Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1871-09-01

On The a day Of August, i'imliu G. knowl-
ton, while intoxicated. wss arrested f5r smother
offence, and admitting be charge slla ged against
him, p,eliel in exteuuatln thereof that be
was ia such state cf iutoXicasou that be
dii lot know what he was doing kuowlton
wSs then committed 70 jail under the provisions
OF section 53 Of chapter Z Of the General
Statutes, which pr5viies thar ." whenever any
person within this State siil. be fouu in such q
state Of intoxicatiou as 20 disturb the pabic or
domestic trsutuiity,' any proper ctii;er may,
without warrant, apprehcui such intoxicated
person and detsiu him 30 custody, d" until ia
the opinion Of such officer. the person 50 de-
tanned shall be capable of test:fyin- pro
perly in court Of Justice, anu as soon
a. may he thereafter bring him be-
fore some justice of tie county" The next
dsy knowton WAS brought before Beritmiu "
Marshall, Esl justice Of the peace Of the
County Of Rutland, aud, in accordance with
the provisions Of the sane section, examined ''on
oath, aui required 20 " disclose the place
where, aai The person OF whom the liquor 50
prciucin- The iuicxiczIou vas obtained. and
an tie circumstances attending IL" Upon this
examination he " disclosed" 8" IL substance that
be obtained the liquor Of some person to him
unknown. sll0 stating, among other things,
that the liquor so obtained was all that he hsI
drank
The ius Zee decided TIA. tie disclosure was
unsatisfactory, and ordered him recommitiei to
Jail. under the provision of the same statute,
that upon the refusli or neglect Of such per
son 70 disclose. ,thst is the place where, etc,
he may, by such justice, be committed 70 the
common jail Of the county. AZ the expense ofthe
State. until he shall So disclose, o. by sad jus
tce be discharged"
On tie I0,h, huowl,on, ct his oRu request.
w.s sgaiu brought before tae same Justice, sui
further disclosed that he obtained liquor Of sno-
ther person. naming him. The disclosure was
slso decided 10 be unsatisfactory, and be was
re-coLmij,el to jail until such time SIS he should
make a satisfactory disclosure, warrants of COM
mitIneut being issued 10 both instances
From this tine he remained in jail until yes.er-
day, when a writ Of habeSs corpus, issued by
Chief Justice Pcrpoint, was served on Sheriff
Field, in the usual form, requiring that kuoEl-
ton, with the day and cause OF his commitment,
etc he produced before him at Fergennes forth
With.
The only question rai ell by tie petition sad
writ Of habeas corpus, Vas the righ, Of a justice
Of the peSce to commit and ietain in Jail person
arrested az intoxicated sf,er disclosure when the
justice decides thst the disclosure is not full aud
satisfactory. Upon the hearing, which was ar
Chambers in Vergennes. Walter c. Dunton an
H. B. Monaghan appeared for the petitioner,
aud Joel c. Baker f5r Stste.
After hearing the counsel for the petitioner,
Chief Justice Pierpoint. in refusing 20 discharge
Know ton, remarked that il appeared to him
that he hal ne authority in the premises, that
the proceeding Of the magistrate appeared to be
all fair. and that he could not review the deci-
zion Of the officer in Whom the statute placed the
exclusive power Of sdjudging upon that question.
That the act Of the Justice in deciding as to the
disclosure WAS a judicial act, upon which the
judgment Of the Justice Wss final, snd that upon
hsbeas corpus he bad no power to say that the
judgment was wrong, snd thst the question Of
thar kind vas full and true must be left where
the law leaves II. to the Justice hefcie whom the
prisoner was brought. Therefore the judgment
must be that the proceedings upou the hsbsss
corpus be dismissed ami the prisoner be remand
ell to the Jail FROM which he is brought.