The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1890-12-27
suit on the Archer Bond.


The suit against the boudsmen Of Steven
san Archer. late treasurer Of Maryland, began
in the Circuit Court Of Baltimore county on
Thursday Of last week. The case will 90 to
the Court Of Appeals, no matter what the
decision Of the Court below is. The facts in
the case are admitted on both sides. and the
only question at issue is whether the bonds
men are liable for two years, from 1886 to
1858. or for Archer's term. The treasurer is
chosen for two years and holds over until his
successor qualities. Mr.. Archer was reelected
in 1888, but did not qualify by filing a second
bond until the Fall Of 1889. The State con
tends that the bond fled in 1886 is for the
term Of Mr.. Archer, not for two years.
Mr. Archer not qualifying when reelected
his first term extended from February IL.
1886. until the Fall Of 1883, when be re-quali
fed. The counsel for the bondsmen contend
that the bond given in 1886, when Mr.. Archer
was fret chosen, was for two years only, and
the liability Of the bondsmen ceased when
the Two years expired.
IN his closing argument for the State,
Attorney General Whyte said:
THE contract here is one with the people
and the gureties. The office is conferred on
the one side and the honesty Of the official is
guaranteed by the other. The recital on the
bond shows the purpose for which 1t is given,
and the condition shows how far the Obliga-
ton Of the sureties extend. The bond for a
public officer is for his faithful performance
Of duty during his term Of Office. What is a
term Of Office? Official terms are fixed and
uniform: they are the same for all who fill the
Office: there is no extension or expansion by
any reasonable arrangement, dependent on
the whims Of judges in each case, by which
their limit is 10 be ascertalned. IT a vacancy
occurs. there is a residue OF the term TO be
/ filled. We must look TO the bond TO see what
is that term for which the sureties are bound.
IF the term is stated in precise language as
to It's limits, the case is plain, but if 1t is
silent and refers only 10 the constitution or
/ law, then the constitution or law is 10 be
regarded and read as part of the contract.
4 number Of cases were here cited to sustain
this point.
1.-The provision Of the constitution fixing
the term at two years, aud until his successor
Is qualified, is to be Incorporated into the
recital Of the bond and read as if there.
Now, then. when the law describes term,
what that term may be is to be according to
its meaning as construed by the courts"
The encouragement cOntended that the bond
i. good during all the legal duration OF the
term. They knew what it was. They con
tracted with the knowledge that Archer was
to hold the office until his successor was
qualified. ''They knew that their bond re-
duired him to hand over unto his lawfully
qualified successor in Office all the bonds and
-, btz bapHa "a and until
he did that their bond was liable. It mattered
not how many delays or neglect of duty oc
Cured in securing qualified successor, I'M
Ill that was done they were responsible for
him as treasurer" He cited Nd, 22l, and
80 Nd, IS, to show that the term of the
Office continued until his successor quail
fed. " and that Archer held until that moment
Of time. as an officer de jure, and not de
facto. He reviewed the cases in other States
where there were conflicting decisions, and
while explaining some, maintained that they
had no binding effect in this State, where the
point had been practically decided in State
vs. Wayman, Gill & johnson, 254; in which
case, also, the court held that no misconduct
or neglect Of duty in other officers affected
the liability Of the bondsmen. He showed
that there could be no termination Of the
Office until the successor had taken the oath
of Office.
He replied to Mr.. Cans statement that
the Governor should have filled the Office
after February 10, 1888, by reading clauses
of the constitution 10 show that there was no
vacancy IN the Office to be filled. Archer,
not having qualified, was still in under the
appointment Of 1886, and while the constitu
ton said that the treasurer elected should
take the oath of office within one month, this
was directory and not mandatory, and to get
rid Of him it was necessary for the Legislature
Of 1888, being thenin session, to have declared
his Office forfeited and proceeded to new
election This is what the constitution
means, and all the denunciation of the Gov
ernor for not appointing another treasurer
has no meaning, for he had no power under
the circumstances TO make such appoint
mcnt
Court adjourned on Tuesday until January
9TH, and the Judges announced that they
would decide the point raised by the counsel
for the bondsmen few days before that date.