Year: 1870

There has been a good deal of feel
ing in our town, upon the subject of
Judge SaffOrd's opinion and reversal
of the judgment of the Mayor of our
town, in the case of the corporation
against Shelton, for the sale of intox-
icating liquors, in the corporation, in
violation of the law. Shelton had
been found guilty of the ofense charg-
ed before the Mayor, and fined fifty
dollars, and in case the fine and costs
were not paid, to stand committed un-
til they We're paid. Shelton had paid
the fine OF fifty dollars. The case was
taken up before the Court of Common
Pleas. The Judge decided that as the
defendant had demanded a trial by
Jury, and the Mayor had not granted
it, the judgment of the Mayors Court
was an error, and that the fine should
be refunded to the defendant. It was
objected to by the Judge, that the
Mayor had no authority to make i'm
prisOnment part of his sentence, for
the offense, but Shelton had never
been imprisoned, and it was argued
by the attorney for the corporation,
that Imprisonment had not been de-
signed as a part of the punishment
for the Off,nsp, but that the fine was
the penalty, and imprisonment was
only the means for enforcing the col
lection of the penalty.


This ruling of the Court, that the
defendant shall have a trial by jury,
before the Mayor, when he demands
it, applies to every other case, for ViO-
lation of corporation ordinance, as
well as trial for violating the whis-
( ky, ale, beer and porter ordinance, and
hereafter, we expect that every fellow
who is arraigned before the Mayor for
being drunk, or making an indecent
exposure of his person upon our streets,
will demand a trial before his Honor,
the MayUf, by jury of his country
men.


We learn that the Council have in
structed the corporation attorney, NJ.
J. Williams, to carry the case up to the
! higher courts; on petition in error,
and that the Mayor will continue to
execute the laws of the incorporation
until the opinion of Judge Stafford is
sustained by the Supreme Court
! There is a determination on the part
of the friends Of law, order and sObrie-
ty, in our TOWN. to give this question
a thorough test, and if such a thing is
possible, to put stop to drunkenness
and rowdyism in our town. But in
doing this all desire to act within the
bounds Of the law, but they are de-
termined to know what is law, and
how much law we have on this sub
Iiect, and to put what we have in force.


The decision of the Judge may be
in accordance with the lawi ifsO, the
law is 0dd one AMI should be changed.


We are at a loss to kHoF why Judge
Stafford, at the late court, assessed a
! fne of fifty dollars each upon two
persons, for violating the liquor law,
while in several other cases he assess
ed fines of five dollars for the same Of
/ Tense, remarking emphaticalIy that this
(S5,) was the lowest fine he could as
, sess under the law. A friend at our
elbow suggests, as the reason, that the
men who were fined fifty dollars SOLD
very Indifferent article Of whisky.
We do not vOuch for the truth o
the assertion, but we have heard i
said upon the streets, that Judge Saf


ford, after he delivered himself of his


Judgment upon the case between the
corporation of Washington and Shcl
ton, remarked that the keepers of ale
3 beer and porter, on account of tn
f town ordinance prohibiting the sale O


these articles.


Complaint has frequently been mad
: by citizens in the heighborhood O
Y Keith's Grove, at the disOrderIy con
duct ensuing during the holding of