Butler citizen. [volume] (Butler, Pa.) 1877-1922, 1880-04-14
&c SITS on County.
THE SUPREME COURT OBJECTS TO THE
MUCH ABUSED PROVISION FOR PILING
THE COSTS ON THE COUNTY IN ALL
TxsnoDT.N Mt nErIlION

OF Tue SupTemt SOuIt. no fo
which it settles is of vital Importance
to the taxpayers of all the counties OF
the State, relieving the county from
the payment of justices and constables
costs in all cases of summary convic-
ton of offenders before Justices OF the
Peace where the convicts are discharg-
ed without the payment of costs, un-
less the Act of Assembly under which
they are tried and convicted requires
the county to paw them, or soue other
Act imposes the responsibility on the
county.
LAFAYETTE BARR VS.. CRAWFORD co.
And now, May p, 1879, it is hereby
agreed by and between the parties, that
an amicable action be entered on the
records in the above court, and that the
following case be stated for the opin-
ion of the court in the nature OF a
special verdict.
The plaintiff in this case is an act
ing Justice of the Peace in the 4th
Ward of the city of Meadville. That on
the 4th of March, 1879, one Elmer
Stebbins was brought before him,
charged with violation of the Act OF
Assembly, "For the prevention OF tres
passing upon railway trains and con-
sequent injury to minors and other per-
sons" Approved March "a, 1873, P. L.
1875. That the said defendant was con-
victed before him, sentenced to pay a
fine of five dollars and costs, and to be
imprisoned in the county jail for the
term of ten davs, and the defendant re-
fusing to pay said penalty the said
Justice committed him as by Act OF
Assembly prescribed
That upon the expiration of time OF
Imprisonment in said sentence men,
toned, the said defendant was dis
charged by the Sheriff of said county
by direction of the County Commis-
sioners without fine or costs being paid
by said convict.
That the plaintiff in this case has de-
manded his proper costs to be paid out
of the county funds, and that the Com
missioners of said county refused go to
pay for the reason that the act raises
no obligation upon the county to pay
If the court should be of the opinion
that the county of Crawford is liable
for said costs, that judgment be enter
in favor of plaintiff, but if not, judg-
ment to be entered for the defendant.
Costs of suit to follow judgment, each
party reserving the right to sue out
writ of error.
MYRoN PARK DAVIS,
Atty for Plaintiff.
THOMAS RHoDDY,
Atty for Co. Comm'rs.
The Court below, on the case stated,
entered judgment for the plaintiff
holding that in such case the county
washable, whereupon the County Com
missioners took out writ of error to
the Supreme Court, and last Novem-
Der the case was fully argued by the
Commissioners attorney, Thos. Rhod-
dy, Esq. On January 5, 1880, the
opinion of the Court, finding for the
county, was delivered by Justice
Turnkey.
OPINION OF COURT.
The opinion of the Court was deliv-
cred at Philadelphia Jan. 5th, 1880, by
Turnkey, j.:
For prosecution of trespassers upon
railway trains it has been enacted that
the trespasser, upon conviction before
Justice of the Peace, shall forfeit and
pay penalty of not less than i've dol
lars nor more than fifteen, and be CON-
mitted to the county jail for period
not exceeding ten days but if ne neg
lect to pay the penalty and costs i'm
mediately, he shall be committed for a
further ten days.-Act March 25, 1878;
p. l.. l25. Punishment at hard labor is
not authorized That has not provided
that the county shall pay the costs, if
the convicted trespasser be lawfully
discharged without having paid the
same.
To recover the costs accrued in
criminal proceeding it is necessary to
show statute obliging the county to
pay, and when this cannot be done an
action against the county must fail. 1t
is said the plaintiff may recover by vir-
tue Of clause in the Gath section OF
the Act of March 81, 1860; 2. L. AS,
namely, that in all cases Of convic-
ton all costs shall be paid by the par
ty convicted, but when such party shall
have been discharged according to law
without payment of costs, the costs OF
prosecution shall be paid by the coun-
ty." That section is part OF the Grim
inal procedure act, and is a consolida-
ton of sections | | and IL of the act of
September 20, 1871. 4 Carey Il Bio
ren's Laws so, see. of the act of Mar.
20 1897, Id. 224, and sec. l3 of the
act of March %, 1914, p. l.. 329. The
act 1871, sec. l3, declared that the
county should pay the costs on indict-
ments returned ignoramus, aud the act
of 1897 imposes like obligations when
a party charged should be acquitted
by the petit jury. Later acts made the
provisions in all cases of such acquit-
tai apply to felones only The act of
1871, sec. Is, enacted "that in all cases
where any person shall be convicted of
anv offenses which shall be punished
capitally or by imprisonment at hard
labor, the county shall pay the costs of
prosecution, if the defendant hath not
property to pay the same" Prior to
1860 it was decided that the county
was liable under that section, for costs
on conviction and sentence of person
before Justice of Peace, for an offense
punishable at hard labor; but not un-
less the conviction and sentence show
ed the case was within said act. County
Northampton VS.. West; Carey l73
county of Cumberland VS.. Holcomb
IL Carey 349. The act 1914, sec. l3,
enacted chat in case of conviction in
any court of Oyer and Terminer,
Quarter Sessions or Mayors Court, all
costs shall be paid by the convicted, but
when such parties shall have been dis