Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1889-09-21
ALEXANDRIA GAZETTE AND VIRGINIA ADVERTISER
Against the State.

In the U. s. Circuit Court at Lynchburg
yesterday, Judge Bond rendered the follow
ing decision in the case of L. o. Shaner,
who had been been com mtted to jail because
he would not pay fine in money after bav-
ing rendered coupons:
Erparte Petition for release upon
Louis o. Sbaner. habeas corpus.
The petitioner states 10 his petition that he
is citizsn of Virginia residing in the city of
Lyuchburg, aud that be is illegally held In
Jail of that city by Mat ]. Day. the ser
geant and ailer of that place. That he is
so held on a cepias Issued by the Judge OF
the Corporation Court of said city demand
ing payment of a fine of 5000 and S45 80
costs imposed upon him by that court for Q
common assault OF " hich he stands convicted
therein.
The petition alleges that Shaner has again
and again rendered genuine coupons cut
from the bonds of the State of Virginia.
which coupons are receivable by law for
payment of all debts, 6ues, dues, and de
mands of the State. and that mis- custodian
has refused TO receive them as by law be
ought in payment thereof, which conduct
on the part of the sergeant impairs the obi.
gatiOn.of the contract heretofore made by
the State, with the holders of such tax
receivable coupons, and is in violation of tn.
constitution of the United States. The
return to the writ msde by the ser
geant admits the facts to be at
slated except that it does not admit OF
deny the genuineness Of the coupons tender
ed. Prima facie the obligations of the State
are genuine, end unless proof is offered to
he contrary they will be held to be 30
This case represents no new feature. The
Court of Appeals of Virginia having decided
that fine imposed by a criminal court Of
the State is a debt or demand due the State,
tender of coupons made by law receivable
for such fine must be received 10 payment
thereof We have again and again so de
cided, and would be glad to know that 5uct
decision is accepted as determined fact il
future cases without the necessity of repeat
ing it monthly at the expense of the State
From the fines imposed and the capias lie
sued on the Judgment set forth In his petit
ton the petitioner must be discharged upon
his leaving with the sergeant the coupons
| rendered.
But the sergeant sets out ia his return
that he holds the prisoner upon two Other
writs of capias Issued By the County Court
of Campbell county, and AXIS that the pris.
oner may be continued in Ill on these foI
the fine imposed by said court, he having
rendered no coupons in paym thereof
The petitioner alleges that IN these two
cases last mentioned be has filed supersedeas
bond which vscates those judgments IN
til another hearing can be had, and
that the Judge OF Campbell county cour
has approved his supersedeas bond.
Whether or not supersedeas bond is o
substitute for bail bond when motion for
new trial is pending or has been granted,
or what fleet il has under the criminal pro-
ceGure in Virginia is not a Federal Ques-
tor Writs Of habeas orpus in the Federal
Courts extend to no case except where Q
prisoner is in custody under or by order OF
authority of the United States or in viola
tion Of its constitution or some law made 10
pursuance thereof. He is to be discharged
upon dis petition here from the custody OF
the sergeant under the capias by which he
is held because the State of Virginia con-
tracted with him that she would receive
such coupon 10 payments of her demands
Not to do so is to impair the obligation Of
her contract, which by the constitution Of
the United States, to which che submitted
az paramount law when she entered the
Union, it ia forbidden her to do.
Tue other question has nothing in it of q
Federal character and if the petition hao
included the wtits of capias from Campbell
county, which it does not, and those alone,
we should have had no jurisdiction in the
matter. The prisoner is discharged from
custody under the writs of capias for fues
where he has rendered coupons in payment, |
add The sergeant will hold him, 80 far as
this Jurisdiction Is concerned, under the |
wits he holds from the court of Campbell |
county And the costs are upon the defen |
dant.