Commonwealth v. Long Keeper of the Gaol
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
THIS was a^'habeas corpus to bring up the bodies of several prisoners, who, as it appeared by the return, were confined in the common gaol, under sentence by the Quarter Sessions} to be imprisoned a certain time, to pay fine, which in each case was under five pounds, and to pay the costs of prosecution. They had all remained in confinement thirty days after the term adjudged for their imprisonment, but had not paid either the fine, or the costs.
Read the full summary
THIS was a^'habeas corpus to bring up the bodies of several prisoners, who, as it appeared by the return, were confined in the common gaol, under sentence by the Quarter Sessions} to be imprisoned a certain time, to pay fine, which in each case was under five pounds, and to pay the costs of prosecution. They had all remained in confinement thirty days after the term adjudged for their imprisonment, but had not paid either the fine, or the costs. The question was, whether they were entitled to a discharge under the fourth section of the act of the 27th °f March 1789, which enacts “ that'every…
1Per curiam
The construction of the act is this, that the prisoner is not entitled to a discharge, unless he has remained in confinement for the fine, thirty days beyond the time adjudged for imprisonment; and when he has remained such thirty days, he is entitled to a discharge both as respects the fine and the costs. But neither fine, nor costs, are remitted. If the criminal has property, his property is liable for both.
Prisoners discharged.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Petition of KishbaughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- County of Schuylkill v. ReifsnyderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1864