amounts which were retained. On the 25th of January, 1871, the college treasury had become empty and the aggregate amount abstracted had reached $36,000. He then resorted to the State Treasury to meet drafts from the college for the sum of $38,500 which had been appropriated for the use of that institution by the Legislature. A warrant to meet this requisition was paid and the amount placed to the credit due the college and this enabled the Treasurer to meet all demands until December, 1872, when a draft for $3,000 was received and paid out of the State funds, this deficiency being afterward made up by Major Rankin. After that time there was no evidence of misappropriation of the funds. When the defalcation became known to the trustees of the college they appointed a committee to take steps to secure it against loss. This committee settled with Rankin, taking his obligation for the amount of the deficit and an assignment of all his real and personal property except household furniture. This was done under the advice of the Governor and the Attorney-General. In concluding the report, the committee of the General Assembly said:
“From all the facts developed in this investigation the committee feels compelled, however unpleasant the duty may be, to say that in its opinion, while Major Rankin has probably made himself criminally liable for an infraction of the law, yet the several boards of trustees who were intrusted by the people to execute the laws in regard to the college are morally responsible for the losses sustained and should be so regarded by the people. While each and every member of the board of trustees in office at the time and every officer of the college should be held liable to some extent to the bar of public opinion for the embarrassment caused and losses sustained by the defalcation of the late Treasurer, yet we are constrained to say that some of them should be held to more rigid accountability than others. About midsummer, 1869, the then chief executive officer of the State, who was also ex-officio member of the Board of Trustees, had his suspicions aroused and opened a correspondence with the president of the college and secretary of the board in regard to the official bonds of the officers. In this correspondence he received information which should have led him, as Governor of the State and a member of the Board of Trustees, to act promptly and energetically but he let the matter drop and we hear no
