The daily star-mirror. (Moscow, Idaho) 1911-1939, 1921-09-20
RENDERS DECISION
FOR \. FORK |D|sTR|CT
is IMPORTANT FOR HIGHWAYS
DISTRICTS TO CONSIDER
A CITATION OF LAWS.

solvency of the Fidelity State Bank OF
Orofino as follows:
The evidence in this case shows
that on the 9th day of April, 1921, the
petitioner, the North Fork highway
district deposited in the bank, on that
date, and on subsequent dates, prior
to the time the bank failed, the sum
of about $4,000, and that about
$17, 400 was SO deposited in the bank
when it failed
The North Fork highway district has
petitioned the court to have the said
amount of money SO deposited, de-
clared to be special deposit and
trust fund held by the bank, which is
entitled to have its claim paid in full
prior to the claim of the general
creditors
In 1910 statute was enacted by
the legislature declaring that no pub
lie funds should be deposited in any
bank except upon a special deposit,
and providing heavy penalties for any
public official, and for the bank which
received the same, for depositing
money in any other way than upon
special deposit.
In the case of the State VS.. Thum,
6 Idaho, page 329, the supreme court
of Idaho held as follows:
''Now it must necessarily follow
that, the state treasurer having no
authority to deosit money with bank
on general deposit, but he being auth
orized to deposit such money with
bank on special deposit, the instant
that C. W. Bunting & Co., received
public money from the state treas
urer, it did SO on special deposit"
This was followed by other de-
cisions, and was recently again held i
in the case of the Bank of Nampa,,
29th Idaho, page 174, where the court I
says:
''The legislature has failed to make
Irrigating district funds other than
to prohibit by Section 6975 revised
code subdivision q, the deposit by the Z
treaurer of such district funds in any
bank or with any banker or other per-
son otherwise than on special deposit,
made by Givens as treasurer of the
Nampa and Meridian irrigation dis
trict of the funds of the district in the
Bank of Nampa, Ltd, was a special
deposit, and it became the duty of
the Receiver of the bank to treat
such as the property of the irrigation
district, and not of the bank"
In 1921 the legislature of this state
enacted law by which it attempted
to change the law, as it existed since
1910. 1t passed what was known as I
he "Bank Act" and is found at page
II of the Idaho Session Laws of 1921,
and so far as is applicable to this
,ase, reads as follows:
'sThe order of payment of the debts 4
# bank or trust company liquidated .
~ the commissioner hereunder shall ?
,e as follows: u
1. The expenses of liquidation, in D
luding compensation of agents, en- v
'loyes and attorneys; 9
2. Debts due by the bank or trust S
ompany as trustee or other fiduci- p
ry, or other claims of like character c
8. Debts due depositors, including +
rotest fees paid by them on valid II
hecks presented after closing of the
ank or trust company, pro rata; all to
eposits Of public funds of every n
ind or character Except those nj
ctually placed on special deposit un- W
er statutes providing therefor), in te
uding those of the United States, st
le state of Idaho, and every county, ~
strict, municipality, political subdi- W
son or pubic corporation of this NJ
ate, whether secured or unsecured, III
: whether deposited in violation of GU
w or otherwise, are included within OF
e terms of this subdivision, and take
e same priority as debts due any ar
her depositor; anything in the stat sh
,es of the state of Idaho to the con- M
notwithstanding. nj
Section Ten, Article 1 of the United ST
ates Constitution provides as fol ed
ws: liy
mo state shall enter into any nc
saty, alliance or confederation; iol
ant letters of marue or reprisal; ia
in money; emit bills of credit; make W.
ything but gold and silver coin ou'
1der in payment of debts; pass any
i of attainder or ex-post facto law, u y
law impairing the obligation of ne 4.s
ntracts, or grant any title or nobil- d1lN l..N
And Section 16, Article 1 of the oe
Institution of the State of Idaho pIf
ovides as follows:
No bill of attainder, ex-post facto
v, or law impairing the obligation 7
contracts, shall ever be passed. +n
It is the opinion of the court that lso1 Io1l
en- the legislature, in 1921 attempt n.I m,;
to change the contract which the off "a.
7 had made between the North cou can
rk highway district and the Fidel- - .
State Bank by making them share Oct
} rata with the general creditors ber M
tead of giving them a prior lien and al
IN all of the assets of the bank, eilo e4a
t it impaired the obligation of a If ofA
tract. The court could not hold 81 -
erwise, because the supreme III q
rt of this state has held, in both +ro,
Thum case and the Bank of Nam ero .,
case that moneys so deposited are SOW,
ced there upon special deposit. 49,
he court will sign proper papers,
laring the North Fork highway r
,rict to have preference in the low!
ment of their claim; and the at dav
leys of said district will prepare tear
papers and present them to me prov
Orofino for my signature, during The
term commencing September 26th. time
EDGAR C. STEELE, Judge. the