The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-07-04
SENSATIONAL PLEAS FILED
 IN THE SUIT OF THE COUNTY

the treasury, but upon the amount or money which the Treasurer still had on
 band. The statement of the proposltioa shows that it can net be the law.
 l "Now then. we have suit brought by the county on an admitted cause or ac- tion against an individual, the fruits or l which. when recovered, must go into the pockets of the county treasurer, ana not into the pocket of the indiviouai Cochran. What reason can there De for denying a right . of acton, the | money when collected, on JuoeIneh' against the individual Cochran, VIII go into the county treasury as the property of the county, because Cochran the debtor in another capacity, is entitieo as an official to receive and hold tne
 money? The treasurer's possession IS the possession of the county. He hoios and keeps for It's benefit, as mere public custodian of money, the legal ana eauita-
 ble title to which bslongs to the county. The result of the suit is to put back into 1 the treasury of the county the money
 which was unlawfully taken out of II | In that respect the judgment but works the performance of duty. which II IS l incumbent upon the treasurer to perform I voluntarily, and a like obligation rests on Cochran as an individual. When the
 money goes into the pocket of the treasu- | Ter, the treasurer's bondsmen become | liable for 1t. There Is quite dlnerence
 between the pocket of the county | treasurer. and the pocket of the individ- | ual Cochran. The fact that the individual l who may be coerced to pay the judgment in another capacity, happens to pc I the county treasurer, is no reason why that the individual against whom the | county has plain cause of acton shali
 not meet his liability to the county There is no foundation in reason or au- 1 thority for holding that the nunty small not maintain it's right of action, merely | because the law provides that when the judgment is satisfied, the fruits shall go
 into the hands of the country treasurer. from whose custody no county authority l can take 1t except in payment of war
 rants drawn on the fund. Allowing the
 county to prosecute its suit to judgment
 settles the fact of conversion and the
 disputed liability for it, and stops the
 running of the statute of limitation; ana
 the coercing of satisfaction by an execu-
 ton the fruits of which go into the chan , nels prescribed by law. to be held for the
 benefit of the county, redresses the wrong and puts the money where the law re- , l quires 1t to be placed and kept as the , property of the county, and does not , violate any right of the individual Coeh- ran. There is no reason why the county should not prosecute it's suit and have , | Jud8nlenL ana e8ccuIlOn dlHSl nun, H. I upon the facts developed in the trial, it , be found that the county is entitled to recover.
 } lawyers representing Mir. Cochran and , the bond company filed the sensational ' pleas.
 These pleas set up in the first place that the Fidelity and Deposit Company
 of Maryland did not execute the bond of MT. Cochran at all, and consequently the county cannot recover anything. They } contend if this be true, which they say 7 they will be able to prove, 1t will defeat
 the whole suit
 Another batch of pleas were filed which contend in substance that MT. Cochran was County Treasurer at the commence l mont of the suit, and is now under bond. 3 and is the sole custodian of the money n Of the county with the right to hold it; that the county has no right to receive . | or recover it.
 : The sensational allegations upon which . the defendants largely rest their case
 are contained in the third series of pleas . submitted to the court. These pleas n are in substance that the law authorlzine n the county of Montgomery to issue $1e0. | 900 of bonds required that they be sold fol o cash and that the money resulting tkere' from be paid to tine County Treasurer o that the bonds were sold under an agree 6 ment, that they were to hC paid for 1T .- cash and that the bonds were not paiC
 for In cash; that no money es the pro |, ceeds of the bonds was eecr received bS ', MT. Cochr9n as County Treasurer or by any one acting for him.
 - Continuing, the pleas contend that in l- stead of selling the bonds for cash as re
 quired by the law authorizing their is a suence, Charles A. Alien, Clerk of thC fl Board of Revenue, delivered the bonds tC - less check" that John P. Kohn wal e acting in the dual capacity in the transac d tion as a~clerk of Josiah Morris & Co; e and as gAdeputy for MT. Cochran witl V money only, all of which 1t is alleged y Mir. Allen knew at the time of the de 's livery of the bonds and the acceptance II of the check. It is further alleged bl > ths pleas that John P. Kohn in exchang IT for the check gave a receipt signed in th tt name of MT. Cochran as though he hae d received money; tat this worthless checl
 was for $l1l iO9 5S and that Mir. kohl knew at the time he drew the check upoi e Josiah Morris & Co, for the bonds ant ' received it as deputy of the Count! e Treasurer that there was less than 5000 F in the bank and that the check could no 'r Tke pleas contend further that MT N Cochran knew nothing about the trans action from beginning to end until afte U the failure of the banking house of Jo '- sah Morris & O., about two weeks later 1t and that as soon as MT. Cochran learned D about the transaction he repudiated tn 'r Counsel for the county announced tha IS they would be ready to file demurrers an, St answers to the pleas this morning Judg J. Jones called attention to the fact tha h today is a national holiday, saying, how a ever, that he was willing to hold hi
 court open today if 1t better suited tn f parties concerned. After a consultation E the lawyers for the county announces It that they could not prepare their demur If rers for submission this moning, and tn Is court adjourned until Saturday morning
 at 9:30 o'clock.
 Meanwhile, upon the suggestion O 'T Capt. John c. Finley, County Attorney and Hon. Jesse F. Stallings, who repre- e. sents the county in the suit, specia t. meeting of the Board of Revenue wa ,e called at the County Court House. It ,s said that as a result of the phases O '1 the case which have developed, 1t wa -o suggested by the lawyers that the sui l- might be compromised. A member of tn ,e Board of Revenue said last night tha
 the Board unanimously rejected an T., proposition looking to a compromise 0 ,e the suit and directed the lawyers to figh '" n it to finish.
 IT Mir. Whelan of Baltimore President 0 m the bond company, who is in the cit " assisting in the defense of the suit, sai ,e last night that his company had at n " time suggested a compromise and tha ,S5 no such proposition had come from hiI ~ or from his company
 Hon. Thomas H. Watts, who, with Nil n Cans, a Baltimore lawyer, is representa- ot Mir. Cochran and the bond company. sai A in an interview last night that the cas # would be tried on its merits. He said ~ was probable a jury would be drawn i u the United States Circuit Court Monday and that much testimony would be taker le Among the witnesses who have bee