Legal Opinion

Scarborough v. Thornton

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 8, 1848PublishedCited by 3 opinions

In error from the Common Pleas of Bucks. This was an action of debt by the sheriff against the principal and sureties in the bond of the jailer for an escape of a prisoner arrested on mesne process.

Read the full summary

In error from the Common Pleas of Bucks. This was an action of debt by the sheriff against the principal and sureties in the bond of the jailer for an escape of a prisoner arrested on mesne process. The bond recited that Thornton, the sheriff, had appointed Scarborough jailer and keeper of the prison of the county, and the condition was, that he should perform all the several duties required by law for the jailers and keepers of the county prisons, &c., and should receive, keep, and detain in safe custody all such prisoners as should from time to time be committed to his charge. The breach…

1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.

The first error assigned is founded in a misconception. In some of the counties of the commonwealth, the sheriff himself resides in the jail of the county, and superintends personally the custody of the prisoners, whether confined under criminal or civil process. In other counties, the custom has been for the sheriff to appoint a jailer, without reference to the 28th section of the act of 1790, which seems to require the approbation of the justices of the Court of Quarter Sessions of the proper county, in open court. The legitimacy of this practice would seem to be recognised in Duncan v.…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Commonwealth ex rel. John T. Baldwin & Co. v. YeisleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
  2. Commonwealth v. Elliott, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Mercer County1941
  3. Krasinski v. Gorman, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Elk County1965

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API