
    C. A. BYSTROM AND OTHERS v. E. W. ROHLEN.
    
    July 14, 1916.
    Nos. 19,828—(189).
    Reward — village constable may share, when.
    A village constable who, without a warrant, aids in making an arrest outside his village for an offense committed outside the village, may participate in a reward offered for the arrest and conviotion of the offender.
    The application of E. W. Rohlen, O. A. Bystrom and several other persons for a reward of $200 for procuring the arrest and conviction of a person charged with horse stealing, was heard in the district court for Swift county before Qvale, J., who made findings and apportioned the amount among E. H. Rohlen and others. From that order C. A. Bystrom and four others appealed.
    Affirmed.
    
      J. O. Haugland, for appellants.
    
      T. J. McMligott, for respondent.
    
      
       Reported in 158 N. W. 796.
    
   Taylor, C.

This is an appeal from an order made by the district court of Swift county apportioning between the parties hereto the reward given by statute for the arrest and conviction of a horse thief. Appellants contend that respondent is barred from participating in,thc reward by the fact that he was a constable and the night marshal of the village of Milan. Neither the theft nor the arrest took place within that village, and the arrest was made without a warrant. While a village constable as a peace officer may, under certain circumstances, make an arrest outside his village and without a warrant for an offense committed outside the village, the law does not command him to do so, and if he aids in making such an arrest he may participate in a reward offered for the arrest and conviction of the offender. Burkee v. Matson, 114 Minn. 233, 130 N. W. 1025, 34 L.R.A. (N.S.) 924.

Order affirmed.  