The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1900-03-21

which he had placed for safe keeping in
banks. AS result of the public interest
the matter vas called to the attention Of
the grand jury of Logan county and
Judge Burford instructed such grand jury
in substance that while the territorial
treasurer had a right to deposit the ter
ritorial funds in banks and had right
to contract for interest ON such DEPOSITS.
yet the interest received thereon belonged
TO the funds of the territory and that it
was the duty ofthe treasurer to account
for the same TO the territory.
"Acting upon this information an in
vestigation was had and it was learned
that Mr.. Thompson had received from
the Guthrie National bank interest upon
public moneys deposited with such bank
and thegrand jury returned an indictment
against him for the embezzlement of the
interest received By him.
st is our contention" continued Judge
Dale that this interest belongs to the
treasurer and not to the territory. There
is no statute in this territory which pro-
vidies how the territorial treasurer shall
keep the moneys entrusted to him, ex-
cept that he shall safely keep them.
There is no law which prohibits the
treasurer from depositing the money in
banks nor directs that he shall not do 50.
In other words, the legislature has fail
ed to pass any law attempting to regu-
late the manner in which the treasurer
shall handle the funds that come into
his possession, but the law does hold the
treasurer absolutely responsible for the
safe keeping of the funds. Such being
the case, the question Of the liability of
the treasurer for interest must be de-
termined upon the legal phase Of the
case which determines whether or not
he is a bailee or trustee or debtor of
the territory. If bailee or trustee, the
interest belongs to the territory. If a
debtor, the interest belongs to him. Such
appears to be the decision of the courts
passing upon this question. Our statute,
as we contend, makes the treasurer a
debtor; that is to say, the treasurer in all
instances is bound to account for all
funds received. That is true no matter
whether the funds may be lost by reason
Of this negligence or by reason of some
act beyond his power. In either event he
would be bound TO make good the loss.
THE decisions of the courts which
have passed upon questions of a similar
character are not entirely harmonious,
many of them hold that where the labil-
ity is absolute, the treasurer is in the
position of debtor, while some few
have undertaken to make a distinction
by asserting that while the treasurer is
absolutely reliable, he is yet in the at
titude Of a trustee or baflee.
1.-THE supreme courts Of the states Of
Colorado, Indiana, Kentucky and GeOr-
gia havee ach passed upon the identical
question here in dispute under statutes
similar to ours, and have held that the
interest which the treasurer receives
upon the funds of the state deposited in
banks is the money Of the treasurer, and
this principal of law is applied because
it is held that the treasurer is debtor of
the st2[e, and does not stand in the rela-
ton OF bailee or trustee.
In case which came up in the Unit
ed States supreme court, where a con-
sui in China had received funds belonging
to the government and placed them in a
bank, and interest was paid upon the
deposit, it was held that the interest be- |
longed to the fund and not to the indi-
vidual; but under the statutes of the |
United States it is held that the liabil- |
ity of the custodian Of the Office is not |
at all times absolute, that he stands in !
the relation of trustee or baiIee of the |
government. In Wisconsin a case of con-
siderable Importance was under consid- |
Grafton. and it was there held that the |
interest belonged to the state but the |
supreme court, in dealing with the |
question, held that their decision was
by the statutes in that state. |
and that the rule announced in Colorado, |
Indiana, Kentucky and Georgia was, in /
the absence of a statute. the correct rule.
Very many of the other states have
dealt with this question but their decis-
ions are of little value to US in deter
mining the matter presented here, for the
reason that in most of the states the leg
stature has undertaken to control the
question. and of course the legislature
has the power to do so If 1t thinks It the
part Of wisdom.
'In our own territory the supreme court
has held that a county treasurer is alb
solutely liable for the funds coming into
his possession-that IS to say, he stands
n the relation of q debtor to the county;
and we have no doubt but that the su-
)reme court Of the territory will say
hat the territorial treasurer stands in
he relation of a debtor. If it so holds,
we think the conclusion must follow that
whatever Of interest or income may be
added to the funds while in his possession
belongs to the treasurer, and not to- the
erritory.
1.-THE governor Of the territory. believ-
ng thab the question Is one which should
9e speedily settled, and that IL the ter
'itory is entitled TO the interest the ter