State v. McCauley

• Decision Date: 21 May 1897
• Parties: STATE v. MCCAULEY. [1]
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

49 P. 221

17 Wash. 88

STATE v. MCCAULEY. ^[1]

Supreme Court of Washington

May 21, 1897

Appeal from superior court, Pierce county.

James W. McCauley was convicted of making a profit out of public funds, and appeals. Affirmed.

Taylor, Dennis & Luse and Johnson Nickens, for appellant.

A. R Titlow, for the State.

GORDON J.

Appellant appeals from a judgment of the superior court of Pierce county adjudging him guilty of the crime of unlawfully using public money in order to make a profit out of the same. The appellant was treasurer of the city of Tacoma, and, as such came into possession of large sums of money. The information charges him with receiving and accepting interest upon a deposit of the city's money made by him in the Columbia National Bank of Tacoma. The information is similar to the one considered by this court in State v. Boggs, 47 P. 417, and, upon the authority of that case, we hold that the demurrer which was entered below was properly overruled.

Numerous errors are assigned by appellant, and from his brief we quote the following: "This case is almost identical with the case of the State against George W. Boggs which has already been argued and decided in this court, and the assignment of errors is substantially the same." We are satisfied with the decision reached in that case, and deem it unnecessary and unprofitable to review it at this time. The only question argued in the brief in the present case is the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction. The information alleges that the offense was committed "on or about the 15th day of June, 1895, and between the 1st day of May, 1895, and the 1st of August 1895." The proof shows that, in addition to his account with said bank as city treasurer, the appellant also had a personal account with the bank, and that from time to time his personal account was, under the direction of the cashier credited with different sums, which sums approximated in amount a sum equivalent to interest at 5 per cent. per annum on the average daily balance of his account as treasurer. It appears from the evidence that the cashier from time to time would enter upon deposit slips, such as are commonly used by bankers, what purported to be a deposit of funds by appellant to his personal account, and at the same time would make out a debit slip charging the expense or profit and loss account of the bank with the amount so credited to the personal account of the appellant. These credit and debit slips were, with a single exception, all made out by the cashier in his own handwriting. In one instance, however, the slips were made by Andrus, the teller of the bank, under the express direction of the cashier, so that it appears from the evidence that the amounts so credited to the personal account of the appellant were charged to the expense or profit and loss account of the bank; and we think the proof was sufficient to warrant the jury in finding that, of the amount so credited to the personal account of appellant, no portion was represented by money or other funds actually deposited. The amounts so credited to him were all checked out by the appellant. These various amounts were also entered to the credit of appellant in his individual pass book, which the evidence shows was usually kept in the cashier's desk. This pass book was usually balanced once a month, at which time appellant's checks would be returned to him. Bearing upon the question of appellant's knowledge of the transactions already referred to, the teller of the bank testified as follows: "*** Part of the time Mr. McCauley's private individual pass book was kept in Mr. Peters' desk (Mr. Peters was the cashier), and he would go to his desk, and Mr. Peters would take out the book, and make a credit entry in it, and Mr. McCauley would say, 'What month is that for?' and Mr. Peters would say a certain month. I don't remember what...