Hi eagle780:
Thanks for the interesting question.
Given your hurry for this information, I will post the "simple" answer
straight away:
*********************************
THE "TAYLOR VS TAINOR" RULING.- DECISION OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME
COURT
Taylor VS Tainor, 16 Wall, 366
When bail is given the principal is regarded as delivered to the
custody of his sureties (Bail Bondsman). Their Dominion is a
continuance of the original imprisonment. Whenever they choose to do
so, they may seize and deliver him up in their discharge, and if it
cannot be done at once they may imprison him until it can be done.
They may exercise their rights in person or by agent (Bounty Hunter).
They may pursue him into another state, may arrest him on the Sabbath,
and if necessary, may break and enter his house for that purpose. The
seizure is not made by virtue of new purpose. None is needed. It is
likened to the rearrest by Sheriff of an escaping prisoner.
*************************************
From: http://www.usawanted.com/rewards.html
More detailed info at:
Legal Aspects of Bail Enforcement
http://www.sasops.com/taylor.html
I will attempt to find any more information (if possible) later today
and post it as a clarification.
websearcher-ga
Search Strategy:
"supreme court" bail 1873
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&safe=off&q=%22supreme+court%22+bail+1873 |