21 A. 1005 (Conn. 1890), In re Clayton

Citation21 A. 1005, 59 Conn. 510
Opinion JudgeCARPENTER, J.
Party NameIN RE CLAYTON.
AttorneyG. P. McLean and A. Brainard, for appellant. W. Hamersley and F. H. Parker, for appellee.
Case DateDecember 15, 1890
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

Page 1005

21 A. 1005 (Conn. 1890)

59 Conn. 510

IN RE CLAYTON.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

December 15, 1890

Application for writ of habeas corpus by John M. Clayton, committed to jail for contempt of court under Sess. Laws Conn. 1889, c. 167, providing that if a person be found guilty of intoxication, and refuses on request of the prosecuting officer to disclose under oath when, where, and from whom he procured the liquor by which his intoxication was produced, the magistrate before whom the trial was had shall commit him to the county jail for contempt of court.

G. P. McLean and A. Brainard, for appellant.

W. Hamersley and F. H. Parker, for appellee.

CARPENTER, J.

The complainant was convicted of intoxication, and was required to disclose, under the act of 1889, c. 167, " under oath, when, where, how, and from

Page 1006

whom he procured the liquor by which his intoxication was produced." He refused " to make such disclosure." Thereupon the magistrate (the judge of the police court of Hartford) before whom the trial was had proceeded " to commit the accused for contempt of court to the common jail" for 10 days. On a writ of habeas corpus he was brought before a judge of the superior court. The sheriff's return set out the proceedings in the police court, and the mittimus issued thereon. The complainant demurred to the return, because, he says, the statute under which the proceedings were had is obnoxious to constitutional provisions. The judge overruled the demurrer, and the complainant appealed.

Provisions for disclosures by persons found intoxicated or arrested for intoxication first appeared in the statute of 1854, and have since remained there, with some changes from time to time. Until 1889 disclosures were at the option of the prisoner, and could only be made before conviction; and, upon being fairly made, they contemplated the discharge of the intoxicated person. The statute of 1889 made a radical change. It provides for disclosures only after conviction, does not discharge the prisoner, and the disclosure is made compulsory. Whether this act is a substitute for the statute previously existing, or is in addition thereto, is not now a material question.

The first ground of demurrer is that the statute " is a deprivation of the right to a trial by jury, as provided by section 21 of article 1 of the constitution of Connecticut." This...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 practice notes
  • 166 N.E. 100 (Ill. 1929), 18430, People ex rel. Rusch v. White
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court of Illinois
    • April 20, 1929
    ...of courts by declaring certain improper conduct to be contempt not theretofore so regarded. It was likewise so held in Re Clayton, 59 Conn. 510, 21 A. 1005, 13 L. R. A. 66, 21 Am. St. Rep. 128. In Re Robinson, 117 N.C. 533, 23 S.E. 453, 53 Am. St. Rep. 596, and in Carter v. Commonwealth, 96......
  • 26 N.E.2d 895 (Ill.App. 1 Dist. 1939), 40671, People ex rel. Rusch v. Levin
    • United States
    • Illinois Court of Appeals of Illinois
    • October 25, 1939
    ...of courts by declaring certain improper conduct to be contempt not theretofore so regarded. It was likewise so held in Re Clayton, 59 Conn. 510, 21 A. 1005, 13 L.R.A. 66, 21 Am.St.Rep. 128. In Re Robinson, 117 N.C. 533, 23 S.E. 453, 53 Am.St.Rep. 596, and in Carter v. Commonwealth, 96 Va. 7......
  • 611 A.2d 400 (Conn. 1992), 14404, Perry v. Perry
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • June 29, 1992
    ...in their nature [222 Conn. 815] common to more than one department [of government]." Id., at 38, 31 A. 522; see also In re Clayton, 59 Conn. 510, 519-20, 21 A. 1005 (1890). We need not decide whether we would today continue to apply the principles enunciated in In re Application of Cla......
  • 256 P. 704 (Okla. 1927), 18081, State v. Owens
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court of Oklahoma
    • May 24, 1927
    ...35 Colo. 225, 86 P. 224, 229, 231, 6 L. R. A. (N. S.) 822, 117 Am. St. Rep. 198; Wyatt v. People, 17 Colo. 252, 28 P. 961; In re Clayton, 59 Conn. 510, 21 A. 1005, 13 L. R. A. 66, 21 Am. St. Rep. 128, 13 L. R. A. 66; Hunter v. U. S., 48 App. D. C. 19; McDougall v. Sheridan, 23 Idaho, 191, 1......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
12 cases
  • 166 N.E. 100 (Ill. 1929), 18430, People ex rel. Rusch v. White
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court of Illinois
    • April 20, 1929
    ...of courts by declaring certain improper conduct to be contempt not theretofore so regarded. It was likewise so held in Re Clayton, 59 Conn. 510, 21 A. 1005, 13 L. R. A. 66, 21 Am. St. Rep. 128. In Re Robinson, 117 N.C. 533, 23 S.E. 453, 53 Am. St. Rep. 596, and in Carter v. Commonwealth, 96......
  • 26 N.E.2d 895 (Ill.App. 1 Dist. 1939), 40671, People ex rel. Rusch v. Levin
    • United States
    • Illinois Court of Appeals of Illinois
    • October 25, 1939
    ...of courts by declaring certain improper conduct to be contempt not theretofore so regarded. It was likewise so held in Re Clayton, 59 Conn. 510, 21 A. 1005, 13 L.R.A. 66, 21 Am.St.Rep. 128. In Re Robinson, 117 N.C. 533, 23 S.E. 453, 53 Am.St.Rep. 596, and in Carter v. Commonwealth, 96 Va. 7......
  • 611 A.2d 400 (Conn. 1992), 14404, Perry v. Perry
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • June 29, 1992
    ...in their nature [222 Conn. 815] common to more than one department [of government]." Id., at 38, 31 A. 522; see also In re Clayton, 59 Conn. 510, 519-20, 21 A. 1005 (1890). We need not decide whether we would today continue to apply the principles enunciated in In re Application of Cla......
  • 256 P. 704 (Okla. 1927), 18081, State v. Owens
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court of Oklahoma
    • May 24, 1927
    ...35 Colo. 225, 86 P. 224, 229, 231, 6 L. R. A. (N. S.) 822, 117 Am. St. Rep. 198; Wyatt v. People, 17 Colo. 252, 28 P. 961; In re Clayton, 59 Conn. 510, 21 A. 1005, 13 L. R. A. 66, 21 Am. St. Rep. 128, 13 L. R. A. 66; Hunter v. U. S., 48 App. D. C. 19; McDougall v. Sheridan, 23 Idaho, 191, 1......
  • Request a trial to view additional results