Beaver v. State ex rel. Heaston

• Decision Date: 11 April 1890
• Docket Number: 14,963
• Citation: 24 N.E. 242,124 Ind. 324
• Parties: Beaver et al. v. The State, ex rel. Heaston, Auditor
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

24 N.E. 242

124 Ind. 324

Beaver et al. v. The State, ex rel. Heaston, Auditor

No. 14,963

Supreme Court of Indiana

April 11, 1890

Petition for a Rehearing Overruled June 17, 1890.

From the Grant Circuit Court.

Judgment affirmed.

J. C Branyan, M. L. Spencer, L. P. Milligan, O. W. Whitelock, B M. Cobb, C. W. Watkins, W. H. Charles, T. L. Childs, G. W. Harvey, L. D. Baldwin and H. J. Paulus, for appellants.

E. C. Vaughn, J. B. Kenner and J. I. Dille, for appellee.

OPINION

Elliott, J.

The complaint is founded on a bond executed by Henry Beaver and his sureties to secure the performance by Beaver of the duties of treasurer of Huntington county.The dispute is as to an item of twelve thousand dollars which the relator claims is due from Beaver, and for which it is alleged he has failed to account.The special finding of facts made by the trial court is quite full, but it is unnecessary to state the facts at much length, since it is conceded that Beaver did receive twelve thousand dollars from his predecessor in office, Daniel Christian, and that he is chargeable with that amount.As we understand counsel for the appellants, their contention is that he has accounted for the amount received from Christian, but that he has been wrongfully twice charged with the amount, thus making it appear that he owes twelve thousand dollars, whereas he, in fact, is not in debt to the county in any amount.It is true that the record shows that Beaver was charged with twelve thousand dollars in an erroneous mode, in this, that the amount was made up of fictitious items instead of the correct one, namely, the amount received from Christian.But, while it is true that the items of the charge were not the true ones, inasmuch as the true item was the twelve thousand dollars received by Christian on account of what was called the Stutt's Gravel Road Fund, and by him paid to Beaver, and not the fictitious items stated; still, it is also true that Beaver did receive twelve thousand dollars on account of the Stutt's Gravel Road from Christian.For this sum he has not accounted, and he remains liable for it.

The fact that the charge was not made, as it should have been for the money received from Christian, does not exonerate Beaver.As he did, in fact, obtain the sum of twelve thousand dollars belonging to the public funds, he must account for it, notwithstanding the error in making up the items of the charge.If the...