Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1892-01-21

Perley VS.. Muskegon, supra: U. 8 "a
Thomas. supra. No decision TO the con.
trary is Known where there were st4tntes
directing the mode and place of
keeping the funds.
But, it is objected that the state cannot
recover this interest because it must trace
its title to it, il at all, through series of
| unlawful transactions Ii it is established
that the principal fund which earned the
interest was the property of the state.
this objection does not seem to be insuper.
able. The depositing of the money in
the banks by the treasurer for his own
gain was forbidden and unlawful. On its
civil side at least the unlawful! act was a
1ort-a conversion of the states money.
he eonveCsi IN did not dispace the states
tile, The fund was still the states money
Inc accessory followed its principal. the
aecretlon was the state's monsy-Tne I. s.
| Mosby. l33; .. S. 273-2S6. But the treas.
urer can trace title to the interest only
through his own wrongful act This bs
cannot be allowed to do. That would ha
violation of that most ancient and wida.
lY applied maxim of the law no mar
shall profit by his own wrong. The de-
PENDANT has not even plausible claim Of
legal title to this interest. 1t would in
deed be a startling legal paradox. if the
treasurer, being forbidden by law 10 de-
posit the public funds for his own gain.
could yet do the very thing forbidden and
get away with his gains, according to
law. This interest was, also, received in
TO the state treasury. 1t was paid 10 the
treasury without restriction. There was
no way for the banks to paw the money
into the frpo l,,,t - -
hands Of the treasurer ANY subtle ais
tinction between paying to the treasurer
and paying into the treasury is sp,cious
and Elusive. 1t is not certain
that any of this money came into the
vaults of the treasury. No money is paid
into the vaults of the treasury. 1t is paid
TO the treasurer. 1t is then In legal com
temptation in the treasury. PEOPLE vs..
Mckinney. 10 Mich, 81. 1t is then a
treasurer's duty to put it into the vault.
Whether he do so does not affect the
ownership of the money. 1t is the treas
urer's duty to deliver to his successor in
office, ali moneys, books, records, papers.
furniture and other effects belonging to or
preserved in his office. Section l56:
These interest moneys belong to his Office.
He has not faithfully discharged the du
ties of his office until he has delivered
them to his successor in office. It is not
considered that a long continued practice
OF state treasurers to deposit public money
Ia banks for their own gain is such a
practical construction of the statute. by
Ofhoers charged To the execution of the lau
as to be of any controlling influence. 1t is
only in cases of real doubt that con-
struction is allowable WhetF er the law
contemplated that the treasurer might
deposit public moneys in the banks for
his own gain is not perceived to.
have been doubtful since chapter $40 of
the laws of 1876 cana II force however,
it may have been before. Nor is it con
sldered that the delay of the state to claim
this money acts in any way as bar to its
right or cloud upon its good faith. The
law Is the standard of the treasurer duty
and the measure of his right. 1t all the
while warned BIN that this was not his
money.
Judgment should be for the state for
the amount of moneys detained by the
treasurers with interest from the time
when it should have been paid to their
successors.