Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1884-02-06
y As % II I DER.
w~u. j JAEuRLING,

On motion the report Of the committee was
| adopted, and orders destroyed according to law
The special investigating committee on jus
ticcs, marshals, and cOnstables accounts, Offel
| the following report:
To the Board Of Supervisors of Jefferson Coun
| ty;
| Your committee to whom was referred the du
| ty of investigating matters in relation to Jus
| tees Constables' and marshaIs' accounts have
| had the mattersssu ubmitteG to them under consid
| Grafton and respectfully report that we have
| caused several Witnesses to come before us
and have examined cases and the papers. Ill
cases before w. ID. Stacy and j. G. Halliger, o.
| the city Of Watertown and Christopher Grimm
and Z. f. Krebs, of the city of Jefferson.
In the examination Of Mr.. Stacy we find that
from Nov. IA, 1882, to April l, 1882 there was
before him charged with being vagrants 63 cases
that out OF this number OF cases, so of them, the
defendants were sentenced to jail or leave the
county, leaving but IL cases in which the defend
every instance the defendants left the county
when they had an opportunity. And for want o1
any satisfactory evidence to establish the fact
that they would leave the county sooner after
such sentence concluded from the evidence
of Mr. stacy they left as soon as they were re-
lieYed from custody, and we further concluded
from his testimony that they would have gone
before the costs were made had they been threat
ened with arrest. OF the 63 cases before Mr..
Stacy, j. Eitf1er, deputy city marshal was com
plaInant, and executed the warrant in Al; John
Rechardt, city marshal, was complaining wit
ness and executed the warrant in 6; n. Bruegger,
deputy sheriff, made the complaint and execut-
the complaint and executed the warrant in 1,
and G. F, ZauJner made the complaint and exc
cuted the warrant in 2. The Justices costs in
the cases here referred to is about the sum OF
$3.50. 80; John Reichardt, city marshal fees S10.-
25: M. Cunningham $1.S6; j. Eitf1er, deputy city
marshal S133.O7; N. Bruegger, deputy sheriff $10.-
IS and G. f. Zautner $11.21
Upon the examination OF Mr. StaCy's docket,
the papers in the cases and the certified state
ments filed with the clerk of this Board we find
that all of the cases were for vagrancy, when in
foct tbn mt vac
rants but were made tramps, and should have
been treated and sentenced as such, and no judg-
ment or sentence made in conformity with the
tramp act
Your committee find upon the examination of
Justice Halliger's docket, papers in the ca ses,
and the certified state ements on file with the
clerk of this Board that he had 42 cases. 20 OF
these cases the prisoners were discharged and
the costs taxed against the county. For these
az cases Mr.. Halliger has filed a claim agains
the county for Sl23.S6. }. Elhter, deputy city
warrant in Is cases, and has an account against
Jefferson county for S42.55. J. Re1chardt, city
marshal, was complaining? witness ana the ON
Ger executing the warrant in cases, aud has an
account against the county for $3.50. n. Brueg-
ger, deputy sheriff, was complaining witness
and executed the warrant in % cases, and has an
account against the county for S93.46.
Upon the examination of Mr.. Halliger, his
docket. the papers in the cases and the certified
statements filed with the clerk of this Board we
find that all of the cases were for vagrancy when
in fact the defendants were, under the statute,
not vagrants but tramps, and should have been
treated and sentenced as such, but no Judgment
or sentence was made in conformity with the
tramp act.
Both in Mr.. Stacy's ana Mr.. Halliger's cases
we find that in many Instances that there are
more than one defendant. We also find that IN
many instances whe re cases on the same day
might have been united and thereby save heavy
charges against the county, your committee has
failed to find any good reasons why they were
not.
Your committee find upon the examination of
Christopher Grimm, his docket, papers in the
cases and the statements filed with him with
the clerk of this Board, that he had before him
so cases which were under the tramp act, and III
all of the cases except ten the statutory judg-
where there was from two to Eve cases upon one
day and your community are of the opinion if
the officers had had the interests of the county
at heat, nearly ifnot all of these several par