St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-07-16
SHERIFF CHAPEL WILL DRAW
ONLY THE SMALL SUM
OF SIT
FOR THE DOUBLE HANGING.
JUDGE OTIS FINDS THE LAW
DOES NOT WARRANT PAY
MENT OF BONUS.
BIG FEE BILLS HEADED oFR
By Mayor Smith When They Arc
Presented to the County
Legislature.

Judge Otis, in a decision filed yes-
terday, says that Sheriff Charles E.
Chapel is not entitled to the fat
claim he made for expenses in con-
nection with the execution of Err
! misch and Wonigkeit Mr.. Chapel at
first wanted $1,000 extra compensa-
| ton from the county for performing
his duty in the case. Then he
knocked off the 81 900 fee for the
actual hanging and sought the as
sistance of the legislature to re-
ceover this, thinking there would be
no objection to the allowance of the
5000 remaining.
But the Globe called attention
to the fact that Mr.. Chapel was get
| ting fees as compensation for fur.
nishing all the help necessary to
run his office, and was not entitled
to the amount claimed, as it includ+
ed extra compensation for the en-
ployment and board of watchnen
to guard the doomed men. Notwith-
standing this, the county commits
SlonerS allowed the bill; but, thanks
again to the watchfulness of the
q b e, backed by the county at
torney and county auditor, the game
was blocked by an appeal being
taken to the court from the COM
missioners' allowance of the claim.
Judge Otis heard the case some
time ago, and took it under consider
alton, his decision being filed yester-
day, as stated. In this decision the
+! court finds that the sheriff is en-
titled to nothing for his extra watch-
men, but
/ ALLOWS HIM $244
for his other expenses, summing the
case up in the following language:
! The allegations of the complaint are
true, except that the sums so advanced
and paid by the sheriff for services
! and board of watchmen were not adj
vanced and expended for said county,
save only that he expended the same
for the better and more effectual per-
formance by hin of the duties and OBJ
| legations on him by law imposed as
/ jailer and custodian of the Jail and
| said prisoners therein confined.
! Said sheriff was without authority
| to hire or employ for and at the de-
! fendants expense any persons as
"eiNSiliiiCI OIllcl llIdil lie Sdlu persons
SO paid by defendant. AS conclusions
J of law the court finds that plaintiff is
| entitled to judgment against the de-
! fendant for the sum of $244, with in
/ terst since June 6, 1895, with costs and
disbursements.
| The memorandum of the judge sets
forth:
The sheriff by law is custodian of the
Jail and charged with the duty of safe
ly keeping all prisoners committed to
his custody. He accepts the office cum
onere and can receive only such COM
pensation as is contemplated and all
lowed by law. The statutes authorize
and require the county commissioners
to allow the sheriff $720 each per an
mum for one night Watchman and two
turnkeys of the jail.
And this, in my judgment, is lin.
itation upon the amount which can
be allowed by them for such purpose.
The plaintiffs claim is in excess of the
sum so accorded him and must be diss
allowed.
The other items so charged for stand
on a different footing. No objection
is offered or seriously urged to the all
lowance for the two suits of clothes,
serving warrants and copying of findI
! ings. AS for the rope, though seldom
required, it is none the less a proper
adjunct of the sheriff's office, and like
other necessary furniture of the jail,
should be provided by the county. The
enclosure for the execution may also
be made to rest on the same principle.
The execution is to take place when
practicable in the Jail, otherwise in an
enclosure to be erected, not by the
Oh l,,& Iic Il;
county commissioners are to furnish
and provide a jail, and if this does not
prove suitable for the execution of the
death sentence it seems to me within
: their implied power to- provide a suita-
BILE place, to-wit, the inclosure required
by law, which is in the nature of an
adjunct to the Jail. This item, there
fore, should be allowed.