The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1871-08-29

On the 9TH day OF August, Hamlin U.
Knowlton, while intoxicated, was arrests
ed for another offence, and admitting the
charge alleged against him, pleaded in
extenuation thereof that he was 10 such a
state of iutoxicatiou that he did not what
he was doing. Knowlton was then COM
mitted to Jail under tho provisions Of
section 33 Of chapter "a of the General
Statutes, which provides that "wheever
any person within this State shall be
found in such state of intoxicaton as
to disturb the public or domestic tranqu-
ility," any proper officer may, without
warrant, apprehend such intoxicated per-
son and detain him in custody, until in
the opinion of such officer, the person 30
detained shall be capable Of testifying
properly in court of Justice, and as
soon as may be thereafter bring him be-
fore some justice of the county" The
next day knowlton was brought before
Benjamin W. Marshall, Esq, q justice
of the peace of the County of Rutland,
and, in accordance with the provisions of
the same section, examined son oath,"
and required to disclose the place whore,
and the person of whom tho liquor 80
producing the intoxication was obtained,
and all the circumstances attending it,"
Upon this examination he disclosed" in
substance, that he obtained the liquor of
some person to him unknown, also stating
among other things, that the liquor so
obtained was all that he had drank.
The justice decided that the disclosure
was unsatisfactory, and ordered him re-
committed to jail, under the provision of
the same statute, that upon "the refusal
or neglect of such person to disclose, THAT
is, the place where, etc., no may by such
justice, be committed to the common Jail
of the county, at the expense of the State,
until he shall so disclose, or by said jus.
tice be discharged"
On the 10th, Knowlton, at his own re-
quest, was again brought before the same
justice, and further disclosed that he OBJ.
tanned liquor of another person, naming
him. The disclosure was also decided to be
unsatisfactory, and he was re-committed
to jail until such time as he should make
a satisfactory disclosure, warrants of com.
mitment being issued in both instances.
From this time he remained in Jail un.
til yesterday, when a writ of habeas cor.
pus, issued by Chief Justice Pierpoint,
was served on Sheriff Field, in the usual
form, requiring that Knowlton, with the
day and cause of his commitment, etc. he
produced before him at Vcrgennes forth.
with.
The only question raised by the petit.
ton and writ of habeas corpus, was the
right Of justice of the peace to commit
and detain in Jail person arrested as in.
toxicated after disclosure when the jus.
tice decides that the disclosure is not full
and satisfactory. Upon the hearing
which was at Chambers in Vergennes
Walter G. Dunton and II. b. Monaghan
appeared for the petitioner, and Joel c.
Baker for the State.
After hearing the counsel for the petit.
toner, Chief Justice Pierpoint, in refus.
ing to discharge Knowlton, remarked
that it appeared to him that he had nc
authority in the premises, that the pro.
ceeding of the magistrate appeared to be
all fair, and that he could not review the
decision of the officer in whom the statute
placed the exclusive power of adjudginp
upon that question. That the act of the
Justice in deciding as to the disclosure
was a judicial act, upon which the judg.
ment OF the Justice was final, and that
upon habeas corpus he had no power to
say that the judgment was wrong, and
that the question of that kind was full
and true must be left where the law leaves
it, to the Justice before whom the pris'
oner was brought. Therefore the judg'
ment must be that the proceedings upon
the habeas corpus be dismissed and the
prisoner be remanded to the Jail from
which he is brought.