| Show oost COSTS s tim THE decision of the sir str supreme preme prene court in the case ease of ns vs va iron coun ty appealed by the latter from the second district is one of confide considerable r importance to the territory it needs but the case is so plain that it is difficult to believe that even justlee justice boreman cou could id err therein that the counties are not liable to pay the costs of missioners ners courts pett petty y tribunals created by the poland billis evident to any one having any knowledge whatever of the laws of congress relating to this territory and what object judge boreman could have except to annoy the county authorities author in ruling 11 so diametrically in opposition 0 to those laws the language 0 of af pf which as the supreme court decision says is plain and unequivocal it is certa centa certainly 1 hard to th discover As to the anticipations of congress that the territory would pr provide 0 for the them expense ff of courts which are not needed here under any pretense whatever it is probable ae that asin asin the past or in the future unless great changes arise they will not amount to anything in 1 the shape of material realities the deci deel decision slon sion is definite and fully fally in accordance cor dance w with th la law lam a la the supreme court of utah territory june julio term 1880 1880 J B R wilkins 4 vs iron county appellant appeal from the second Di district kriet 4 the respondent is a commissioner of the supreme court of this territory appointed under the provision of section 6 of an act of congress approved prove dJune june 1874 in relation n to courts and judicial officers in the territory of I 1 utah As such commissioner signer be performed services as a committing maer marr magistrate istrate in theebam the examination of a per person on accused of a vio alo violation of some law of the territory the offense having been alleged to have been beell committed in iron county for vor these reason reasons he brought suit against the county and recovered a judgment 11 fo for r the amount ther thereof with costs the ony on only y question raised by the appeal it is Is the county dounty liable for the fees of the tile commissioners in such c cases as e s section 64 61 of the act of congress above referred to provides thia that the supreme u p r me C court 0 u r t of said territory is hereby h r e b 3 authorized iu tl i 0 ri zed to ampol appoint n t co commissioners in mii mil ners of or 1 said sald I id court who shall shail ha have ve and exercise allther all ali the duties of commissioners of the circuit courts of the united states and to take a afo aft of bail bai landin and an ad they shall have the same authority as examining and committing magistrates in all cases arising under the laws osbald territory as is now possessed by justices just ces of the peace in said territory the persons appointed under the above provisions are commissioners of the supreme court of the territory and there can be no doubt but that their territorial jurisdiction is extensive coextensive co with that of the power which appoints them that of the whole territory the territorial legislature has made no provision for the payment of their fees the last clause of article 2 of the act of above referred to provides abd aad the costs and expenses pen ses of all prosecutions for offenses against any law jaw of the territorial legislature shall be pa paid ld out of the treasury of the territory congress evidently anticipated that the territorial legislature would provide for these expenses Iii In fact by the terms above quoted it imposed this duty upon the legislature by providing that these I 1 costs and eapen expenses ses sea should be paid out of the territorial treasury these off omm meers officers were created by the i act of congress with a territorial jurisdiction extensive coextensive co with the tho limits 0 of f the territory and as to the subject matter of that jurisdiction they have lave the same authority as examining exa minine and committing co magistrates as justices just fust ices fees of the peace throughout this territorial juns dice dici tion with this thia extended territorial jurisdiction it was wi seand proper that the expenses empens es attendant thereon should be paid out of the territorial treasury the language of the act of con gres in in relation to these costs and expenses does not require any construction st it is plain and vocal 1 I 1 1 there is in our opinion nol not legal 2 obligation batio n r resting e sl n g upon iron on county to pay this billa billand dj judgment dg en t should have been rendered for the defend ant I 1 the the judgment of the court below is g reversed with costs i aud and the cause remanded H euer emer roso associate justice |
