Evening journal., 1903-06-16
CASE GOES
TO HIGHER COURT
Counsel for Ex-Sherif Hope
to Argue Before Supreme
Court This Week

An effort As being made by William II.
Heald and Robert G. Harman, counsel for
Samuel A. Mcdaniel, Ex-Sherin, of New
Castle county, to have the case of Nc
Daniel VS.. the Levy Court come before the
Supreme Court at Dover this week. The
case was argued on a case stated before
the Superior Court last week. when de-
cision was given against Mcdaniel. His
counsel. however. appealed the case and
hope ito argue Vt before the Supreme Court
as soon as possible. In case, however, 1t
does rot come up this month, 1t will then
be held over until next January.
The case attracted a great dead of atten-
tion among the members Of the bar when
1t was heard last week, as there were some
Interesting legal points in the case to be
argued. IL is an action on the part Of Nc
4 Daniel for profit for board of prisoners
committed to the worNhouse during his
term of office. The court decided against
: Mcdaniel without hearing any argument
? whatever from Horace G. Knowles, who
represented the Levy Court.
Robert G. Harman made an exceptional
ly strong argument for the plaintiff His
argument was divided in four parts
He first said 1T is settled principle
of law that the adoption of a statue of an
other state carries with IL the construc-
ton that the courts of that State have
placed upon It, And the same rule of con-
struction applies in the adoption of par
ticular constitutional provision Of another
F. state. And the construed State of consti-
4 tutional provision, constitutes precedent.
A and has the force of a stare decisis In the
state adopting the same"
Il Of ha TDn1uttrarf rpnefffnffOu
4 which reads as follows, he said was taken
\ from the Pennsylvania constitution:
"No law shall extend The term OF any
4 public officer or diminish his salary OF
emoluments after his election"
The word "emolument" he said, in Sec
uon 4, imports any perquisite, advantage
\ profit or gain arising from the possession
\ Of an office. And the compensation ordered
y by authority of law to be paid TO the
sheriff for the board of prisoners in IN,
\ county Jail is an 'emolument" of his Of
8 flee within the meaning of section 4.
i He contended that the compensation or
8 dered by law to be paid to the sheriff fo
4 the boarding of prisoners IN the count!
q jail is an emolument and that a law passe,
n after the election of the sheriff reducing
his emoluments is repugnant to section
y and void.
Il Counsel for the plaintiff cited the cas-
a OF Apple VS.. county of Crawford Pa. Ap
81 pie was elected sheriff in 1873 and receive
& $3.50 per week for boarding prisoners. j
y the year 1879 the law was changed, allow
Is ing him less per week. The Pennsylvani
8 court held that the law was unconstitu
n tional.
n The Mcdaniel case he said was pract
n cally the same. Mcdaniel was electe
II sheriff I'm 1900 and received S1.4O per wee
Ii for boarding prisoners in the county jai
In the year 1901 the law was changed, n
81 lowing him less per week. This law, b
said, is therefore clearly unconstituuona
and as we adopted our constitutions
"a provision from the Pennsylvania constitl
q tion, the above case is a precedent. II
claimed the effect was the same as thoug
the matter had been actually decided 1
the Delaware court.
Mr.. Harman said that an act in the eye
81 of the law Is not deemed to have been pa
ed until it becomes operative. lie said thu
N II the salary act had been passed when Il
IA workhouse bill was. which was befo
McDanicls election, the part relating
n salary would have been void. because
b was rot law until it became operati'
IA and the salary feature was not to becon
~ operative until the workhouse was cor
rs pleted and the prisoners delivered by Il
& sheriff TO the trustees of the workhouse.