And, while nothing but a breach of official duty is a breach of a sheriff's bond ( Collier v. Stoddard, 19 Ga. 274), a wrongful act done in the prosecution of some official duty is a breach of duty and a breach of the bond ( Robertson v. Smith, 16 Ga. App. 760 (1), 85 S.E. 988), and such wrongful act may be done either virtute officii or colore officii. Robertson v. Smith, 16 Ga. App. 767, 769 ( 85 S.E. 991); Hawkins v. National Surety Corp., 63 Ga. App. 367, 371-372 ( 11 S.E.2d 250); Smith v. Glens Falls Indem. Co., 71 Ga. App. 697 (2) ( 32 S.E.2d 105); Luther v. Banks, 111 Ga. 374 ( 36 S.E. 826). 2.
The cases cited in Judge Hand's dissent support the rule that, in general, a Sheriff's performance bond will cover liability which is based upon acts or omissions which constitute an intentional or malicious abuse of power. In Powell v. Fidelity Deposit Co. ( 45 Ga. App. 88, 163 S.E. 239), the Georgia court held that a Sheriff who without provocation shot and killed his prisoner was acting within his official capacity so as to render his surety liable (see also, Smith v. Glens Falls Indem. Co., 71 Ga. App. 697, 32 S.E.2d 105). In Kosowsky v. Fidelity Deposit Co. ( 245 Mich. 266, 222 N.W. 153), the Michigan court held that a Sheriff's bond covered the liability of a Sheriff who wrongfully assaulted and beat a prisoner.