Guardians of the Poor v. Greene
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. ___ * | ''HIS was an action of debt in the Common Pleas of Philadelphia county, to recover from the defendant the penalty of sixty dollars, prescribed by the act of the 29th of March 1803, for refusing to take the oath of office of a guardian of the poor, for the township of the Northern Liberties, or to unc^erta^e the duties of that office, The cause was decided below in favour of the defendant error, upon a case, in the nature of a special verdict, which stated…
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. ___ * | ''HIS was an action of debt in the Common Pleas of Philadelphia county, to recover from the defendant the penalty of sixty dollars, prescribed by the act of the 29th of March 1803, for refusing to take the oath of office of a guardian of the poor, for the township of the Northern Liberties, or to unc^erta^e the duties of that office, The cause was decided below in favour of the defendant error, upon a case, in the nature of a special verdict, which stated as follows: The defendant was duly elected to serve as a guardian of the poor, in the month of November 1810, by virtue…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
The question in this case is, whether the defendant in error, an ordained deacon, and an elder in the Methodist Episcopal church, is subject to the penalties of the act of the 29th of March 1803, for not serving in the office of a guardian of the poor, to which he was elected. There is no doubt but the, commonwealth has a right to insist on the service of every member of the community, in any capacity in which it may be thought proper to exact it. But unless the intention is clearly expressed, it is not to be supposed, that services were meant to be exacted contrary to ancient…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Felo v. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
- Commonwealth v. Lehigh Valley RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895