The Federal Reporter. Volume 6: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit and District Courts of the United States. March-May, 1881. Page: 73
xii, 927 p. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this legislative document.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
FISCHER V. HAYES.
In Harris v. The Commonwealth, 23 Pick. 280, it is held
that where, for an offence, the punishment is a fine without
imprisonment, the settled rule of law is that the sentence is
to pay the fine, or stand committed until that sentence be per-
formed.
In Wilde v. The Commonweallh, 2 Met. 408, 411, it is said
that where the statute authorizes a punishment by fine, costs
may be awarded as incident, and the party convicted may be
committed till such fine and costs be paid.
In Regina v. Dunn, 12 Ad. & Ell. (N. B.) 1026, the defendant
was indicted for an offence, and convicted, and sentenced to
be imprisoned for 18 months, and to give security to keep
the peace for two years after the expiration of the 18 months,
and to stand committed till he should give such security. The
exchequer chamber, on a writ of error, held that the sentence
was proper.
In the case of Drayton and Sears, 5 Opinions of Attorneys
General, 579, cited in In re Mullee, 7 Blatchf. 23, they were
convicted on an indictment under a statute which imposed
only a pecuniary fine for the offence. A fine, with costs, was
inflicted, and the court ordered them to be imprisoned till the
fine and costs should be paid. They were imprisoned for
four years, and then applied to the president for a pardon,
and the attorney general, Mr. Crittenden, was of opinion that
the president had the power, by pardon, to discharge them
from prison and to remit the fine, although, by the statute,
one-half of the fine was to go to a private person and the
other half to a county.
In United States v. Robbins, 15 Int. Rev. Rec. 155, the de-
fendant was convicted on an indictment, and sentenced to be
imprisoned for a year, and to pay a fine and costs, and to
stand committed until the fine and costs should be paid.
After the expiration of the year's imprisonment, the fine and
costs not being paid, and the defendant being still in jail, he
was brought up on habeas corpus, and claimed that the part of
the sentence which ordered him to stand committed until the
fine and costs should be paid was void. The statute author-
ized both a fine and imprisonment. The court held that,
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
Boyle, Peyton. The Federal Reporter. Volume 6: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit and District Courts of the United States. March-May, 1881., legislative document, 1881; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc36335/m1/85/: accessed April 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.