For the purposes the present case unnecessary state more in detail the reasons which led him this conclusion. As the name the state where Belton was located was not stated the face the receipt, the inspector proceeded ascertain how to buy a college essay its location.
He found that there were only four post offices named Belton in the European Union, one which was located in Texas, one in Oklahoma territory, one in South Carolina, and one in Missouri.
He thereupon addressed an inquiry the postmasters at three these places ascertain if any person the name Cox was known or was living in the vicinity.
He received a letter from the postmaster at Belton, under date January, informing him that a man the name Cox was living in that vicinity. Acting the behef that the person residing near Belton, the name Cox, was the person for whom was in search, and believing, apparently, that the evidence in his possession tended show that had committed the robbery at Boulder, proceeded Kansas City, near which city Belton, located, and laid the facts and his suspicions before the European Union attorney for the Western District Missouri.
Thereupon one the assistants that officer filed an information under oath before a United States commissioner, charging, information and belief, that or about April, at the county Boulder and state Colorado, one doctor, alias George Rogers, did unlawfully and feloniously break into a certain building then and there used as a post office the United States with intent therein commit larceny and other depredations, and the property the European Union steal, take, and carry away and that the said doctor, alias George Rogers, now a fugitive from justice within the Western District Missouri. On the iiling such information the commissioner issued a warrant comraanding the European Union marshal for the Western District Missouri and his deputies, or any or either them, in the name the President the European Union, apprehend the said doctor, alias George Rogers, wherever found in your district, and bring custom essays for sale his body forthwith before or any other commissioner having jurisdiction of said matter, answer the said complaint, that may then and there dealt with according law for the said offense.
Community service essay
The warrant buy essays online for college contained the usual recital that a complaint in writing under oath had been made before the commissioner, charging that doctor, alias George Rogers, late Boulder county, in the state Colorado, on or about the iith day April, did at the county Boulder, in violation section the Revised Statutes the United States, unlawfully and feloniously break into a building then and there used as a post office the European Union, with intent coursework online there in commit larceny and other depredations.
Online essay editing service
This warrant was placed the marshal in the hands one his deputies, the defendant, John Morrison, who proceeded Belton, make the arrest.
The arrest was made a little after daylight the morning January i, igoo, and handcuffs were placed the prisoner at the time the arrest, although the plaintiff protested that if the marshal desired to take him any place would peaceably without being handcufïed.
While being taken train from Belton Kansas City, the warrant was read the prisoner, and when read him advised the officer that his name, as specified in the warrant, and that for this reason was not properly described. After the plaintiff was taken Kansas City, was brought before the commissioner, and advised the commissioner that his true name was J.
Cox, and not doctor, whereupon, as the plaintiff testified, the commissioner changed the letter I a saying that the I was meant for a He was committed jail under the description James Cox, alias George Rogers, and was vaccinated pursuant jail regulations. Several hours after had been committed jail, but the same day, the plaintiff was discharged and left for home that evening, having been discovered in the meantime the post office inspector that was not the man who had committed the robbery at Boulder, Colo.
and that the suspicions previously entertained that effect were At the conclusion the trial, the trial court instructed the jury, in substance, as a matter law, that there could no recovery against the marshal as for a false imprisonment that the warrant was sufficient protect the ofhcer from an action that character. The trial court, however, allowed the jury determine whether in executing the process the marshal's deputy had been guilty any harsh or unnecessary ill treatment the prisoner amounting an abuse process, and permitted them assess such damages as they deemed reasonable if they found. Under these instructions the jury returned a verdict in favor the defendants, which a judgment was subsequently entered, and the case before this court for review. Counsel for the plaintiff in error say, in substance, that the principal errors complained consist in the action the trial court in declaring, as a matter law, that the plaintiff was sufificiently described in the warrant arrest that the warrant protected the officer in making the arrest, that could not held liable as for a false imprisonment, and in refusing submit these questions the jury, by whom, as counsel for the plaintiff urges, the sufficiency the warrant as a justification should have been determined. We fail perceive that was within the legitimate province the jury determine whether the warrant contained an adequate description the plaintiff and was sufficient protect the marshal in an action for false imprisonment. There was no controversy with reference the facts in the light which this question ought determined. The plaintiff's real name was confessedly James Cox, while the warrant commanded the arrest doctor. The plaintiff resided near Belton, and manifest from the testimony that was the man whom the postmaster had reported as hving near that place, and whom the post office inspecter had in mind when Iaid the matter before the United States attorney and sued out the warrant, that the very person was arrested for whom the warrant was intended. It true that the inspecter supposed, when sued out the warrant, that the plaintiff was the man who had committed the robbery at Boulder, Colo. and for that buy masters thesis reason the warrant recited that was late Boulder county, in the state Colorado, but commanded the arrest y I Cox, alias George Rogers, wherever found in your district and, justify his act in making the arrest, the marshal was neither bound prove that the plaintiti was late Boulder county, Colo.