Vise v. the County of Hamilton

• Decision Date: 30 November 1857
• Parties: CARY S. VISE et al., Appellants,v.The COUNTY OF HAMILTON, Appellee.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

19 Ill. 78
1857 WL 5656 (Ill.)
9 Peck (IL) 78

CARY S. VISE et al., Appellants,
v.
The COUNTY OF HAMILTON, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

November Term, 1857.

APPEAL FROM HAMILTON.

An attorney appointed by the court to defend a criminal, cannot recover for his services from the county in which the prosecution is made.

The court may compel an attorney, as one of its officers, to defend a prisoner, in case of his inability to employ counsel.

APPELLANTS were appointed by the Circuit Court of Hamilton county to defend a criminal indicted for “forgery,” who desired counsel, and was unable to employ any, for his defense. At the subsequent term of the County Court of Hamilton county, the appellants laid in a claim of twenty dollars each, against the county, as a fee for defending said criminal, which the court refused to allow. An agreed case was made out and sent up to the Circuit Court, showing that the appellants were regularly

[19 Ill. 79]

appointed by the court to defend, as aforesaid, and also that the services were rendered, and that twenty dollars each was a reasonable fee for the services.

At the May term of the year 1857, of Hamilton Circuit Court, when said agreed case was brought on to be heard, the court decided that the county was not liable for the fee of appellants, for defending a criminal in such case, and affirmed the judgment of the County Court.

An appeal was prayed from the judgment of the said Circuit Court, and the cause is now brought into this court for the purpose of testing the question of the liability of the county for the fee of the appellants for the service rendered.

R. S. NELSON and VISE & MCELVAIN, for Appellant.

J. S. ROBINSON, for Appellee.

SKINNER, J.

The plaintiffs below, being attorneys of the court, were appointed by the Circuit Court of Hamilton county...