The Pascagoula democrat-star. (Pascagoula, Miss.) 1878-1920, 1880-07-09
supreme Court Decisions.
APRIL TERM, 1880.

j. ,. HOSKINS, J
vs.. No. 3lJ0.
j. S. Baker.
Appeal from the circuit court of
Holmes county, lion. VIM. Cochran,
Judge.
Baker, claiming to have been
elected sheriff OF Holmes county,
brought this writ of gaO rdrTdato
against HOskins, who as former
sheriff holds over until his success
sor shall have been elected and
qualified.
One of the pleas filed by Hoskins
alleged that Baker was " liable for
public moneys unaccounted for,'
and therefore disqualified under
section l6, article 4 of the consti.
tuition.
Some years ago Baker acted as
deputy for one Loyerin, sheriff I'M.
der n contract by which the former
was to discharge all the duties and
and receive all the emoluments of
the office. Baker collected large
sums of State and county taxes
which he failed to pay over, aud for
which suits were brought against
LOverin and Sureties, of whom
Baker was one. Under special acts
these suits were compromised aud
the sums agreed ON were paid by
the suretieS. The act authorizing
a compromise of State tax extended
only to the amount then in suit.
The receipt of the District Attorney,
though broader in terms, must be
limited to that amount. Acts 1877,
p. 80.
Baker then owed, and still owes
the further sum of s2,100, col.
lected for liquor licenses, otc., which
was not known, and therefore not
embraced in the compromise. The
relator obtained Judgment in the
courts below. The provision of the
constitution is as follows:
"No petson liable for public
moneys unaccounted for, shall be
eligible
to any Office Of profit or trust until
he shall have accounted for and
paid over all sums for which he
may have been table,
Held
l. This language is not confined
to public officers. "No person liza.
bic =" is the expression, and it EN-.
braces all who have in any manner
become recipients and holders OF
the public revenue.
2. The relator is considered incl.
igible, not upon the ground that he
was deputy of public officer, or
surety upon the bond, but be.
cause it is admitted that he himself
collected aud still retains aportion
Of the public moneys. There must
be some element OF personal de.
fault, some right in the State to de-
mand of him the payment of its
revenue which he has appropriated.
Whenever this is the case, the in.
eligibility will attach, regardlets of
the manner in which, OF the person
by whom the money is retained.
3. The fact that the State may,
under the private contract between
Baker aud Loverin, hold the latter
aud his sureties liable, does not ac.
Quit the relator of the liability rest.
| ing upon hlm. He is ineligible to
any office of profit or trust so long
as he remains liable for public
moneys.
4. 1t being conceded that Baker
obtained u majority OF the votes
returned and counted, sbut being
disqualified to hold the Office, Hos
kins will hold over until bis success
sor is elected aud qualified. 1t is
the duty of the board of supervI.
sors to order an election. Sabtett
as Bedpell, AZ Miss, 2GG.
RorerSed and information dismissed.
Opinion by Chalmers, }.
II. $. Allen, q. A. Wilson and
Hookcrand Groce, for appellants.
q. Il. Gwin, for appellee.
-----<s. CD -
| ni,I Nn.Ifs flnnIy-