The Farmington times. (Farmington, St. Francois County, Mo.) 1905-1926, 1921-09-23
Where Many
Are in Error

|
The unusual interest aroused in the
article in last weeks Times, "How
Much Longer Can We Stand IT."
which dealt with the apparent Unjust
ice that is often done prisoners in an
often overcrowded Jail, owing to their
inability to secure an early trial, as
we'll as the burden that is thus put
upon the Taxpayers, whose only in
terest in the matter is that speedy
justice be meted out, has caused this
paper to go little further into an in
vestigation along this line-this time
in regard to the fees the Sheriff is
quite generally supposed to receive
from all cases that serve to add in
mates to the Jail.
The idea that most people seem to
have in regard to the remuneration
of the Sheriff's office are as erroneous
as they are indistinct. The Times
feels, after some recent investigation,
that the Sheriff's office is called on
for more thank you" work, or for
more work for which it does not even
receive "thank YOU, than any other
officer in the county. Of all the trial
cases attended to in the Justices
court, and they are many in this
county, and the Sheriff's office is US
ually called upon for considerable
work in such cases, practically all the
Sheriff gets out of any such cases is
81 for commitment.
Yet with the general feeling that
prevails, that the fees in the Sherifr's
office are enormous, without stopping
to investigate as to where such fees
could come from, many invariably
feel free to carry their charges and
complaints to that office, no matter
how forlorn and threadbare they Of
ten prove themselves to be, on invest
igation. Many there are who are loud
in their protestations of knowledge of
various kinds of lawbreaking, and
they are usually loudest in criticism
of the officers if their alleged "tips"
are not accepted at full 100 per cent
value, and the entire Sheriff's' force
do not Immediately 20 in search of
Their pu
The Times repsSts its belief that
the Sherff's office in this county car
ries with 1t the poorest pay for the
work such officer is called upon to do
of any other office in the county. It
has been stated that County Courts in
other counties have made it possible
for the Sheriff and his deputies to
gather in some extra fees for services
well performed, such as allowing, as a
reward, $25' for every whiskey still
captured and brought in, or an extra
fee for every bootlegger or other law
breaker arrested, after conviction.
The county need not bear cent of
this expense 1t could be added to the
fine of such prisoner, who would in
that way be forced to bear at least a
trife of the expense he has created.
If there is no law now on the sta
tute books to permit of such proceed
ure, then it is the firm belief of The
Times that such law would tend to,
strengthen the present legal fabric.
1t has long been the opinion of The
Times editor that the Sheriff's office
was far more lucretive than recent in
vestigation demonstrates it to be, and
it appears but natural that if there
was possible remuneration ina sight
the officers would feel more like TAX
ing on additional expense if they felt
there was a chance to get pay for
their trouble. This paper further
more knows that Sheriff Hunt has
been unusually active in the pursuit
and capture of law-breakers ever
since he was inducted into office.
Nothing more could be reasonably ex-
pected of him than his office has rem
dered. But we also know that much
of his official activity has been abso-
lutely unrewarded, insofar as money is
concerned.
These suggestions are made without
the knowledge or consent Of Sheriff
Hunt, and their sole purpose is to ac-
quaint the people somewhat with the
fact that the fees of the Sheriff's Of
flee in this county are not of the huge
dimensions they are by many sup
posed to be. Also for the reason that
such an important officer is entitled
to fair recompense for the correct
performance of his duties.