Mineral Point tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1869-1938, 1892-09-17


Jy tie deposits and damages for their
conversion. such tight of actIon
ceased when the entire amount Of The
funds deposited was duly applied by
the treasurer to the public cause or
turned over to his successor. Thereby
The conversion of tho moneys Of the
state by their deposit in banks was
cured
We contend tnat the action cannot
he maintained without ratification Of
the unlawful act; that the governor,
treasurer and attorney general who di-
/. mtify it as thy could not have authorized
/ Iected the action were incompetent to
/ it as they could not have authorized
the dealings originally and it follows
dat the action was commenced with.
/ out lawful authority We contend that
/ the moneys referred TO in tie bond arc
! those moneys Ouly which the treasurer
/ WAS by statute required to receive
or might have received are not meant.
( The expression can only mean moneys
actually realized and belonging to his
Office
The loan or deposit of the funds of
the state by the treasurer to or with
/ banks or bankers upon interest or 9th
eIwise, unless such funds in bank sub
ject to instant check be deemed to be
in the treasury (as now declared by
Statute), was not only unauthorized
but was punished by statute as a crime,
when made for his CWn gain by the
treasurer it was declared to he prlma
facia evidence Of embezzlement. The
private gains of the treasurer obtained
. by means Of a violation Of law do
nounced as a crime. cannot under any
just Iulc Of Interpretation be deemed
moneys belonging to his office.
Another strong and we Judge control
ling ground for our contention that the
moneys in dispute were moneys belong
ing TO The treasurer's Office. is to be
found III the settled doctrine that by
the statute and the terms Of his bond
the treasurer was made insurer of the
funds.
1t was assumed On the statute Of
1876 that the treasurer might deposit
such funds for his own gain in viola
ton of law, but there We're no require
ments that such gain should be Maid
into the treasury. On this point the
statute was silent.
Mr.. Stark next spoke at length of the
custom that had grown up Of treasurers
receiving interest ON deposits and that
It was generally known ana allowed to
continue. In closing he said: If there
be a doubt on this point we point to
the history Of the state for nearly forty
years to the uniform understanding
and practice of The executive department
OF the state, 70 the act and proceedings
OF the legislature year after year, to
IFS special action in 1876 and 1873 and
to other proofs, an showing that the
construction for which we contend was
universally accepted And acted upon as
the true one during an these years, aud
urge tha such uniform and lOng-contiu- /
ued executive and legislative c0nsuuc-
lion Of the law ought to remove every
doubt md Conclusiyely settle this ques.
ton
Mr. Stark begged the attention Of
the court 10 the peculiar relation of
the state treasurer to The state and
iis funds
The treasurer he Md holds his office
under tha constitution for the term of
two years lie can be removed from
Office only by impeachment. lie is
given 10y statute exclusive charge and +
control &C the fHlds Of the state. No
etber Citicer or board Of officers has any
power % direct him in respect to such /.