Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1865-01-31

:. Z 2 Wal. y. STATE Of Indians: su'Ae'-

i've shots. wiih0at hitting him once The CAP
tain was sent BY the lower court two years to the
penitentiary. charged with intent 70 kill. and the
matter. 10 viii he observed. has been affirmed ]
Jacob Huber W. William J. II Robinson. On
The application OF Huber, a writ of hsbeas cor
pus was issued by the clerk Of this court on the
order of Chief Justice Ray. directed TO the de-
fendant Robinson, sheriff CT Marion county,
commanding him TO have the body OF Huber
&c before the Judge Aforesaid, at &c. on &C,
20 do and receive what shall be ordered, dc.
To this writ the defendant, makes the follos
ing return:
Il hereby produce said Jacob Huber in obcdi
ence 10 the order Of the writ OF habeas corpus
herein ! bold said Huber under the authority
OF al order from Hon Solomon Blair, Judge of
the court Of common pleas OF this district, a
copy OF which order Is filed herewith. and which
order was made upon the conviction of said Hg-
Der. IN the court OF common pleas of Hendricks
county, upon an information filed in sid court,
by the district attorney thereof. at the January
term 1865. upon which conviction said Huber
was duly sentenced 10 pay TO the state OF Indiana
the sum of two hundred dollars aDd costs OF the
suit, and to be imprisoned in the county Jail OF
Hendricks county, and until said fine and costs
are paid or r~eplevied
The copy Of the order of Judge Blair Is az
follows:
State OF Indiana, Hendricks county: In the
court of common pleas. January term A. ID. 1865.
Wednesday, January %, Ices.
State of Indiana va Jacob Huber. lnforma-
ton for keeping a disorderly house. Comes Ed
mund II Slranghsn. sheriff Of Hendricks coun-
~, and on his application. il is ordered that the
said Jacob Huber be committed to the Marion
county jail. the Jail of this (Hendricks) county,
being insufficient to keep prisoners.
Signed SoLoNOS BLAIR,
Judge G. C.. 2. 10Th Dist.
To this return the plaintiff Huber demurs.
The jurisdiction OF the court OF common pleas
in this state. in criminal prosecutions. il only co
extensive with the limits of the county.
This court in the case of Sherry VS.. Winton, |
Indiana 90, Judge Blackboard, delivering the opin-
ion. said: "A circuit court is d county court
only, whose jurisdiction is limited. generally by
the bounds OF the county. Ii can issue no pro
cess whatever. mesne or final, to any other coun
~, unless by some special statutory provision"
The only statute under which it is claimed, thai
Huber is held by the sheriff OF Marion county,
on a conviction in Hendricks county, for keeping
\ disord-rly house. is as follows: When there
- no sufficient prison in any county wherein any
criminal onense shall have been committed. any
judge of the circuit or common pleas court Of
such county, upon application of the sheriff. may
order any person charged with a criminal Offense
and ordered to be committed to prison, to be sent
- 80 ~ Nb0 O0ANT ~ "a - C0at
cient Jail: and the sheriff Of such nearest county
shall, on exhibit OF such judges order, receive
aud keep in custody in the jail of his county, the
prisoner ordered TO be committed as aforesaid,
at the expense of the county from which such
prisoner was sent; aud the said sheriff shall, up
on the order of the circuit court, or a judge of
the court of common pleas. re deliver such pris-
oner when demanded - Gavin & Hord All,
sec. III.
Looking at the precise words used. and con-
STRUNG them in their ordinary sense the plain
meaning OF this statute taken together is, that
any one charged with a criminal offence and be-
fore conviction may on the order of the
Judge, in the case contemplated 10y
the section, be removed to the
stands charged. And under the rule of law on
this subject il Is the duty OF this court TO give
this conclusion to this statute, unless il would
lead to an absurdity, or manifest injustice.
Parke h, IN Perry vs.. Skinner, q NJ. K W.
40. We do not think this a case requiring ju-
d'cial Interpretation. changing the plain and oh.
vious meaning Of the words of the act.
Ii Ia the duty of each county in this state to
provide a common Jail. IL may so happen by ac-
cident or otherwise that for a limited period some
OF the counties may not have such jail in such
case II would be very proper that persons charged
with crime should be safely held for trial; other
wise the greatest offenders might escape. But
where Imprisonment in the county Jail is the
punishment for a crime of which the person has
been convicted, it seems 10 us not the policy of
the law to increase that punishment by removing
the criminal to a neighboring county. away from
home ana friends. Such a course results in On
inequality in the punishment of offenders.
And in the language of Blackford j.. in the
case OF Sherry Va. Winter Supra, "a person is
not TO be shut up within the walls OF a prison,
but in cases where the law plainly authorizes his
Imprisonment" '
The sheriff OF Marion county is not an officer
OF the court of common pleas of Hendricks
county, and he cannot, OF course, in the absence
OF any special statutory provision on the subject,
execute the process of such court
Sherry vs. Winton Supra. IL follows that the
order OF Judge Blair for the removal Of Huber is
void, aud In contemplation of law, Huber il. or at
least ought 10 be in the custody Of the sheriff Of
Hendricks county And under the provisions of
sections 12o and ia Of the code. . Gavin & Hord
PIP. 3l9. 800. il should be ordered that said
Jacob Huber be discharged from the custody of
the said defendent Robinson. the sheriff of Mar
ion county. and remanded to the custody of the
sheriff of Hendrick county.
Which order was accordingly made by Chief
Justice Ray.