Montour American. (Danville, Pa.) 1866-1920, 1908-12-10
SHERIFF Wins
THE Case

Judge Evans Saturday morning hand
ed down an opinion in the case of D.
o. Williams vs.. the County OF Mon
tour, which was an action brought to
recover 60 go for boarding Andrew
Kodack, and Michael Manerick, two
prisoners who served a term in the
county prison for illegal car riding.
Judgment was entered in favor of the
sheriff.
The circumstances of the case will
readily be recalled. The two above
named men were arrested for illegal
car riding last summer. The county
commissioners. who oppose the prin-
ciple of keeping car jumpers in jail at
the county's expense, upon learning
of their commitment ordered them re-
leased.
Some doubt arising as to the legality
of this course the men were re-arrest-
ed at their homes in the coal region
and recommitted to the Jail OF Mon
tour county, where they served their
full sentence of ten days.
After the discharge of Kodack and
Manerick the plaintiff as sheriff de-
manded of the county commissioners
the sum of 50. so for boarding the con-
victs.
The county commissioners refused
to pay the said sum or any part there
of for the reason that the act of May
"a, 1878, fixes no legal liability on the
part of the county to pay costs and
charges.
The act provides in part that any
person found entering or being upon
any railroad engine or car contrary to
the rules of the person or corporations
owning or operating the same and
with the intention of riding thereon
without paying fare shall upon con-
viction forfeit and pay penalty of
not less than s5, nor now more than
$l5, which penalty shall be paid to the
treasurer of the school district in
which said offense was committed for
the use of said district and such per-
son so convicted shall be committed to
the county Jail of such county for a
period not exceeding ten days.
1t has been definitely decided by the
supreme court that justices of the
peace before whom convictions are had
and sentences imposed under the act
of May "a, 1878. for trespassing on
trains cannot recover their costs from
the county for the reason that the act
does not make the county liable for
the costs. Crawford VS.. Barr 90 Pa.
359; and Godding vs.. Bardford coun-
ty, 116 Pa. 53.
"Kodack and Manerick," the opin-
ion continues, "were arrested, convict
ed and committed to the county Jail
by the justice of the peace under the
provisions of said act. The sheriff ac-
cepted the commitment and received
and boarded the prisoners in the coun-
ty Jail for a period of ten days. We
scarcely see how he could have done
otherwise. The act in plain terms
authorizes the justice of the peace to
make the commitment to the county
Jail.
"It is one of the duties of the sheriff
to board the prisoners of the county.
The compensation to be paid for the
performance of this duty is governed
by the act of assembly passed for that
purpose. Apple VS.. Crawford Co. 105
Pa. 3O2 "
The act of April, II 1856, p, L. 3l4
determines the county's liability and
fixes the allowance for boarding pris-
oners, which is not to exceed twenty
five cents per day for each prisoner.
"And now to wit, December .. 1908. in
accordance with the terms of the case
stated Judgment is entered in favor of
the plaintiff for nine dollars and sixty
cents.
BY the Court,
CHARLES O. EVANS, p. J..
~