Stuart v. Bd. of Supervisors of La Salle County

Decision Date30 September 1876
Citation25 Am.Rep. 397,1876 WL 10345,83 Ill. 341
PartiesHENRY STUART et al.v.BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LA SALLE COUNTY et al.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

WRIT OF ERROR to the Circuit Court of La Salle county; the Hon. EDWIN S. LELAND, Judge, presiding.

This was a bill in chancery, by Henry Stuart and James Kane, against the Board of Supervisors of LaSalle county, and Arthur C. McIntire, sheriff of the same county. The substance of the bill and the proceedings thereon are given in the opinion of the court.

Mr. B. F. LINCOLN, and Mr. H. T. GILBERT, for the plaintiffs in error.

Mr. G. S. ELDRIDGE, and Mr. HENRY MAYO, for the defendants in error.

Mr. JUSTICE WALKER delivered the opinion of the Court:

Complainants were indicted, and on the 21st of June, 1876, tried and convicted of the crime of petit larceny, and the court sentenced them to thirty days' confinement in the county jail, and they were confined therein when this bill was filed. The bill alleges that the county jail is very filthy and unhealthy, and wholly unsuitable to be used for the confinement of human beings, and confinement is injurious to health, and that com plainants' health has been impaired by being confined therein, and that they fear, and have reason to fear, that longer con finement therein will irreparably impair their health by reason of the unhealthy condition of the jail.

The bill embodies a portion of a report of the grand jury of the county. It is this:

We further report that the jail is situated in the south part of the basement of the county court house; that the basement is built of stone, and is about eight feet in height, four or five feet of which is below the ground; that the jail consists of a hall, about eight and one-half feet in width and some forty feet in length, extending across the whole width of the basement, and is lighted by two small grated windows, the sills of which are on a level with the surface of the ground; that the two windows afford the only means of admitting the sunlight and air into the jail; that the court house is surrounded on all sides by high buildings, so that there is not at all times a free circulation of air around even the outside of the basement; that the two windows are placed, respectively, one to the east and the other to the west end of the hall, and are so small and near the ground that the light of the sun can only reach them during a short time in the morning and evening; that in front of each window there is a pen, or crib, made of boards, so ingeniously constructed as to effectually exclude both the circulation of fresh air and sunshine from the neighborhood of the jail windows; that the board pens, or cribs, combined with the beautiful and economical vaults erected on either side of the court house, close to the jail windows, form a complete and perfect protection from all the influence of fresh air and sunshine; that the sleeping rooms of the prisoners consist of six small cells, in size about four feet wide and five feet long, adjoining the north side of, and opening into, the hall by grated doors, which are tightly closed during the night, from which cells daylight and fresh air are partially prohibited; that the prisoners are provided with no beds except bunks and blankets; that the floors of the hall and cells consist of a stone pavement, resting upon the ground; that the water and moisture from the earth around the jail soak through them and keep the rooms of the jail constantly damp and musty, although every possible effort is made by the janitor to keep them dry; that, in hot weather, the rooms of the jail would absolutely swarm with bugs and other loathsome vermin, were it not for the incessant efforts of the janitor with his whitewash brush. The air of the jail is so bad as to almost stifle the breath of a person just entering it from the fresh air outside, and we were informed that the jail is so unhealthy that not infrequently robust and healthy persons, after a short confinement in the jail, have to be removed on account of sickness contracted therein.

We unhesitatingly say that the jail is wholly unfit to confine a human being in even for one night, and that it is absolutely inhuman to confine any person in the LaSalle county jail for any length of time.

Yet, in this small, dirty and unhealthy jail, all of the prisoners of LaSalle county, numbering sometimes more than thirty, have to be crowded and confined. This small hall affords the only room in which the prisoners may wash, eat, sit or exercise, and in the hall they are obliged to attend to all the calls of nature.

After a careful examination, we are obliged to say that it is absolutely cruel and inhuman to confine a human being in the present LaSalle county jail for any length of time.”

Complainants aver that the above statements in the report of the grand jury in regard to the jail are substantially true, and that, situated as it is, said jail can not possibly be kept in such condition that persons confined therein will not be injured in their health by reason of their confinement therein.

Complainants aver that said La Salle county contains over 60,000 inhabitants, and is very wealthy and able to provide a suitable jail, yet the board of supervisors, although having for a long time known of the unfitness and unhealthfulness of said...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • State v. Clark
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 15 Diciembre 1915
    ...v. Mayor, of N. Y., 10 Paige [N. Y.] 539; Davis v. Am. Society, etc., 75 N. Y. 362; Tyler v. Hamersley, 44 Conn. 419, 422 ; Stuart v. La Salle Co., 83 Ill. 341 ; Devron v. First Municipality, 4 La. Ann. 11; Levy v. Shreveport, 27 La. Ann. 620; Moses v. Mobile, 52 Ala. 198; Gault v. Wallis, ......
  • J.W. Kelly & Co. v. Conner
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • 11 Diciembre 1909
    ... ...          Appeal ... from Chancery Court, Hamilton County; T. M. McConnell, ... Chancellor ...          Consolidated ... Hamersley, 44 Conn. 419, 422, 26 Am ... Rep. 479; Stuart v. Board of Supervisors, 83 Ill ... 341, 25 Am. Rep. 397; Devron v ... ...
  • J. W. Kelly & Co. v. Conner
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • 11 Diciembre 1909
    ...Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 75 N. Y. 362; Tyler v. Hamersley, 44 Conn. 419, 422, 26 Am. Rep. 479; Stuart v. Board of Supervisors, 83 Ill. 341, 25 Am. Rep. 397; Devron v. First Municipality, 4 La. Ann. 11; Levy v. Shreveport, 27 La. Ann. 620; Moses v. Mayor, etc., of Mobile, 52 Ala. 19......
  • State ex rel Ladd v. The District Court in and for Cass County
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 20 Marzo 1908
    ...section 132. Prosecution criminally for same matter will not be enjoined. Suess v. Noble, supra. Moses v. Taylor, 52 Ala. 198; Stuart v. Supervisors, 83 Ill. 341; Joseph Burk, 46 Ind. 59; Gault v. Walles, 53 Ga. 675. Writ of prohibition issues to an inferior court that has exceeded its juri......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT