Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-04-07
Decisions OF THE SUPREME COURT
OFFICIAL.

composed of one Judge to be elected by the quail
fed voters Of the 5th 18th and 18th civil districts Of
Shelby county.
He was to hold his Office for eight years and re
side in said civil districts.
The style of said Court was the Criminal Court of
Memphis 1t was to be held IN said city and have ex-
elusive original jurisdiction OF all crimes and mis-
committed against the laws OF the STATE,
within said civil districts all authority over said
officers being taken away from the Circuit Court OF
Shelby county and the Common Law and Chancery
Court of the city of Memphis.
1t was made the duty of the Sheriff of Shelby
county to attend the said Criminal Court, and per
form all the duties required of him in relation 70
such criminal business as might come before said
Court-he being entitled to the same fees ana com
pensation therefor as for like services IN other
Courts.
The said Court was to have no jurisdiction be-
yond the limits of SAID civil DISTRICTS and the eXpen
SEES of providing house in which to hold the same,
and of the jurors in said Court were required TO oe
paid by the corporation of the city Of Memphis.
Afterwards-at the same session of the Leglsla-
ture-the charter of said city was amended, ana
the collector of the county revenues for the county
of Shelby, was required to pay to the Mayor and
Aldermen Of said city, the county tax thereafter
collected within the limits OF said city, and they
were to have the fines and fOrteitures Of the Com
mon Law and Chancery Court of the city OF Mem
phis and of all other Courts which might there
after be held in said city; and the said Mayor and
dent to the holding of all such Courts
They have power given them to provide for the
erection Of all such buildings necessary for the use
of the city, for the arrest and confinement until
trial Of all Migrants, vicious, disordery persons
within the limits of the city; and to authorize the
arrest and detention of all persons violating any Or
dinance Of the city.
The city Recorder is declared to have exclusive
original Jurisdiction of all offences arising under
any violation Of the provisions OF the city charter
orn NJ oTtliu of
In September 1855. William d. Gilmore. then be-
ing the Sheriff of Shelby county, filed his petition IN
the Circuit Court of said county, stating that sad
Mayor and Aldermen of the city of Memphis mad
built good Jail in said city out OF the common
public funds of the city, and had set apart the
ground floor, or basement story Of the west end OF
said Jail for a caaboOse TO imprlsOn offenders
against the city laws and ordinances and the re-
mander Of said jaii-including all above the en-
trance floor on the east end was by Them set apart
for the Imprisonment of persons charged win
crimes and misdemeanors against the laws Of the
State and for the accommodation OF the Jallor; ;
and that there was no other Jail or safe place to
keep the prisoners committed to his charge as Sher
if within the jurisdiction Of said Criminal Court
Il was further stated that the the said Mayor and
Aldermen of the city of Memphis and Thomas b.
Mynatt city Marshal, and J. S. Dyer, Deputy Mar
shall held possession of said jail and all parts Of
the same adversely to the petitioner and his right
to the possession and control Of the same; and that
against the State, and hold them wlhoutany author
ity from the petitioner, responsibility to him or
the State for their safe keeping and that they have
ousted petitioner of his possession and control OF
said Jail tor the safe-keeplng OF prisoners COM
mtted 10 his charge, and assume to act as J6or IN
his stead against his wish and in violation Of his
right and franchise as Sheriff.
The prayer of the petition was for a writ of man
damus and that the petitioner, as Sheriff, might be
restored the possession Of all OF that part OF sand
4 H., 8, 10 of off r,I
ers against the laws of the State, and for the ac-
COmmOdatiOn of the Jailor.
An alternative mandamus was issued and served
upon tie defendants.
In this answer the facts stated in the petition are,
in substance, admitted.
They. - be sure. stated and the proof shows
that the Sheriff has, at all times, been allowed free
access the jail and prisoners confined there for Of
fences against the laws Of the State and to use the
SAID jail for the confinement Of said prisoners and
to remove them at pleasure; but this Is stated and
claimed as matter of favor to the Sheriff, and not
of right in him: and that the Mayor and Aldermen
Of the city of Memphis are the absolute owners Of
said jail and the keepers Of the same; and as such,
have the right at their will, to exclude the Sheriff
and the States prisoners therefrom. And the re-
cord shows they have accordingly appointed the
aor and have the entire control o. the JaI and the
KEYS thereof.
