OPINION IN EX PARTE BRADLEY.
BY THOMAS RUFFIN.
This opinion of Judge Ruffin, taken at random to illustrate his style, is not above his average.
His great opinions are too long and technical to be of interest to the general reader. He thoroughly understood "the language of the law," and used it with the utmost precision.
His discussion of the question at issue throws a side-light on times fifty years agone, and will awaken memories in the old and inquiry in the young.
Badger and Iredell applied to the Chief Justice for a writ of habeas corpus in behalf of William Bradley, who had been imprisoned for assault and battery.
OPINION.
Ruffin, C. J. At the last term of Anson Superior Court, William Bradley was convicted of an assault and battery, and was sentenced to pay a fine of one dollar, and "to be imprisoned in the public jail of Anson county for twelve months, and thereafter until the said fine and costs should be paid." He was committed to the custody of the sheriff of the county, and has been kept a close prisoner ever since, but has recently tendered to the sheriff a bond with sureties to keep within the rules of the prison (which have been laid off by the County Court, and contain six acres), and demanded of the sheriff to be let out of prison. This was refused by the sheriff, upon the ground that he was required by the sentence to keep this person within the public jail.
Upon an affidavit and petition of Bradley, stating those facts, he has applied for a habeas corpus, that he might be brought up and an order made for his enlargement, according to his application to the sheriff. His counsel, however, does not desire that he should be put to the expense and trouble of the writ, unless it should be thought that he is entitled to the liberty of the rules bounds. As I had an opportunity of consulting my brethren on the subject, I have availed myself of it, and I now give our unanimous opinion, that the sheriff is bound to keep the applicant a close prisoner. The application is founded on the Act of 1741, Rev. St., c. 90, s. 11. It enacts, that, "For the preservation of the health of such persons as shall be committed to the county prisons, the court shall have power to mark out such a parcel of land, as they shall think fit, not exceeding six acres, adjoining the prison, for the rules thereof; and every prisoner not committed for treason or felony shall have liberty to walk therein, out of prison, for the preservation of his or her health."