1892. ] OF THE SENATE. 399

stances, which are well known, continued in the liabil-
ity for two years longer; and this occurred without
any default on their part. The law operated against
them with great severity, but it was enforced.

Opinion of the Court, per Judge Bryan, on motion-
to remand for new trial ease on bond of 1886.

E Precedents for the relief of sureities on official
bonds are numerous. In this State, the Legislature
(Act of 1858, chapter 286), released entirely the sure-
ties of Lloyd B. Smith, Collector of Taxes in Allegany
county, and in 15th Md. 205 (State vs. Hendrickson &
Smith), the Court of Appeals affirmed the right of the
Legislature to do so. Again, (Act 1868, chapter
327), the Legislature released entirely the sureties of
Sheriff Knotts of Caroline county;

Acts of our own Legislature for partial release of
sureties are very numerous.

Amongst the Acts of Congress are many such pre-
cedents.

About 1842, Purser Sputhall, of the Navy, defaulted
to the extent of $40, 000, and in 1852 or 1853, Congress
released his sureties upon the payment of $1, 400.

About 1872, David L. Stanton, Collector of Internal
Revenue for a Maryland District, defaulted to the ex-
tent $40, 000. The Forty-Third Congress in 1875, re-
leased entirely Zephaniah Poteet, John H. Long-
necker and John T. Ensor, his sureties. (Statute at
Large, volume 18, part 3, page 419. )

On March 6, 1886, Congress released entirely the
sureties of J. T. Carter, Secretary of Arizona; on
March 7, 1888, those of J. C. Dexter, Receiver of
Public Moneys, Michigan; on March 14, 1888, those
of Samuel A. Blaine, Indian Agent, Texas; on Janu-
ary 8, 1831, those of George W. Hook, Receiver at
Land Office, California; and on March 22, 1886, those
of Frank Soule, Collector of Internal Revenue, Cali-
fornia.

These are a few of the many cases found among the
U. S. Statutes at Large.

An examination of the reasons for relief in the above
cases, where they can be learned, exhibits' facts much
less strong than those in this, case.