The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-07-08
JURY ORGANIZED TO TRY
 THE SUIT OF THE COUNTY

The jury in the suit of the County vs its Treasurer, J. J. Cochran ana the Fidelity and Deposit Company. was organized yesterday, and today will very probably begin to listen to evidence In the case.
 The work of selecting the jury from the talesmen was completed at the morn ing session, and when court reconvsned at o'clock, the other talesmen were dis missed. Those selected are:
 A J. Duncan, Lomax. Chiffon County; Pollard Johnson. Wetumpka; E. M. Will tumpka; J. B. Hardy. Selma: A. l.. Champion. Highland Home; J. H. Jolley Macon County; c. G. McMorris. We tumpka; A. Kelly. Wetumpka; J. C. Edwards. Elmore County; w. G. Privett Selma and George B. Bryant, Macon County.
 Judge Jones delivered an opin- ion on the countys demurrers to the pleas. set up by the defendants. The decision is highly interesting, and is as follows:
 It. the Circuit Court of the United States
 for the Middle District of Alabama
 The County of Montgomery vs. John
 J. Cochran and the Fidelity and De-
 posit Company of Maryland.-Jones
 District Judge.
 In passing upon the demurrers to the pleas, it is important to bear in mind the precise nature of this suit. It is an ae- ton by the county of Montgomery, against it's treasurer and the sureties upon his official bond. It is .needless to state the allegations of the several counts at any length. It suffices to say that they all count upon breaches of the official bond of the treasurer for noI safely keeping. etc, money which Coch- ran received as treasurer. It is alleged that he converted mbney received by him, either by making d general deposit or an individual deposit, or allowing his agent to make a general deposit in a pri- vate bank, and permitting the bank to convert the money to its own use. It is unnecessary to notice all the defenses set up by the pleas which are numerous. One of the defenses is that no money was paid to Cochran or received by him in payment of the price of certain bonds sold by the county, the proceeds of which it is alleged that Cochran received. An other defense is that the bonds were awarded by the Board of Revenue plain tiff's agent. to Josiah Morris and Com pany for the sum of S111, ,109.5S to be paid in cash upon the delivery of the bonds That Kohn was an employe of the bank, and at the same time Cochrans deputy. and that Kohn knowing that the bank
 
 price of the bonds a check of Josiah Morris and Company on themselves, pay able to Cochran as treasurer. for that amount and handed the check to the Clerk of the Board of Revenue, who re- fused to receive it; and that shortly af- rewards, Kohn acting under power of attorney. which authorized him to do all acts which Cochran could lawfully do gave a receipt to the Board of Revenue in Cochran's name as for so much money received by Cochran from the Board of Revenue. It is further alleged that no money ever actually passed, but that the check of Josiah Morris and Company drawn on themselves, payable to Coch- ran as treasurer, was surrendered to the bank. and that the bank which vas in- solvent. received the check and entered redit for corresponding amount in fa- vor of Cochran on the books of the bank, and shortly afterwards the bank failed, etc.
 The demurrers to these pleas pres9at the important question of law, wheth er the facts presented by the pleas, present any defense: or, to state it in another form. insist that under the facts stated in the pleas, there was a receipt of money by the treasurer, and e conversion of money by him in the eye of the law. which preached the obligation of the be nd to safely keep monies of the county received by him.
 The condition of the bond is that the