People v. Miner

• Court: Illinois Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: LAWRENCE
• Citation: People v. Miner, 47 Ill. 33, 1868 WL 4925 (Ill. 1868)
• Decision Date: 31 January 1868
• Parties: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ex rel. JOHN HODGESv.ORLIN H. MINER, Auditor, etc.

47 Ill. 33

1868 WL 4925 (Ill.)

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ex rel. JOHN HODGES

v.ORLIN H. MINER, Auditor, etc.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

January Term, 1868.

This is an application to this Court, in the name of the people, on the relation of John Hodges, for a writ of mandamus against Orlin H. Miner, Auditor of Public Accounts.

The facts in the case are fully stated in the opinion.

Messrs. GREEN & GILBERT, for the relator.

Mr. R. G. INGERSOLL, Attorney General, for the respondent.

Mr. JUSTICE LAWRENCE delivered the opinion of the Court:

This is an application for a mandamus to compel the auditor to pay a sum of money claimed by the relator to be due him, as marshal of the city of Cairo, for conveying certain convicts to the penitentiary. The act creating the Court of Common Pleas for the city of Cairo, first passed in 1855, and amended in 1859, provides that the marshal shall perform all such duties for said court as are required by law to be performed by the sheriffs of the several counties of the State for the Circuit Courts, and shall receive fees in like manner as the sheriffs of the counties of this State.

The act of 1851, amending chapter 81 of the Revised Statutes, entitled penitentiary, fixes the fees of sheriffs for conveying convicts to the penitentiary. By the act, entitled “an act to regulate the fees and compensation of sheriffs and collectors in certain counties,” passed February 16th, 1865, the fees of sheriffs in fifty-one counties of the State are considerably raised, the fees of the same officers in the other fifty-one counties remaining unchanged, and as fixed by the general law of 1851. The question at issue in this case between the relator and the auditor is, which of these acts shall determine the compensation of the marshal.

It is urged by the counsel of the relator, that it was the intention of the legislature to establish the fees of the marshal in reference to those of the sheriff of Alexander county, in which the city of Cairo is situated, and as this county is one of those in which the fees of sheriffs are raised by the act of 1865, the fees of the marshal must be considered as raised to the same extent. But if such was the intent of the legislature, they failed to express it. On the contrary, the language of the act of 1859 is, that the marshal shall “receive fees in like manner as the sheriffs of the counties of this State.” The language of the act of 1855, was that he should “be entitled to receive the same fees allowed by law to sheriffs.” In neither act is reference made to the fees of the sheriff of Alexander county, as the criterion by which those of the marshal are to be regulated, and in...