*1 Many provide compensation to Compensation Workmen’s Acts employees injured going returning place in of work to or from their premises grows “while on the out employer. requirement That duty employer place to maintain a safe to work. No such provision is in being and, contained now be- the statute considered sides, against city. this is not a suit

Appellee says that nar this construction of the is too statute row;’that that, injured means if Officer in Moore had been while the act o'f telephoning, but, he protected, would have been if he had injured been hung up receiver, second after he while one still at box, the call he"would not have been Our under the statute. ruling go need not that far. We do not policeman hold that the ceased performance be duty very of his he official at the second completed duty his off call yet and while he spot at the where duty placed him. In completed this case the deceased his had duty and had appreciable moved an away. Each distance case must governed by its own facts and we are compelled often to seek out a shadowy line liability between non-liability. Notwithstanding the desire we favor have to the widow of faith- this ful officer, the terms of the prevent -statute granting us from her a pension under the facts this case. We hold that the action of the Board in denying claim was correct and that the circuit court erred in quashing the Board’s record. Accordingly, judgment the trial hereby All reversed.

concur. County R. Commissioner v. Bank, Holt, Waldo Howard Commissioner, Finance, Deputy Appellants. and R. T. Copeland, 841. (2d) 149 S. W. One, April 18,

Division 1941. *2 A. W. Walker and Hunter & appellants. Chamier for *3 Jack Denny, Bubey H. M. Eulen and respondent. J. A. Collet *4 BRADLEY, $27,378.54 against, claim C. Plaintiff’s the failed

Fayette Bank was allowed as preferred appealed. and defendants question is: Did the relation of debtor and creditor exist between bank, and the on deposit bank time the closed on November 1938? If such relation existed, plaintiff was not a preference. entitled to As to whether such depends relation upon existed whether the bank was selected as July .on so, and if whether it re- mained after the effective date the act of 1937, p. 502, Laws now Sec. R. S. 1939. R. S. 4 Ann. 2083, p. 2659, fixes terms court, Howard, Mondays of such counties as as the first *5 in February, May, August, day and November, hence of the the, regular May county term of May the court was on 2nd. June 8, 1937, during May term, the county the court an made order for publication of for notice of bids banks which desired to be selected county as depository, or depositories, duly and notice was this pub- lished. order and county the notice recited that the funds “will

987 viz., parts; general into two fund and school and be divided separately.’-’ The bids for the each fund will be made of publication newspaper order notice called in Howard for for some of County May “20 adjourned the before commencement of July 5, 1937, published. term” on and the notice And was so notice recited that bids “until 10 would be received on o’clock m., a. day July, 1937, May the 5th adjourned court, of at the term” of and that required the successful bidder or would bidders be to execute payable a county, bond provided by as then was Sec. 1929;

R. S. penalty that the general of the bond for the fund would $75,000, be and for the $50,000. school fund

July 3, 1937, Bank general filed its bid “for the fund,” July 5, 1937, May on adjourned county- at the term the court accepted the bid. The step August 3, next was the second day August of the (we judicially term calendar), notice at which time the bond approved. $75,000, The bond was for and was signed by ten individuals, all whom, of except three, were stockholders n in the bank and included the president, president, and cashier. vice ' 1939, 9 Ann. 8183, R. S. 13846, 13849, 13850, and Sections taken in steps to be seq., out the seq., 6455 et set p. et “It provides: county depository. Section the selection of county state, in duty county each this’ court of shall be the every years there year 1909, two May thereof, term in banking corporations, associations after, proposals from to receive may be as desire'to or individual bankers in such county. purpose depositories For of the funds of said , by record, letting shall, divide such funds court order of such equal parts, and said funds into not less than two nor more than ten parts. provided the bids herein one or more of such be for Notice the' clerk published -that such bids will be received be shall 'term twenty days of said said the commencement of before (italics ours) no county, in in and if newspaper published some said newspaper published therein, published be be then such notice shall .” n at-the door county. . . courthouse of said

