The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1889-02-23

afternoon, and announced that he would de-
eide the Milligan case on Thursday after
noon at l.30 O'Clock
When The hour arrived the space inside
the rail vas fairly damned With members Of
The bar. Every chair was occupied and
seyera, legal lights reposei among the folds
Of the window curtains. The scene was an
Impressive one 1t lkened more 10 gath
ering to pay tribute TO the memory of one
/, departed than TO u business session of the
court. Nhan Judge Stipp began speaking
turned upon his furrowed conference, and
none more earnestly and intently than that
of the old sheriff.
}, Judge Supp carefully dissectei the case,
giving his conclusions upon each contested
point fully and explicitly. The sheriff was
not entitled to receive more than the earn
ipgs of his office would cover. Two items
lin dispute, whether the sheriff or the county
should pay the jaior and give remuneration
for guarding prisoners The Jail must he
supported at the expense of the county, not
at that of the sheriff. In large counties like
this this is perfectly manifest. For the
sheriff to discharge the duties of his office
and take care OF the Jail is an imposslbility.
The statute provides and the court finds
that the sheriff is entitled to pay the jailor :
salary from the county. In regard to Jail
guard the real question is. was it necessary?
The defense contended that the sheriff should
have the advice and authority of one of the
circuit court judges. The position was UNI
tenable. 1t is not the position precedent to
his recovery against the county. If a guard
is necessary it is not the intention of the
legislature that he take anyOne's advice
The board Of supervisors allowed the charge
as Just one. No evidence is introduced
going to prove the guard unnecessary, and
the court allows the charges.
Upon the question of emolument for sum
} moning grand and petit jurors and subpoena.
; ing witnesses before the grand jury, Judge
I Sipp said that these were not fees in
criminal cases. but services required for the
, benefit of the county, and that he was of the
opinion, that the law authorizes the
f boari of supervisors to pay for these ser
vices. Wherever the statute has fixed the
, fee of the sheriff, and it is not in crimi
nal case, the sheriff is entitled to recover.
The board was warranted in allowing the
= charges.
I AS the law stands, the people pay no
= costs in criminal cases, with the single ex-
ception that where the fees in civil cases
are insufficient to meet the sheriff's individ'
ual salary, the deficit should be made up by
5 allowing him fees in criminal cases. This
emergency did not occur, and therefore the
! charges for subpoenaing witnesses, serving
capiases, attachments, scire facias and cit,'
- tions were disallowed.
9 The charges for insane and dependent
children cases we're allowed, as per stipula-
to n, as the cases are of q civil nature.
), COURT FEES.
: In the matter of fees for attendance on
1 the circuit, county and probate courts, the
Y court held that the sheriff WAS entitled to
8 recover In the circuit court he is entitled
:. to three dollars per day. He charged for
r two deputies, but could not charge more
y than two dollars and half per day for the
; second deputy. The court must always be
Q we'll served Con stables, bailitfs or other
officers may be employed and their emolu
4 ment is fixed at two dollars and a half per
day. Mr. Milligsn employed no bailiffs II
cut no figure who performed the work, he
: was entitled to three dollars per day for the
deputy, and two and half dollars for the
u other persons furnished Under the same
u rule of law, he is entitled to compensation
for services in the county court, AS to thu
county. The statute establishing it wal
enacted after the statute was passed. which
allows the sheriff fees for actual time spen
in that court at the request of the county
{ Judge, who acts as probate judge in all coun
ties but La Sale and Cook. The law com
pels him to attend, whether requested or not
and for this service he is entitled to twt
, dollars per day
The defense maint aimed that the sheriff
was not entitled TO fees for attendance upOr
I the grand jury. lie is not, if he PERSONAL!
performs the duty, but the appellate cour
%, decided that if he furnishes constable OF
. other officer, he may draw two dollars and
half per day.
- Judge Stipp decided that the point mad
by the defense that the sheriff was not en-
titled to recompense for attendance upol
the county board, was not well taken. TIT
board has the power to use its discretion
:, He would allow for the services.
h The claim of the defense that the sheriff
q should not receive payment for the care o
O sick prisoners, was erroneous. The burden
q of caring for sick prisoners should certainly
Ia, Al Il,