State v. Hutchinson
| Decision Date | 22 March 1883 |
| Citation | 15 N.W. 298,60 Iowa 478 |
| Parties | STATE OF IOWA v. HUTCHINSON |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Webster district court.
The defendant was indicted for the crime of embezzlement. He was tried and convicted, and now appeals to this court.Hubbard, Clark & Dawley, for appellant.
Smith McPherson, Atty. Gen., for the State.
1. The defendant was treasurer of Webster county for 10 years, commencing in January, 1868, and ending in January, 1878. In April, 1878, the indictment in this case was returned against him, in which he was charged with embezzling about $48,000 of the public money which came into his hands as such treasurer. The state introduced in evidence the settlement sheet, which was made at the commencement of the defendant's last term of office, in January, 1876, with his certificate thereon that it was a true statement of cash then in his hands as treasurer. The account or settlement sheet embraced the transactions of the office for the six months next preceding the settlement, and upon its face it appeared to be correct, and the defendant was thereby shown not [to] be in arrears. The state then followed up this showing by an exhibit of the subsequent semi-annual settlement sheets, and then from the books of the office for the last six months of the last term, ending in January, 1878. Upon this basis it appeared that, at some time during the last term of office, the defendant became short in his cash some $46,800.
We do not understand that the defendant contended upon the trial that he was not short in his cash and largely in arrears when he went out of office in January, 1878. But he sought to show that this shortage occurred during his prior terms, and more than three years before the indictment was found, and that, therefore, the prosecution was barred by the statute of limitations. To make this proof the defendant offered evidence to the effect that, at the settlement made in January, 1876, and at those previously and subsequently made, but a small amount of cash was produced at each settlement, and that the cash balances, which should have been actually in his hands in money, were largely made up of bank certificates of deposit and other vouchers. He offered to show that certificates of deposit and other evidences of debt had been made use of by him in his settlements more than three years prior to the finding of the indictment. He further offered to prove that he had no funds in the banks which issued the certificates. In other words, he offered to show and prove that he made his settlements with the board of supervisors by the use of worthless and spurious certificates of deposit instead of cash, and that whatever money was converted to his own use, was so converted more than three years before the indictment was presented. This evidence was objected to by the state and the objection was sustained. This ruling, as we infer from the objections made to the evidence, was based upon the idea that the defendant was criminally bound by the settlement sheets, and by his certificates that he had the cash actually on hand at the time the several settlements were made.
In Boone Co. v. Jones, 54 Iowa, 699, [S. C. 2 N. W. REP. 987,] it was held that a county treasurer and the sureties on his bonds were bound by a settlement and accounting made according to law, and where at such settlement, for aught that appeared, the cash which should have been on hand was produced by the treasurer, such settlement could not be impeached by showing that the defalcation complained of previously...
To continue reading
Request your trial