Section provides duty that “it shall day May at noon on open the first term” publicly bids and cause each bid to be entered record and to select the de- pository depositories or “of all public going funds” into the n hands treasurer. in provisions force all its when the bond here con- cerned was executed approved, that, provides within ten the selection of a depository, dnty it is the of each successful after bidder “to payable execute bond county, approved to be court and filed in the thereof, office of the clerk with not than less five solvent sureties who shall own unencumbered real estate in this great state of amount said or value bond, with a *6 by of this state

surety the laws company or trust authorized may accept county surety: Provided, that execute bonds county, or the State security, bonds of such in lieu of real estate n by fully guaranteed Missouri, States, or bonds or of the United deposited States, which bonds shall be United such fiduciary desig- may or direct, trustee, company with a trust other by nated approved or it. 502, now to, 1937, p. Laws Sec. The act of above referred 6, 1937, 1937, p. September R. Laws S. went into effect 13850, supra, and, effect, now repealed part that of what is Sec. sureties, etc., county depository bonds. providing personal for on any “notwithstanding 8183, among things, that provides other every provisions public of law of . . funds of this state . any deposited in . which shall now or hereafter be banking acting legal under depository institution as a such funds provisions by deposit of the statutes” shall be secured required by 11 Ann. securities as Sec. R. S. pocket p. and all thereto. amendments Fayette challenges legal

Plaintiff the claimed selection of the Bank following grounds: (1) as the on Failure to divide into than two nor more than ten funds not less parts; (2) publish failure to notice for bids before day regular May day first term, on the of the to do regular May July May adjourned term what was done on 5th at the term; (3). failure to and file the bond ten make within after the selection a depository. plaintiff And makes the further contention 1937, barring that when act of on personal sureties depository bonds, 6, 1937, any county September became effective deposited thereafter were held the bank as trustee ex maleficio, though legally even the bank was theretofore as the county depository.

This order for the notice for and the notice recite that bids funds would be parts, general divided into two fund and the fund, school and there is no evidence that such was not done. And there was no evidence that bids, Fayette a bid or other than Bank, were not Fayette received. The specifically Bank’s bid recited that it general fund, was for the July 5, 1937, and the order of ac- cepting Fayette bid, begins: Bank’s “In the matter bids for county depository,” etc. And when the court clerk was on the stand he was “Q. you asked and answered as follows: Have given us all your the record that is in pertaining office selec- to tion of this depository? And, stated, Yes, supra, A. sir.” while we Fayette that the August 3, 1937, Bank’s bond was approved on order was: “In the matter of are depositories; bonds same filed approved” (italics ours). may

It that there general was no division of the funds into fund except bid funds, there was no and it be that and school show. The so, if fails to Bank, but this record selec- statute, show that the relative burden was on *7 Moberly, 338 followed, a not Landwehr v. depository, tion was of meet burden 1106, (2d) 935, plaintiff W. and did not this Mo. S. 93 the funds. point on the as to division of say for might, dividing the to make the order

And that failure we necessarily People’s Liquidation of would be fatal. In funds not 671, 611, (2d) 669, l. W. the court said: Bank, 344 Mo. 127 S. c. preliminary the the a order division of funds: “As to absence of .for ruling we found none this appellant has us case and have cited- no bank for two point. that one ten tenths and the other fact bid .The familiar with banks for three tenths each that the were bidders shows and, county four- respect,- statute in as the court awarded the this banks, tenths bank tenths each the other two we to one and three to ’’ apy public private right prejudically fail to how or affected. see days publish Was to the notice for 20 before the failure bids day regular May the legal first term fatal the selection.of to county depository? statutory requirements relative selec The to the tion a county depository mandatory, compli of are and “failure of ance, prevents public passing title to the the bank and the arising,” relation of debtor compliance and but “a literal creditor statutory with provisions required the if public private is not no or right prejudicially Bank, is People’s [Liquidation affected.” 344 Mo.,611, 669, W. (2d) 671, 127 S. l. c. and cases there-cited.] It says will noted that duty be Sec. 13846 that be it shall the. county May at bids, term to receive and that notice that days bids will be received shall published be 20 “before commencement said term.” argue May Defendants that term May means term, any and would adjourned include tei’m held between Monday May first and Monday in August, first and .that the county court, therefore, May term, did at duly advertise for and Fayette did receive bid, did, May Bank’s and term, tlxe select at the bank as a depository. It will be noted that Section 13846 not, terms, say does ixx that notice published shall be .20. day

before regular May term,'as plaintiff, says it means. But if the statixte means as contends, which we do not decide, such not, would it, as we see validity affect the of the selection Section; Bank depository. as 13859, S.R. Stat., 9 Ann. p. provides: “If, any reason, for no depository seleetioxxof a made-.at. time fixed this article, the any sixbsequent coxxrt at term, twenty days’ after notice, receive bids select a depository or depositories in the provided, manner herein bank or. banks so depository shall depositories or remain until the. next regular term for the selection of a provided by

