The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-04-13
THE BONDSMEN HELD.
Effect of Supreme Court Decis-
ion in the G.. D. Hill Case.
SHORTAGE MUST BE REFUNDED
Decided That the Board Of County Com
missioners Are Not Clothed With
judicial Powers.

The case of King county against e. p.
Ferry, Eben Smith and David kellogg, ex-
ecutors of George D. Hill, deceased. and
others, in which Judgment was rendered
against Hill, and an appeal was taken, has
been decided by the supreme court, and
the judgment of the lower court affirmed.
It was suit brought by King county
against George d. Hill and his sureties,
upon his official bond as treasurer of the
county, to recover specified sum of
money alleged to have been received by
Hill as treasurer during his term of Office
in 1881 and 1882, but which he failed to
account for to the proper authorities, or to
turn over to his successor in Office. The
case was tried by referee, who heard the
testimony and reported it with his con-
illusions of law and findings of facts to the
court.
The referee found that Hill made a set
Element of his account with the board of
county commissioners, as required by law,
and received credits accordingly; that
during his term of Office as treasurer he re-
ceived various sums of money amounting
in the aggregate to $50. 297 or, but that he
did not account to the authorities for
$12,472.16 Of this money on account of
certain mistakes and errors of Hill and
the auditor and commissioners of King
county.
The defendants moved to set aside the
report of the referee, but the court denied
the motion and entered judgment for the
plaintiff in accordance with the referees
report. The case was appealed to the su-
preme court by defendants, who alleged
that eleven errors were committed in the
rulings of the court in settling the plead
ings in the case. The supreme court was
unable to perceive any substantial error in
the pleadings, and also held that the court
below committed no error in denying de-
PENDANTS motion for new trial, for the
reason that the facts found were true, and
the evidence warranted the findings, and
that the facts found justified the conclu-
sions Of law arrived at by the referee.
The supreme court also held that the
court below would not be warranted in
setting aside the report of a referee, ex-
cept for reasons which would make it the
clear duty Of the trial judge to set aside
the verdict of a jury and order new trial.
Hills counsel contended that the
treasurer's settlement with the county
commissioners was conclusive between the
parties and that the board in making such
settlement acted in judicial capacity
and its decision could not be attacked.
But the supreme court declared that posi-
ton to be untenable, for the reason that
the judicial power of the territory of
Washington was vested by the organic
act in supreme court, district courts,
probate courts and justices of the peace,
and it follows therefore that the board of
county commissioners could not have been
clothed with judicial powers or functions,
even by an act Of the legislature, and
much less could they exercise such func-
tons in the absence Of legislative enact
ment.
The power exercised by the board of
county commissioners in making settle
ments with the treasurer is held to be
purely of a ministerial character and not
in any manner partaking of a judicial de-