The Circuit Judge dismissed the petition, and the
plaintiff has appealed III error to this Court
If this be regarded a legal prison, and the
Sheriff have the right claimed by him. 1t will hard
" be denied that the writ Of mandamus is the prop
er remedy.
1t is laid down as a rule that in general where
man is refused to be admitted wrongtully turned
ont of any office or franchise that concerns the pub
lie. or the administration Of justice, he may be adj
mitted or restored by mandamus ) BaC. Alb. (ldte
Mandamus C) 26ll The rule has been applied t. the
case of Constable Bac Alb. 264.
Neither can it be maintained that, in this particu
lar case the injury to the Sheriff slnsuthcent to au
thorze the writ since he has been virtually refused
all legal authority and control over the Jail and the
and KEYS thereof have, by the Mayor and
Aldermen of the city of Memphis, been placed in the
hands Of jailor Of their own appointment.
The next question is whether anything has trans
pired since the institution of this suit to abate it.
The official term Of Gilmore, who then the
Sheriff has expired, and though Fets, his successor,
became party by an amended petition, yet his
term has also expired and his successor been elect
ed. The record does not disclose any personal, or
interest either in Gilmore Felts; but
the suit appears to have been prosecuted by them
in their official character Of Sheriff, for the time
being, for the public benefit-nOt as individuals.
IN such a case the law regards the name of the
office and not the adjunct name Of the individual,
and in it are implied all the successors that shall
eyer be TO it. each successor, for the time of his
term being the real plaRtyQ to support the action
whether described by nGTae or not. And if one |
lies or his term OF Office expire before the deter
nination Of this suit, it shall be continued b. his
successor and will not abate. Haynes IA, Polk vs..
pummer, ct al; Hum. 500.
We are of opinion, therefore, that the present /
Sheriff Of Shelby county may take the benefit Of this
Iuit.
We are next to inquire whether this is a legal /
prison for the safe custody Of all persons charged
With offences cOgniZabe in the Criminal Court Of 1
Memphis? and whether the State has not the right (
10 to regard and use il
In England jails are said 20 be of such universal
concern to the public, that none can be erected by
my less authority than by act Of Parliament All
prisons or jails belong to the King, although sub
ect may have the control, keeping of them. This
so pro bono plbco; and therefore they were to be
epared at the common charge
a subject was not allowed 70 have prison Of his
wn and therefore when the lord Of franchise or
ONE one. other than the Sheriff as was sometimes
I the prison-it was 1the Kings prison. Even a
ouse OF correction is a jail to which prisoner
harged with high treason may be committed. I
ac Alb. title GaOl and GaOler :. 4 b. Is Sg.; 4
ON Dig. little Imprisonment A. GIG; Tenn. r.
p
In Tennessee tails are usually built by the County
ourt ont of funds in the county treasury; but the
e0islatlIre may authorize them TO be constructed
y the towns and cities; land unless they be, by law,
pstrcted 20 the confinement OF particular class Of
TENDERS, It cannot, we aPprehehu, DC 4Te S
lat uDon common law principles, they VIII become
le publc prisons Of the State, TO be used for the
lfe custody of offenders; and it does not lie with
nv county town or city, to exclude the State aRdits
roper officers therefrOm.
Here there is no such restriction. On the CON
AIRY. it seems to US, from the scope and language
the acts creating this Court and amending the Gliy
larter it was intended that there should be jan
the city Of Memphis as well for the safe custody
offenders against the State laws as the CITY Or
nances. How else could public justice be admins
red or the Criminal Court be held with any safety
P convenience: 1t cannot be supposed that the
multitude Of criminals whose offences might come 4
I.hn the GOgRizaEce OF that Coult were 10 DC
ept without alGr, or be confined IN the county {
NJ at Baleigh-a distance of nine miles from the !
ty-and from thence taken and restored as they
,cpld be needed. from day to day. during the ses-
ons Of The Court
Il Is true II i not SAID in many words. that tie
ayor aud Aldermen Of Memphis should build Jail
ut what is sufficiently Implied, need not be ex-
seSsed
Tie C9gIt is to st ia the cisy.
It's Jurisdictions is confined 70 the civil districts Il
Dove mentioned which embrace the city. The ;
leritf of the county is tie Sheriff OF tGat Court
he Mayor and Aldermen OF Memphis arc 70 furnish =
court house and be at all the expenses 81 that and
other Courts of the city; may erect all buildings
cessary for the use Of the city and provide for the
rest and confinement of offenders against the city