Collier v. Elliott

• Decision Date: 04 March 1897
• Citation: 28 S.E. 117,100 Ga. 363
• Parties: COLLIER et al., County Com'rs. v. ELLIOTT et al.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

28 S.E. 117

100 Ga. 363

COLLIER et al., County Com'rs.

v.ELLIOTT et al.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

March 4, 1897.

Counties—Police Officers — Commissioners of Roads and Revenues.

1. There is no law authorizing or empowering the commissioners of roads and revenues of Pulton county to establish a board of "county police, " charged with the duty of making arrests or otherwise enforcing the criminal laws of this state.

2. The record in the present case disclosing with certainty that the "county police" were not appointed for the purpose of inspecting roads and bridges, but that their duties, under the rules and regulations prescribed for their government, were exclusively those of police officers proper, the court was right in enjoining the county commissioners from paying out of the county funds the persons so appointed for their services as policemen.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from superior court, Pulton county; J. H. Lumpkin, Judge.

Action by E. R. Elliott and others against C. A. Collier and others, commissioners of roads and revenues of Pulton county, for injunction. There was a judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants bring error. Affirmed.

Luther Z. Rosser, for plaintiffs in error.

Lewis W. Thomas, for defendants in error.

LUMPKIN, P. J. The commissioners of roads and revenues of Fulton county, some years ago, passed an order by which they undertook to establish a board of "county police, " and to prescribe rules and regulations for the government of this force. It was made the duty of the men composing it "to arrest and make cases against all parties in Fulton county whom they know, or may have evidence against, for the violation of any state law." These men were furnished with horses and pistols, and provided with quarters at the Fulton county barracks. Not one word in the order, or in the rules and regulations above mentioned, made it the duty of the members of this organization to inspect the public roads and bridges of the county, or to make any report as to their condition. After the lapse of some time, the county board passed another order, reciting that at a previous session it had been determined, "in order that the public roads and bridges might have proper oversight and inspection, and that this board might have constant knowledge of the condition of the roads and bridges of the county, that the public interests would be advanced by the appointment of inspectors who should be charged with the duty of regularly inspecting ail the roads and bridges in the...