The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1899-12-23
VERDICT FOR COUNTY
0oran Jury Made a Report
Yesterday.
ON FINDINGS OF FACT
County Is Awarded the Sum
of S31,83734

insisted by some that Amidon was de-
pressed by finding S. Nevertheless this
has been a notable case and Amidon, as
the county's attorney, has snatched vic
tory from apparent failure of the jury
to agree. Herbert E. Patterson, expert
accountant, has reason to congratulate
himself too
At half past 3 o'clock yesterday after
noon the jury returned their completed
work, all the findings Of fact had been
answered but two and the verdict, signed
by the foreman, fixed the amount of re-
covery against the various defendants
The long agony and uncertainty was over
This verdict, with interest, which amounts
to more than $4,000, will fall pretty heavy
on the defendants-men who for friend
ship stood bound to pay for any defalca-
ton the treasurer might make. It is a
hard situation. 1t is a big sum to pay
able to collect the judgment. The bonds
men are entitled to sympathy, but what
is due the public must be paid.
When the verdict was announced and
the special findings read in open court,
there was whispering among the defend
ants attorneys as to what should be done.
Finding 66 is that there has been no evil
dence introduced from which the true state
Of Doran's account could be ascertained.
The jury were instructed that the pre-
sumption was that when Doran closed
his first term and made settlement he
honestly turned over all monies belonging
to and due the county and unless there
were some evidence to the contrary this
presumption must control their verdict.
Defendants attorneys will rely on this
finding as one point to overthrow the YER
dict. If there were no evidence to dis
close the true state of Dorans account
October 8, 1894, how could the jury find
shortage? the defendants argue.
The jury had a long and difficult task
They were in some sense confused by
legal technicalities and the mysteries Of
bookkeeping, cash and cash items. But
they did their work conscientiously and
there seems to be a general relief that
there is a verdict. The battle will be
fought in the supreme court but there
will be no more days of debating jury-like
al a SlOSCN IiO SNIdGHCO VIII llOL
be re-introduced unless this terdict is set
aside, and courts hesitate to override YER
diets of juries.
Several lawyers on the defense have
argued themselves into the belief that
there was no shortage in Dorars ac-
counts during the first term. In arguing
themselves into this belief they have, by
their serious contention, made many other
people believe there was no shortage dur
ing the first term. 1t would not be rea-
sonable that man, a candidate for re-
election, with the books open to inspec-
ton would take such chances. This is
rather remarka understandable that the
matter escaped detection. Twelve men
find that shortage did occur and the
amount they find is 81, 927.49, at one time
s42, 32S. So. With the books open to coun-
ty clerk and county commissioners, nearly
$4,000 disappears.
Judge Dale instructed the jury: you
are further instructed, that if you find
by a preponderance Of evidence, that on
the first day OF October, 1894. at the an
nual settlement for that year, there was
a shortage in DOran's accounts as treas
urer, covering the term of one year pre-
Ceding said time, and at the end of his
first term, October 9Th, 1894, he did not &C
count for the same, and turn the same
over to himself as treasurer for the sec
ond term, then and in that event said
misappropriation would date from Octo-
Der l, 1894 and as this case was COM
menced on the first day of September.
1897 the same would not be barred by the
three years statute of limitation"
Findings 81, IS. SO and 60 are as fol-
lows:
57-Tf Mr.. Patterson, IN making up his
balance sheet, given Doran credit for all
cash and cash &ms on hand on the 1st
day of October. 1894. would the same have
shown shortage in Dorans accounts?
Ayes.
5S--It you answer the above question af-
state how much.
A.-s42, 32S So.
59-If you find from the evidence that
Doran was short in his accounts on the
9th of October, 1894, state how much you
find said shortage to be.
A.-SSS. S2097.
60--If you find from the evidence there
was a shortage, then state how much of
said shortage occurred prior to September
/, 1894
Ave have no evidence.
According to these findings Doran was
short October /. 1895. so. 1855 and on Oc-
tober 9, 1894. SIS. SS0s7. The evident pur-
pose of finding 90 was to fix the time 50
that the three-year statute OF limitation
would bar al shortage prior to September
l. 1894. However, the court instructed the
jury that if there was shortage on Oc-
tooer l. 1894. or at the time Doran sue
ceeded himself. October g. 1884. and he
did not then turn over all monies be-
longing to the county then the misappro-
priation would date from the 9Th Of Octo-
Der. 1894. and would not be barred ny the
statute Of limitation on the 1st Of Septem-
Der. 1897. II this instruction l. correct law
then it would make no difference whether
or not there was any evidence as 70
shortage on the 1st day OF September.
1854 However. II the supreme court should
take the view that the limitation statute
would begin 10 run at the time the sep
srste misappropriations were made. then
i "outQ ne very material 70 KNOW Just
what misrepresentation took place prior
to September !. 1894.
II should be noted that the amount sued
for in this case was Ss2.SoS.65- The short
age. as found by special finding =. is Sse.-
Is. =. The suit was brought on ExDert
PatJerson's report 70 the board OF county
and the finring Is a CON-
piete vindicstion OF PatterSon's figures.
While IL may De a little diificule 10 fol
lew the jury in their findings o. 81 ~ s.
October !. 1854. and SIS. SSas7 October 9.
.Ss4 and s.. 81. ~ on September !. 1887. the
amount Of the verdict. ye, it must be con-
ceied that hnding > is al that Herbert
Patterson could ask