¶1 By tbe terms of G. S., 18-45, authority is vested in tbe A.B.C. Boards of tbe respective counties to appoint one or more law enforcement officers witb “tbe same powers and authorities within their respective counties as other peace officers.” Subsection (0). Peace officers are required to give bond for tbe faithful discharge of their duties. G. S., 128-9; S. v. Swanson, 223 N. C., 442, 27 S. E. (2d), 122. Tbe law provides that such officers, and tbe sureties on their official bonds, shall be liable to tbe persons injured for torts committed colore officii. Dunn v. Swanson, 217 N. C., 279, 7 S. E. (2d), 563; Price v. Honeycutt, 216 N. C., 270, 4 S. E. (2d), 611; Warren v. Boyd, 120 N. C., 56, 26 S. E., 700; Kivett v. Young, 106 N. C., 567, 10 S. E., 1019; G. S., 109-1; 109-34.
¶2 Tbe case was tried under tbe principles announced in Dunn v. Swanson, supra, and Price v. Honeycutt, supra. In this, there was no error. Tbe decisions in Davis v. Moore, 215 N. C., 449, 2 S. E. (2d), 366, and Midgett v. Nelson, 214 N. C., 396, 199 S. E., 393, are inapposite to tbe facts of tbe present record.
¶3 Tbe naming of tbe Durham County A.B.G. Board as obligee in tbe bond, rather than tbe State, works no limitation of its character as an official bond and affords no escape from its obligations as such. G. S., 109-1. See Hunter v. Retirement System, 224 N. C., 359, 30 S. E. (2d), 384.
¶4 Tbe verdict and judgment will be upheld.
¶5 No error.