The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1853-04-06

thou NV iNEioihtuiC w ~ oOlO IunEtS
how far drunkenness, or those who aid
in its preparation, are punishable Grim
inslly. l take it, that at this day, it is
scarce needful for this court to spend
words in indicating this acknowledged
right of the Legislature. How far the
thing is durable by any process of mere
legislative restriction is y matter with
which we have here no possible concern.
We would be hopeful of all laws, that
they are in some sense capable of an
swering their proposed end. Assuming
then, that the legislature have the right
to punish drunkenness, and those con-
cerned in its preparation, or indirect
production, and commission, it becomes
a question of expedicncy merely how far
they will punish it, or in what mode.
We should then, to treat this matter
fairly, view this subject in the same light
VIC do any other subject Of criminal leg
i%slation.
Let us then, for the purpose of plac-
ing this matter in II different point of
view, so as, if possible, to perceive its
true bearing, suppose that in the first
instance the %relator has been guilty of a
homicide, which was clearly manslaugh-
ter, and the sheriff had been called in,
after the whole transaction was ended,
and he had taken him into custody and
detained him. either in Jail or not. for
in that respect there is probably no diff
ference. Is it supposable that any one,
even without any special statute, would
regard this as unlawful ? And if not.
then a special statute requiring it could
not be more so, than the act, without
any express law.
And if the legislature should see fit
to punish homicide, committed in a state
of intoxication, by having the person ar
rested and detained until he become so.
Der, could he complain Of the arrest and
detention, without warrant and trial by
jury, any more than if he were still liza
BILE to further punishment for the offence.
he could object to the preliminary de.
t%ention 1t seems to us it could make
no difference, as to the power Of the
legislature, to order the arrest and de,
~tcntion of one, who had committed HON.
icide, in a drunken fit, until he becomes
sober, whether be wa made liable tc
still further punishment afterwards OF
not.
What essential difference, In princi
pie, then will it make, whether the ar
rest and detention Is for disturbing the
public peace, in a state of drunkenness
or committing a more grevious offence
When we concede to the Legislature the
right in one case, it follows in the other
unless they are restricted in some way
which is not the case. as i. seems to us
Few persons, at this time, would be in
clined to deny the right in the case sup
posed. And we think it follows of course
in the case of a breach of the peace in
state of intoxication, as much as in the
case supposed.
This portion of the statute is peculi
arly expressed, and as it seems to me
needlossly minute in detail. But tina
was done probably out of over caution
and to prevent misconstruction of the
purpose of the legislature. 1t seems tc
me, that public and domestic tranquil
ity mean nothing more than the pub
lie peace. The public peace is made W
of the aggregate ofindividual peace, and
domestic peace is nothing more, than O
subdivision of the one, and the aggrega,
ton of the other. One cannot lawfully
disturb the quiet Of domestic life, by
that same kind of offensive and tumultu.
GUS carriage, which would any where
constitute a breach of public peace, al
though no one, but the family of which
he is a member, is present.
The statute then, on a fair construc
ton, we think, provides that if one shall
be in that peculiar state of i~ntoxication
whereby his conduct puts those about
him in reasonable fear of bodily harm
any sheriff, or other officer named, may
take him into custody, and detain him,
till he is sober enough to testify. This
is the first point at which it would be
reasonably safe to have such a person GO
at large. This any citizen might al
ways do, in England or this country, up
on the mere ground of preventing the
continuance of the disturbance, upon the
same ground that one may arrest, with
out warrant, to suppress a riot -.SpaHi-
ding and Preston, 81 W. Reports, and
cases cited, where the subject is fully
discussed.
The right Of private persons 10 make ar
rests, on their own mere motion; without any
special statute, and without express warrant,
was distinctly recognized in the discussion of
| n lnt.. a G in tho common rlaag in Wastpain-
ster Hall.-EHiot y. Allen, ] NJ. G. & Scott,
Is, [5O Z. C. L. 3S, 1916. long since the
transaction occurred, out Of which the pres
ent action grew. And this right, in every
subject of the realm, is there recognized, for
the mere purpose Of preucHtiHg crime. And
il the right of personal liberty, which is al
ways rcckoncd among the most sacred of civ
II rights, may he thus violated by private per-
sons, upon their own mere motion much more,
it would seem, may such rights Of property,
as one may be supposed to have, either in
counterfeit coin, or in the materials in an un-
finished state, be disregarded by a public Off
Ger.
The following is the law as laid down in 6
Bac. Alb, Tit. Tfcspdss ID. p. $40, upon that
subject. A private person may, without ex-
press warrant, arrest persons who are actual
ly fighting, and keep them in custody, until
their passion is over. Has that state OF safe
ty yet occurred, in regard to this coin II
surrendered, il would seem there should be
some security, that it should not be applied
TO the same use. Certainly not in this state !
So ii is said by Bacon, one may arrest one COM
ing to assist another in II fight In. l Hawk.
PI Cr., C. 8, : II. So may one arrest another,
who is on the point of committing murder, or
treason. So he may justify breaking and en-
tering ones house and imprisoning him, "to
prevent his committing murder on his wife. /"
HaRdeoek + .. Baker, 2 b.. al go. "A private
person may, without an express warrant, con-
fine a person disordered in his mind, who