, 1873-02-22
Important Decision Of tho Supreme
Court Of Illinois.
A Saving Of $470,40 This
Week in Jury Fees.
The Victim Of q Mock Marriage
Comes into Court for lIOr
Rights.
Fitting with $4,000 Worth
Of Goods by Might.
Particulars of the Great $500, 900
Railroad Suit.

OF the Great $500, 900
Railroad Suit. Il
Bankruptcy, Criminal, and Cen
era1 Notes.
Tho following decision has boon fllod In tho |
Supreme Court Of Illinois, Tic opinion is by |
Judge MoAllister. Tho tltlo of tho cause iss !
Ba1this Myers u.s. The People, eto., appeal from /
Bureau County. Judge MoAlister said:
Under tho proya1ona Of tho act to increase tho nria-
was IN s oeuaS
f. ssSss
ts.ppeatsna p liquors IL q te State ei insts spprsvsa
guilty; ID TOOK an appeal, under tho psovislsns ef
xhors y ~ tts ,naemsat Of t5o county
brought e this court BY witt of error. Tho error
assigned which is principally relied upon, was, TINT
r. @ to es on s oqaS Il
apply 70 a The County Courts M IL tho sts;c t.,
Ss b. IL or each
one County Judge and one olesk Of tho County Court
whose term OF office shall be four years, hut tho Gen.
or Judges who shall tuke tho place Of md excr-
County oours sa b. Gsurs q rocord aad ss
hayp Original Jurisdiction in n matters Of probate,
q a aa he seent q
ther accounts IN NIL natters relating to apprentices,
assossmenta and such other Jurisdiction as may 10
provided foE BY gsneIa law" Hcro IL distinctly de-
1ned Courts OF particular class or grade. :.
tT6ntF.nDih Arctinu C0ntntnH
court shall b general and Of uniform operation, md
9ar regulated BY law and Tho force md ecct Of tic
lily shall b. uiiorn '' ~'e@'e' -''@' ~''' ''''A
Tho rst section q the act to increase tho uriso-
that in addition to tic Jurisdiction now conferred by
law the County Courts Of h!a statc thoy nla here
l. ooneurrent jurisdeien v viii tis h oireut Court.
IN I'll that class Of casea wherein Justices now or here
after may hare Jurisdiction, whore the amount clatn
ID, or the yalo Of tile property In controversy, shall
not exceel $500.
s eli a p s9e
1nsdemeanora where tho punishment il not iprtson-
when tho pssonor Indicted n lie des eour for
greater oenre and is found guilty Of lesser une,
County Court the Circuit Court ehall not 10 oustcd Of
IT, 5uEis4lctlon, hut nay snter tudgment and SEN
Court rnay indict for all offences ereofore which
Indictment for offence coguizablo in tho County
Court ahs be certified to the County Court for pro-
Tho last section Of ibis net declares That "tho pro-
by tho last State or Federal eeusuu, one hundre1
thousand population" II this section can be per
the act Would n not IT. appy 10 the Goy x donrs ens
Of Cook County, besauso that County la
oa t1o last M h9 time tho &c; Wod a1s
Courts throughout the State rold have the incresse1
5Ss;sa,e9n sySsn by ns ss szfsp Aat il 0oeE
In direct violation Of Section 20 Of Article Of the Con
'sttution docs not admit Of Doubt That soction I'M
M s
90 far regulated By la-Aat Is, BY statnte-bo uni
class graae Courts here sought 10 b Regulated BY
sta;s and oy tle lat seon q the se that Courts
Wholly void q 7 OILY % Is to ths Il as .eeiops
% tho sans e1esntton had been embodied In tho nrst
ssos1on and hns US created dependence Of par
ons t ttestn.s, then al would havs to fan togeter
the remaining parts of Tue aatule With the exception
It !s general rule and founded In good sense,
stands 50 Independently Of itself that it ay be re-
ected aud yet enve hat which remains 10 complete
act should be construed tie sauo AS If t,o yoi .xt
had never been inserted.
yadsr these rules. we hold that ut liberty to
Terms q tne ss section, 1t will apply to al the County
The Lust elauas OF Section 10 Of Article Q, above
quoted is broad enough 10 warrant tho Legislature in
son1sF19g upon tho County Courts Of the State
oause must be construed In connection with tho other
provisions Of the same instrument.
tuition declares thut the Circuit Courts shai have
original 3urtsdiction Of al causcB IN law aud equity
ded BY The Legssture cpe,ores, es L. nss pro, no
nower to aSIdgo or restrict the rt.dlcon circuit
dvson Of st section Of the act IN m auoson sd by
pIoy1ding that County Courts shall Aava exclusive
eli ii IL E
@ r. whsh the County Courts hayo cognzaneo
1r ov be
IN thu eaaea Bpecanea, upon county Courts, md tho
not :, as to anps 5 to The
naissye With tue qualifications specified, pre-
nssd 70 hd The at 9 asfsaso ns
This dispoaca Of the principal question In tho case.
Ihere arc some minor points mado in respect to tho
proceeaing 1taelf but noue Of which nre well takeu.
The Information. for aught tha appears, was properly
ea by tho Prosecuting Attorney, under Tue pfoviyons
ssanst Sn ev. s rssalt'as is from
nation, the anles Of tho person or persons,
to whom The liquor Sold The provision III last
that act il should not bo necessary 10 atns tho name
OF the person to whom sold, wholly unnecessary
TO requiro US to nor nt o nas ot he M poraon ' to
whom liquor sold should be stated in the nforna-
uon for offences unlor thu frat section.
Under tho second section, where lie offence couBlsa
OF Tho ealo to specified clnHs Of 1crBous, TO por-
son In particular condition or VI Certain habits at
the time tho uano or names should 10 stated In order
to give tho accused IN opportunity to propaIe ILLS de-
fence.
There was al nlday1t in this cnse which statca oil
that required to e ataol and upon which perjury
could DO assgued, an we aro Of opinion That tue NTH
with reference TO tho atxth section 81 Tho Diil Of
lights, which declares tl.at 'no warrant shall 1ssuc
without probable cause, supported by ntdnyl" cto.
may tsae wlthout n1lav tho tlnor would bo open TO
fntoerabo abNse every man'a liberty WonIa 10 ut tho
mercy or the caprice 1naco Of the State or County
Attorney -
Finding In the record, the Judgment Of tho
Court lolow Ia affirmed. Affirmed
ANOTHEn UNMARRIED wotlAN CLA1a1g TIE RIGHTS
or WIFE,
An extraordinary suit fur n1ailtena,lce cana