58 Ill. 26 (Ill. 1871), Farris v. People

Citation:58 Ill. 26
Opinion Judge:Mr. Justice Scott.
Party Name:GEORGE W. FARRIS et al. v. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Attorney:Mr. JOHN I. RINAKER, for the plaintiffs in error. Mr. WASHINGTON BUSHNELL, Attorney General, for the People.
Court:Supreme Court of Illinois

Page 26

58 Ill. 26 (Ill. 1871)

GEORGE W. FARRIS et al.

v.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

Supreme Court of Illinois, Central Grand Division

January, 1871

Page 27

WRIT OF ERROR to the Circuit Court of Macoupin county; the Hon. EDWARD Y. RICE, Judge, presiding.

This was a suit by scire facias, brought by the people of the State, in the Macoupin Circuit Court, against George W. Farris, Stephen Sawyer, Warren Sawyer, William N. Mitchell, John Higgins and John Wright.

It is averred in the scire facias, that George W. Farris, with others, was taken before a justice of the peace on a criminal charge of aiding, abetting and being accessory to the shooting of one Jasper Smith, and that after inquiring in regard thereto, the justice of the peace adjudged George W. Farris to give bail for his appearance at the next term of the Circuit Court of Macoupin county; that Farris, and the other defendants, on the 4th day of October, 1869, entered into their several recognizance, to the People of the State of Illinois, in the sum of $ 300, before the justice of the peace, for the appearance of George W. Farris to answer the charge preferred against him; that the recognizance was duly certified by the justice, to the clerk of the circuit court, and became a matter of record in that court.

At the December term, 1869, of that court, an indictment was preferred against George W. Farris, and he failing to appear, his default was entered and his recognizance was declared forfeited, by the court. At the same time, a judgment of forfeiture was entered against Stephen, Sawyer, John Wright and John A. Higgins, his sureties in the recognizance, and a scire facias was awarded. The writ of scire facias, issued to the March term, 1870, set out a judgment of forfeiture against Farris and all five of his sureties, and described the recognizance as being joint and several. A plea of nul tiel record was filed. A trial was had, when the court made the judgment of forfeiture absolute and awarded execution.

Judgment reversed.

Mr. JOHN I. RINAKER, for the plaintiffs in error.

Mr. WASHINGTON BUSHNELL, Attorney General, for the People.

OPINION

Mr. Justice Scott.

Page 28

The writ of scire facias, on a recognizance, stands in the place of both the summons and declaration in the case, and, like the declaration in any other case, should contain every material...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP
3 practice notes
  • 13 Ill.App. 172 (Ill.App. 1883), Briggs v. People
    • United States
    • Illinois Court of Appeals of Illinois
    • Invalid date
    ...Ill. 172; Staten v. The People, 21 Ill. 29; Chu-masero v. The People, 18 Ill. 405; Sand v. The People, 3 Gilm. 327; Farris v. The People, 58 Ill. 26. Mr. M. L. NEWELL, for appellee; that appellants entered a general appearance in writing, indorsed on the writ and signed by them in person an......
  • 11 Ill.App. 346 (Ill.App. 1882), Reese v. People
    • United States
    • Illinois Court of Appeals of Illinois
    • Invalid date
    ...11 Ill. 542. A variance between the scire facias and the record can notbe taken advantage of by general demurrer: Farris v. The People, 58 Ill. 28. OPINION CASEY, J. Page 347 At the March term of the Circuit Court of Union county, Andrew J. Reese was indicted for selling intoxicating liquor......
  • 155 N.Y. 83, Baxter v. McDonnell
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • March 1, 1898
    ...etc., v. Huntington, 82 Hun, 125; Walker v. Wainwright, 16 Barb. 486; Union Church v. Sanders, 63 Am. Dec. 187; Page 89 Chase v. Cheeney, 58 Ill. 27; McGuire v. Trustees S. P. Cathedral, 54 Hun, 207; Tuigg v. Sheehan, 101 Penn. St. 363; Rose v. Vertin, 46 Mich. 457; Stack v. O'Hara, 98 Penn......
3 cases
  • 13 Ill.App. 172 (Ill.App. 1883), Briggs v. People
    • United States
    • Illinois Court of Appeals of Illinois
    • Invalid date
    ...Ill. 172; Staten v. The People, 21 Ill. 29; Chu-masero v. The People, 18 Ill. 405; Sand v. The People, 3 Gilm. 327; Farris v. The People, 58 Ill. 26. Mr. M. L. NEWELL, for appellee; that appellants entered a general appearance in writing, indorsed on the writ and signed by them in person an......
  • 11 Ill.App. 346 (Ill.App. 1882), Reese v. People
    • United States
    • Illinois Court of Appeals of Illinois
    • Invalid date
    ...11 Ill. 542. A variance between the scire facias and the record can notbe taken advantage of by general demurrer: Farris v. The People, 58 Ill. 28. OPINION CASEY, J. Page 347 At the March term of the Circuit Court of Union county, Andrew J. Reese was indicted for selling intoxicating liquor......
  • 155 N.Y. 83, Baxter v. McDonnell
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • March 1, 1898
    ...etc., v. Huntington, 82 Hun, 125; Walker v. Wainwright, 16 Barb. 486; Union Church v. Sanders, 63 Am. Dec. 187; Page 89 Chase v. Cheeney, 58 Ill. 27; McGuire v. Trustees S. P. Cathedral, 54 Hun, 207; Tuigg v. Sheehan, 101 Penn. St. 363; Rose v. Vertin, 46 Mich. 457; Stack v. O'Hara, 98 Penn......