Where a transaction between an employer and employe, or between a principal and his agent, creates the relation of debtor and creditor merely, there can be no offense if the one intrusted with the money of the other appropriates it to his own use. Thus, money deposited by an employe with his employer for the purpose of securing faithful discharge of the duties of his employment, creates the relation of debtor and creditor, and it is not embezzlement for the employer to appropriate the deposit to his own use.112 A mere breach of a contract cannot be made the basis of a criminal prosecution.113

106 Moore vs. State, 53 Neb., 831;

Moore vs. U. S., 160 U. S., 268. 107 Ex parte Hedley, 31 Cal., 109;

State vs. Rue, 72 Minn., 296;

State vs. Spalding, 24 Kan., 1;

Hughes Cr. Law, Sec. 498. 108 State vs. Kent, 22 Minn., 41;

State vs. Butman, 61 N. H., 511; State vs. Riddick, 2 S. D..

124; State vs. Kusnick, 45 Ohio St., 535.

109 State vs. Campbell, 59 Kan., 246.

110 Com. vs. Bennett, 118 Mass., 443; McElroy vs. People, 202 Ill., 473; Hughes Cr. Law, Sec. 526. 111 Ross vs.' Innis, 35 Ill., 488; Phelps vs. People, 55 Ill., 337.