Case Name: The People on the relation of The Police Commissioners of East Saginaw v. The Supervisors of Saginaw County
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1876-10-24
Citations: 35 Mich. 91
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People on the relation of The Police Commissioners of East Saginaw v. The Supervisors of Saginaw County.
Judges: 
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 35
Pages: 88–89

Head Matter:
The People on the relation of The Police Commissioners of East Saginaw v. The Supervisors of Saginaw County.
Charter of East Saginaw: Police force: Pursuit of criminals: Statutory fees: Board of supervisors. The charter of East Saginaw (Laws of 1859, p. 988, § 2U), construed in connection with the amendments of 1873 (Laws of 187S, Vol. 2. p. 856, § 6), organizing a police department, does not require the board of supervisors of the county to audit bills for .the statutory fees of officers in the pursuit and apprehension of criminals when the services are performed by members of the police force of the city in the case of alleged offenses committed within the city.
Heard October 10.
Decided October 24.
Application for mandamus.
The purpose of this application is to require the respondents to audit and allow a bill presented to them by the relators for services performed by one of the city police oificers *in the pursuit and apprehension of a person charged with an offense against the laws of tbe state, committed within the city of East Saginaw. The original charter of East Saginaw (Laws of 1859, p. 988, § BJf) provided that the police constables of said city should have and receive the same fees and have the- like powers and authority in matters of a criminal nature as is conferred by law upon constables in the several towns of the state, etc. The amendments of 1813 did away with the police constables provided for in the original charter, and provided for the organization of a board of police commissioners, with a police force of salaried members, who were forbidden to accept any present, fee, gift, or emolument for police service, other than their salary, except by unanimous consent of the board. Section 24, however, was left to stand as it was. It was provided (laws of 1873, Vol. 2, p. 856, § 6) that the police commissioners should audit all bills for traveling expenses incurred in the pursuit of criminals by members of the force, and present the same to the board of supervisors of the county for payment in all cases where the criminals are charged with offenses committed in said city; and that the board of supervisors should in no case allow or cause to be paid any bill for the pursuit or apprehension of criminals charged with or suspected of the commission of crime in said city unless the same had been presented to and allowed by the police commissioners. Respondents, in acting upon the bill in question, allowed the item for traveling expenses to arrest the offender, but disallowed tbe residue of the bill.
T. JS. Tarsney, for relators.
Gaylord <& Hanohett, for respondents.
Constables for services in executing criminal warrants issued by justices in a city are entitled to compensation although, the city has a police force: Altor v. Wayne County Auditors, 43 Mich,, 76. But private detectives organized in voluntary associations cannot recover pay from a county for services in pursuing criminals: Abels v. Ingham Supervisors^ 42 Mich., 526.

Opinion:
Prr Curiam:
While the construction of the statute upon which a mandamus is asked is not very clear, we are inclined to think it does not require the board of supervisors to audit bills for *the statutory fees of officers in pursuit and apprehension of criminals when the services are performed by members of the police force of East Saginaw in the case of alleged offenses committed within that city. The writ applied for will therefore be denied, but without costs.