-
erto sorely afflicted country.