

MARYLAND. 



519 



erty and to repair and operate the canal for their 

 benefit. Upon these petitions, Justice Cox, of the 

 Court of the District of Columbia, on Jan. 27, ap- 

 pointed receivers of the property within the Dis- 

 trict of Columbia, with authority to repair it and 

 place it in condition for sale, and on Feb. 24 Chief- 

 Judge Alvey,of the Mary land Supreme Court, ren- 

 dered a decision appointing receivers to examine 

 and report to him the condition of the canal, as 

 preliminary to the determination of the question 

 whether it should be sold or be repaired and put 

 in operation again. The report of the Maryland 

 receivers was made several months later, and on 

 the basis of facts presented by them, the court, 

 on Sept. 2, decreed that the canal should be sold. 

 Soon thereafter the bondholders of 1844 peti- 

 tioned Judge Alvey to be subrogated to the rights 

 of the bondholders of 1878, and that they might 

 be allowed to restore and operate the canal as a 

 water way, notwithstanding his former decree of 

 sale. The court in October granted their peti-* 

 tion on condition that they would pay off the 

 principal and interest of the bonds of 1878, liqui- 

 date all the expenses incurred by the receivers, 

 and give bond within sixty days from the pas- 

 sage of the decree in the sum of $600,000 to re- 

 store the canal and have it in running order by 

 the 1st day of May, 1891. On Nov. 28 this bond 

 was executed, and the money for the payment of 

 the bondholders of 1878 was brought into court. 

 An order was then passed directing the receivers, 

 to turn over all the canal property to the bond- 

 holders of 1844. From this decree the canal 

 company took an appeal. In the Court of the 

 District' of Columbia a similar decree was ob- 

 tained on similar conditions covering the prop- 

 erty in the District of Columbia. As the Wash- 

 ington and Cumberland Railroad Company had 

 failed to take advantage of the act of the Legis- 

 lature above mentioned, the outlook at the close 

 of the year was that the bondholders of 1844 

 would obtain control and that the canal would 

 again be opened as a water way. 



The Archer Defalcation. On March 26 a 

 special message to the Legislature from Gov. 

 Jackson apprised that body that the State Audi- 

 tor was in possession of information indicating 

 a misapplication by State Treasurer Stevenson 

 Archer of the public securities in his hands. 

 This created a profound sensation, as Mr. Archer 

 stood high in the counsels of his party, being 

 chairman of the Democratic State Committee. 

 Pursuant to the suggestion of the Governor, a 

 joint legislative committee of investigation was 

 at once appointed, and this committee made an 

 examination of the State securities. Of bonds 

 to the value of $572,000. supposed to be depos- 

 ited in vaults in Baltimore, the committee, ac- 

 cording to their preliminary report on March 

 28, were able to find only $445.000, showing a 

 deficit of $127,000. Mr. Archer was ill at his 

 home at Belair, and unable 1 to render the com- 

 mittee any assistance. As the regular legisla- 

 tive session would expire by constitutional lim- 

 itation on March 31, a special act was passed 

 giving the committee power to continue its 

 investigations after the close of the session, and 

 when satisfied of the malfeasance of the Treas- 

 urer, to take suitable steps to procure his re- 

 moval from office and to protect the State from 

 loss. On March 31 Mr. Archer tendered to the 



Governor his resignation as Treasurer, but it 

 was not accepted. The investigating committee, 

 on April 10, made a report to the Governor, on 

 the basis of the testimony then before it, de- 

 claring that sufficient evidence had been dis- 

 covered to show that Mr. Archer had been guilty 

 of deliberate malfeasance in office by the mis- 

 appropriation of large numbers of bonds belong- 

 ing to the sinking fund, amounting to $127,000 

 or thereabouts ; that it had traced the disposi- 

 tion of $43,500 of the missing bonds ; and that 

 it recommended the immediate institution of 

 suits against the bondsmen of Mr. Archer and 

 the beginning of suitable criminal proceedings 

 against him. The Governor thereupon notified 

 the Treasurer to appear before him on April 15 

 to answer the charges of the committee, and on 

 the same day he was put under arrest to answer 

 a criminal charge of embezzlement. On April 

 15 Mr. Archer did not appear in his defense. 

 He was, therefore, summarily removed from of- 

 fice and Edwin H. Brown was appointed his 

 successor. Early in June the investigating com- 

 mittee published its final report, showing the 

 total defalcation to be $132,401.25. Of the miss- 

 ing bonds, the committee traced the disposition 

 of all except $10,000. They also found that 

 the State officers, especially the Governor, had 

 been too lenient in the performance of the duties 

 imposed upon them by the Constitution, and 

 had thereby made more easy the wrong-doing 

 of the Treasurer. In the criminal proceedings, 

 which were begun in April, a motion was made 

 by the attorneys of Mr. Archer to quash the in- 

 dictment on the ground that the statute defining 

 and punishing embezzlement did not cover the 

 case of misappropriation of public funds by a 

 State Treasurer. This motion was granted' by 

 Judge Stewart of Baltimore, and an appeal from 

 his ruling "was taken to the State Supreme Court. 

 Arguments on this point were made on June 17, 

 and a decision of the court was reached on July 

 1. The statute in question provides : 



That any person holding office in this State, whether 

 elected or appointed by the Governor, corporate au- 

 thorities of Baltimore, or any other authority legally 

 authorized to make such appointment, who shall frau- 

 dulently embezzle or appropriate to his own use money, 

 funds, or evidences of debt, which he is by law bound 

 to pay over, account for, or deliver to the Treasurer of 

 this State or to any other person by law authorized to 

 receive the same, shall b,e guilty of a misdemeanor, etc. 



The court decided that the words " or to any 

 other person by law authorized to receive the 

 same" were broad enough to cover the present 

 case, inasmuch as a retiring Treasurer is bound 

 by law to account to his successor. The case 

 was remanded to the lower court for trial ; but 

 on July 7, before the hearing should begin, Mr. 

 Archer appeared in court, pleaded guilty, and 

 was sentenced to five years in the State Peni- 

 tentiary. Meanwhile suits had been begun against 

 his bondsmen, and a judgment against them was 

 obtained early in January, 1891. 



As a result' of this defalcation, the Legislature, 

 in its closing days, passed an act declaring 

 that the State Treasurer should not have access 

 alone to the sinking fund and other State securi- 

 ties in the deposit vault, at Baltimore, but should 

 always be attended by the Comptroller, or by 

 some other member of the Board of Public Works 



