The record-union., 1897-01-27
THE CUSTODY OF PUBLIC FUNDS

The Record Union has repeatedly
entered its protest against the passage
Of any money held by a county or muni-
cipal Treasurer, out fsuch official hands
except upon legal warrant, and by
methods prescribed by law. The occa-
sion for such protest has been the dan
gerous and illegal practice Of depositing
public funds in private banking and
other institutions under the specious
plea Of safe keeping" and the great
danger of loss Of public funds
through chicane, bad Judgment political
assessing and rascality.
The intention Of the law-and it is
based upon a wise policy-is that the
custodian Of any official fund shall keep
that fund, and the Identical money
units in his actual position and as re-
ceived, and shall disburse the same only
upon legal calls, as by statute or ordi-
nance provided. In nine cases out Of ten
transfer of funds from the legal custo-
dian to private keeping, is made to en-
able private banks or individuals to use
the same for their own profit
It is not only unwise and dangerous,
but a decided wrong to those who pay
taxes, to capitalize any person or bank
with the money Of a town, city or coun-
ty. Not only is it direct abuse of power
and a distinct violation of the duty I'M
posed upon official custodians, 1t is an
unfair advantage given to one dnsbtu-
ton, bank or person in the community.
This, however, is the very least Of the
many objections to the system Of keep
ing money of the people in outside de-
positories subject to the handling and
use of others than official custodians.
The very recent cases Of the city and
county Of Tacoma are in point in sup
port Of our contention In that in
stance the county and the municipal
funds were deposited by their lawful
custodians with public assent, in several
banks, some of which had been formed
with the purpose In view Of banking
upon capital to be thus secured. The
result is well known; the banks failed
and the public funds were lost More
recently still the failure Of the Town
Bank of Newport, Kentucky, resulted
An the loss of the public money OF two
municipal communities in that State.
unnumerable cases Of that order are OF
pews record.
To recapitulate, the chief reasons sup
porting the protest referred to are, that
the law prohibits the lending of any pub
lie funds by counties or municipalities.
1T expressly prohibits the placing or
public money in other than official GUS
tody or keeping it in other than actual
possession and absolute control by such
custodian. 1t emphatically inhibits the
use or handling OF public money by any
one except the custodian chosen by the
people under the law, or for any pur-
poses except those nominated in the
law.
In the late Sonoma County case the
courts explicitly interpreted these laws,
cover their violation or avoidance. 1t is
dangerous for many obvious reasons for
sny lawful custodian to part with actual
possession of money Of the public placed
In his hands save upon legal demand. 1t
is the policy Of the law that every Gus
todian of public money must be pre-
pared to visibly present the actual
money, the identical coin and notes,
and not their equivalent or substitute. or
TO exhibit a lawfully executed voucher
for the same.
But despite these mandates and ex-
press provisions of law the statute is de-
family violated, and impudently de-
rided. Early last December the atten-
Hon of members of the Legislature about
TO assemble was called to the necessity
for enactments to give greater vitality
to these mandates Of the statute, and