990 selecting be revoked article, unless order it of this in this article. specified causes (cid:127) says any subsequent term. that Sec. be noted It will specifically are adjourned terms of the

Special terms 1939, 4 Ann. 2487, 2489, R. S. recognized by Secs. statute. [See the failure do not think that We pp. secs. 2661.] by plaintiff has notice, etc., claimed substantial publish merit, and so rule. 13850, R. S. days, etc.: Sec. failure to file bond in

On things, “within ten after se among provides, other duty bidder be the of each successful depositories, shall lection county, approved, to the payable to- execute a bond .” in the officeof the clerk thereof. court and'filed It filing appear. do not the bond and date of date of execution of however, stated, supra, approved that the bond was appear, does August not or 3, 1937. But if it be so that the bond was executed *8 13850, not provided within 10 as in Sec. such would filed the statutory provi depository affect the of the because such selection mandatory. Bank, supra, 344 People’s not of [Liquidation sion is 673, 611, (2d)W. l. c. and there Mo. 127S. cases cited.] appears, supra, plaintiff effect of the act of 1937. On the As 1938, closed, 2, time November deposit had on at the the bank the $27,278.54. presumes, proof, “The law in the absence of that money money paid the Re received was first out.” [Cherry, Territory Oklahoma, 190; ceiver, 213, 217, v. of 17 Okla. l. c. 89 Pac. Institutions, Financial Liquidation Brauer’s sec. the of Under 43.] money all on rule, plaintiff’s deposit out of when the bank closed first was after effective date deposited the of the act of 1937. give a depository required by Failure of to the bond nullify operates County to the selection. v. statute Commis [Ralls Finance, 167, 334 (2d) 115, 117; sioner Mo. 66 S. W. l. c. Boone County Cantley, Finance, 911, 330 v. Commissioner of Mo. S. W. 56, Withdrawing" a (2d) l. c. lawful bond substituting and 58.] n therefor security by not authorized law has the same effect. [White 135, Greenlee, 132, v. 330 Mo. 49 S. W. (2d) l. c. In the 134.] (49 (2d) 135) W. White case the court said S. l. c. bank, time “The at the its selection a depository, gave a n statutory performance bond the obligations to insure of its under the'two-year period. the contract for This bond prerequisite was a legal designation and its continued to its status as a depository. The during bond the surrender of this term contract ended the a depository, the bank as lawful status of unless the substituted legal sufficiency.” bond was of like of; argues that after Plaintiff the effective date 1937, the act of longer .depository depository bond was no required by bond security statute, was substituted in the case, White plain- bank says to date the deposits tiff that as after effective made a ex trustee maleficio. may “Although a sub- under which bond executed statute is sequently validity of the repealed, be amended or and force a bond thereby. hand, will not be affected . bond . On the other by by void executed, under which it will validated the act not be a subsequent general J., p. 28, act.” It cannot C. sec. [9 42.] that, said re- deposits, there was not a contractual existing lation on plaintiff between the on the one hand and the bank order, other, bid, and the contract was evidenced acceptance, and bond. Section Article of our Constitution provides impairing obligation no law that can be of contracts passed Assembly. Also, the General Constitution States, says any United Article pass that no-State shall law,,imp airing obligation of contracts. (cid:127) Plaintiff existed, concedes that contractual relation but says that all applicable would be a-part statutes considered as contract, true, which is premise and with this refers to Sec. R. S. 9 Ann. p. which providés that “if shall, any time, deem it neces sary protection for the county, may require any depository bond, execute a new upon failure to do within five after copy the service of a upon of the order said bank or individual banker,'said county proceed to select another n ‘‘ thereof, lieu plaintiff says: and then Under this statute what becomes of appellants’ position upon for the call the bank security for other would violate the terms of the contract ” between the bank 1 thp plaintiff’s argument trouble with is that the court did

not “deem necessary protection county” for the require bond, execution of a new but far appears, was satisfied with the bond it had. It quite clear, 'is think, we was not entitled

preference. Therefore, judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded with plaintiff’s directions allow claim as common claim only, Hyde Dalton, CC., and it is so ordered. concur. PER foregoing opinion CURIAM: The Bradley, C., adopted opinion judges court. All the concur.