Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1897-10-29
Judge Cole Renders an Important
Decision Today.
COMMISSIONER MILLS STATUS
His Appointment Declared to Be in
Due Legal Form.
THE POLICE URr

| Hey LAWS as 10 the validity OF the ap-
pointment, last July, by the District Su-
preme Court, Of Samuel c. Mills as Unit
| ed States commissioner, holding that the
appointment was authorized and sanctioned
| by law. In disposing of the matter, Judge
Cole also decided that the Police Court of
| the District is a court of the United States,
and that person sentenced by that court
10 Imprisonment in default of a fine i'm
| posed therein can be lawfully discharged
Dy an United States commissioner under
the provisions of what is known as "the
poor convicts act,' which act provides
'hat' where person is confined in default
OF the payment of a fine. the convict shall
after the expiration of thirty days of i'm
p,no,.inens, De released upon the commits
s,o. peing satisfied that the convict is
not worth more than 500, and is. therefore
urable to pay the fine. =
The District Attorneys Contention.
IL Will be recalled that Congress in Nav.
lso6' enacted that the terms of office of all
united States commissioners should ex-
pre- June 80 1857, and that thereafter they
should be appointed by the District courts
OF each of the judicial districts OF the
United States. Several weeks aso q man
sentenced by the Police Court to pay a
me OF Sl5, or, in default of its payment to
De imprisoned in jail for sixty DAVIS an
pied to Commissioner Mills for his release
under the provisions of the poor convicts,
act
District Attorney Davis being notified If
the mans application, filed in the District
supreme Court petition for a writ of Ger
tlorari, which petition, being granted by
suoge Cole. brought up before the judge
Tor review the whole matter. The case was
argued several days ago by District Attor-
ney Davis, representing the United States.
and by ex-District Attorney A. A. Birney'
on behalf of Commissioner Mills, Mr..
hni I,
supreme Court was, and is without lawful
authority or power to appoint United States
commissioners, because, as Mr. Davis sub
IN. mat court did not and does not ex-
ISL IN any of the judicial districts of the
United states. Mr.. Davis also argued that
the Police Court of the District is not a
court of the United States, that the pro-
visions of the poor conyicts' ACT do not
apply to persons sentenced in the Police
Court, and that when the defendant failed
10 accept the privilege of paying the fine
the sentence resolved itself into one of inn
prisonment only.
Mr.. Birney's Position.
MI Birney, of course. took just the op-
posite position On each of Mr.. Davis prop
ositions, and Judge Cole today sustained
MT. DAVIS predecessor in each instance,
with one exception, Mr.. Birney having con-
tended that Commissioner Mills iuris-
diction and authority should have been
i"S-'ei'hS' ny quO WdTTdntO instead OF by
writ of certiorar After reviewing at
great length the law providing for the
establishment Of the CID Circuit Court of
the District of Columbia and the District
supreme Court, Judge Cole decided that
While the District of Columbia is NOT one
OF the judicial districts of the United
states in the general acceptance of that
Term. yet 1t is, nevertheless, Il judicial
uistrlct, having District Court, and that
Congress Intended. in the act of May, 1895,
mat United States commissioners shall be
appointed by the Supreme Court of the
District of Columbia as it undoubte5I,,
authorized the old Circuit Court of fhc
District of Columbia to appoint them In
oeed, SAID Judge Cole such authority of
the latter court received executive iuGi-
c1al and legislative declaration for three
tourths of a century, and Congress in pass
ing the act of May, 1886, Cid SO with full
knowledge of all that
Referring to the contention that tho po-
lice Court of the District of Columbia 10
not court of the United States Judge COLE
SAID that the United States Supreme Court
has decided that the District Supreme Court
is court of the United States. and Tho
Court in General Term, in the case of the
United States against Norval held that a
United States commissioner has jurisdic-
ton to discharge, under the provisions of
the poor convicts act, a person sentenced
in the District Supreme Court In legis-
latinS for the District of Columbia. ex-
plalned Judge Cole, Congress does not act
Z,
representative of the United States, and. in
establishing the District Police Court it
therefore made that court a court of the
United States. The judge remarked that
II would be anomalous to hold that per
sons in other parts Of the country, as well
as those sentenced in the Supreme Court of
the District of Columbia, could be released
under the provisions of the poor conyicts'
act. and those sentenced by the District
Police Court could not be.
Power of United States COmmis-
siOner.
The prisoner, in the present instance. ex-
planned Judge Cole. was sentenced to pay
a fine of 3d. or. in default of it's payment,
to be imprisoned sixty days. That court,
he further explained, undoubtedly had the
power to set aside the fine at any time dur
ing the term in which it was imposed and
make the sentence one of Imprisonment
but that was not done. Consequently tie
prisoner, at any time during the term Of
imprisonment, could have escaped further
incarceration by paying the fine. In other
words. remarked Judge Cole, he is imDris-
ored because he did not pay the fine m
posed upon him. and is entitled to his re-
release under the provisions of the poor
conv1cts' act, provided, of course, he salts
hes the commissioner that he is unable 20
pay the fine because Of his poverty
Judge Cole thereupon directed the writ of
certiorari to be quashed, and remanded the
case to Commissioners HI