115 Ky. 1 | Ky. Ct. App. | 1903
Opinion or the court delivered bv
Aeeirming.
Ben Spaulding was-the county attorney of Marion county from January, 1898, to the sixth day of January, 1902, on. which date appellee. C. S. Hill, succeeded him in said
Appellant claims that he aided and assisted in getting up the evidence upon which the grand jury returned the indictments; that he was present and consented to the agreement between the Commonwealth’s attorney and the rail
Section 133-of tbe Kentucky Statutes provides: “In all prosecutions in the circuit court when the county attorney is present and assists in the prosecution, he shall receive from the State Treasurer 25 per cent, of all judgments rendered in favor of the Commonwealth,” etc. It is plain that it was contemplated by the statutes that the county attorney that was present and assisting in the prosecution at the time of the rendition of the judgment was entitled to the per cent, allowed by the statute. To construe the statute otherwise would bring about endless confusion and litigation, and every outgoing county attorney would claim and demand a part of the 25 per cent, on each judgment on prosecutions originating during his term of office, to the extent of his labor and service rendered therein. The agreed ment made by the Commonwealth’s attorney and the attorney for the railroad was not binding upon either, and certainly was not binding upon the court. The court or either of the parties could have ignored it, and it did not fix the liability of the railroad company in the event the appeals were affirmed. It could have pleaded “Not guilty,” and have had a trial by the court or jury, in each or all of the twelve indictments. And the Commonwealth’s attorney could have forced the railroad to have tried all the eases, and it was
Perceiving no error, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.