The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-05-08
NOTES MARKED PAID.
REPORTED THAT THE GRAND
JURY WAS INVESTIGATING
SOME PAPER
OF MINNESOTA SAVINGS BANK.
ONE NOTE SAID TO HAVE FOUND
IT'S WAY TO MAN.
kATO.
OF MINNESOTA SAVINGS BANK.
HAS NOT YET BEEN TAKEN UP.
Other Matters Which the Body Now
Examining Bank Affairs Are said
to Have Considered.

II was reported last night that the
grand jury spent most of its Tune yes
terday Investigating the course Oh
number of notes which were held by
the Minnesota Savings bank. One OF
these notes. it was reported, was for
$780, and had been drawn payable in
ninety days. 1t was said that the
grand jury was told that the books of
the bank showed the note had been
marked paid, but Clarence Saulspaugh,
who is said to have been a. witness,
told the grand jury that he had seen
the note in Mankatc. and that it was
sent there to raise money at bank
at that place. 1t was also said the
grand jury was told that if they found
a ncte had been marked paid and that
it haG not been actually paid but sent
out for the purpose Of raising money,
or otherwise disposed of, that the
crime of marking the note paid" was
an act of forgery on the part of some
body. Two other notes We're reported
to have gone the same way, but they
did not find their way to Mankato.
The grand jury convened promptly
at 2:15 p. m. yesterday and remained
in session until 4:3O, when they ad
journed until 2:15 .. m. Monday. In
addition to Mr.. Saulspaugh, P. D.
Street, the Minnesota Savings bank
note teller, was called in before the
jury. Considera BILE attention was also
bestowed upon the Bank of Minnesota,
as Receiver Frank A. Seymour was in
attendance as was also Assistant State
Bank Examiner Lonegren.
MICHAELs' BAIL MONEY.
Judge Kelly Says Clerk Conroy Is
Responsible for 1t.
The clerk of the municipal court and
the sureties on his bond are liable alb
solutely for public moneys deposited
with the clerk, though the money may
have been lost or stolen without fault
or negligence on the part of the clerk.
Such is the decision of Judge Kelly,
embodied IN an order filed yesterday in
the suit of Leon Michaals against
Thomas F. Conroy, clerk of the munich
pal court, and his bonsmen, Timothy
Reardon and Patrick O'Halloran,
brought to recover $500 deposited with
Conroy as bail money.
Michaels and his brother were
brought into the municipal court
CHdIStu Will UllSuSInSduOT. 1Il6lI
cases were continued and bail was
fixed at $10O in each case. Michaels
thereupon deposited $500 with Clerk
Conroy to secure the appearance of
himself and brother in court for trial.
Upon the trial both We're acquitted
and discharged, but when Michaels APP
piled to Clerk Conroy for the return of
the $780, he was Informed that Mr..
COnroy had deposited it in the Mime
sofa Savings bank which had since
failed. To settle the question of the
liability in such cases, rather than to
get out Of the payment of the bail
money, Mr.. Conroy. on the advice Of
his attorney, decided to have the mat
ter settled in the court. Judge Kelly
after citing in his memorandum from
the municipal code to show that the
municipal court has all the powers
conferred upon justices of the peace,
and that they may accept money as
bail adds:
l therefore hold in this case that the 5000
deposited in the municipal court by plaintiff
as security for the appearance of himself and
another as set out in the complaint, came
into the custody of the defendant, Conroy, as
clerk of said court and lin virtue or by rea-
son of his Office. And a failure to account
for it, unless excused by law, is breach of
his official bond.
The next important question is, Does the
answer plead any defense which in law will
after its purpose in the court as bail has
been fulfilled? Or, to otherwise state it, is
the deposit by the clerk of the municipal
court of bail moneys received by him. if
made in good faith with bank which after
wards failed any defense to a suit for the
money brought against the clerk and his
bondsmen? %
| The rule in Minnesota is that public officers
| and their sureties are liable absolutely for
| public moneys, although stolen or lost with
| out fault or negligence en- the part of such
| officers County Commissioners, ETC., VS..
| Gilbert ct al, 10 MINI. Gl.) 176; Board of
| Education VS.. Jewell, A Mimi, 427.
| There is no difference in principle between
! the accountability of such officers for public
moneys or for the moneys of private persons
! when those moneys are received and held
''by virtue of and by reason of his office. "
! The defendant, Conroy, received plaintiff S
money, not in his private capacity, but as
| clerk of the municipal court. AS such clerk
| the bond required by law and executed by
/ him is conditioned in the language of the
| statute: That he will at all times pay over
! to all persons on demand all moneys to
which they may be entitled which may have
! come into his hands in virtue by reason of
| mis- Office (Section 262, page 100, Municipal
| Code 1881
AS is said in Board of Education VS.. Jewell,
supra, where the statute and the bond i'm
poses the duty of payment accountability
! without condition, the obligation is absolute
and the plea that the money has been lost
without fault of tho officer constitutes M