Mineral Point tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1869-1938, 1893-01-14


be decisive of the judment when
ought to be rendered in the case.
/, 1t is assumed for the purpose OF
the case that if the legal title to the
public funds which lawfully came to the
hands OF Treasurer McEetridge was
vested in him, there can be no recovery
10y the state, either against him, or the
SureueS in his official bond, for any pro-
ht he may have made by the use Of
such funds.
The question whether the state is thu
owner Of the public funds in the hands
OF its treasurer, or whether the legal
ute thereto is in the treasurer, must be
determined 10y the statutes prescribing
the rights, duties and liabilities of the
treasurer. These statutes will be refer
red to and considered MS briefly as pos
Sble
Sec, l52, Il, S. is as follows. "The
treasurer shall keep his office at the
capitol shall receive and have charge
of all money paid into the state treas
ury, and shall pay out the same as di-
rected 10y law" Sex, 1913 requires him
20 give b,nd with sureueS conditioned
amongst other thingsl for the faithful
discharge OF the duucs Of his office.
and that ne shall deliver to his success
sor IN office, or other person authorized
to receive the same, all moneys. pro
perry, etc, belonging to his said Office. d"
Sec. l5i requires the governor to exact
an additional bond Of the treasurer in
several contingencies, one OF hich is
whenever the funds in the treasury
shall exceed the amount of the treas
urerS bond Sec. 157, subdivision I. .
makes ii the duty OF the treasurer to
keep a cash. book and TO enter therein
"a detailed account of all money rccciv-
ed by him and diShurSed," which book
he is required to deposit weekly with
the secretary of state. Subdivision =
makes 1t the duty OF the treasurer so
pay out OF the state treasury on de-
mand, the amounts specified in proper
warrants drawn by the secretary Of
state, and provides that che shall pay
no money out of the treasury" except
in pursuance Of some law, authorizing
him TO do so. Subdivision 7 requires
him to report quarter yearly to the
governor the total amount Of funds
in the treasury, specifying in what
kinds of currency they consist and the
amount Of each kind etc Subdiyis
ion s requires him also TO report 20 the
governor at stated times, "a fun and
l. ali
ed into and paid out Of the treasury
during the times specified In the stat
ute See 80 is rs follows; 1.-THE gov
ernor and attorney general shall, ut
least once in each quarter year and AT
such other times as the governor may
elect, examine and see that all the
money appearing by the books of the
secretary OF state and state treasurer
as belonging TO the several funds Is ia
the vaults OF the treasury; and I'm ease
OF Il deficiency, shall require the treas
urcr TO make M such deficiency inn
mcdiatcly and If such treasurer shall
refuse or neglect for ten days there
after TO have the fun sum belonging to
said funds in the treasury, the attorney
general shall institute proceedings To
recover the same" Sec 4tl9, the pro
visions OF which doubtless extend to
and include the state treasurer, makes
il prfma facie evidence of the embezzle-
ment thereof IL the treasurer loans or
deposits the public moneys in his hands
for his own gain, profit or advantage
without special authority" This section
also contains the following provision:
Every public officer shall promptly
nav over as required 10y law, the same
moneys received and held by linn 10y
virtue Of his office, and the whole there
Of"
The above statutes were all in force
when, and for a long time before. the
bond i'm suit was executed. From be-
ginning TO end they are entirely incon-
sistent with the theory that the lcgis-
lature intended by the enactment of
any Of them to vest the state treasurer
with the legal ownership Of the public
moneys which come to his hands, thus
making MIN merely the debtor Of the
state in respect thereto, If such were
his relation to the state, it would be
difficult to show that such funds were
not subject to be seized for his debts,
or in case Of the death Of the treasurer
I'm office, that the same would not so
10 his administrator as part and parcel
of his cstate,-,he state being, perhaps,
preferred creditor It Is inconceiy-
able that any legislature could intend
such results, and there is nothing IN
any statute which forces the conclusion
that they did so. A close analysis OF
the above statutes, or any extended dis
cussion Of them, is suite unnecessary
for a pursual Of them Is sufficient 10
carry conviction to the mind that the
legislature never intended to divest the
state OF its title 10 the public funds in
the hands Of It's treasurer, and the con-
seauent control over those funds when
results from ownership thereof We
must. therefore, negative the first prop
osition above stated and hold that
the state was the owner Of the public
funds which came to the hands OF
Treasurer McFetridge. Some OF the
above statutes are hereinafter referred