Indiana Township Lines Alteration Case

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Jones:

Out of a regard for stare decisis as well as a distaste for judicial legislation, I dissent from the action of the majority in these cases.

The current opinion for this court flatly rejects the early decision in In the Matter of the Division Line of Clay, West Cocalico, and Ephrata Townships, 33 *328Pa. 366, which construed statutory language identical with that here involved. Thereby, the relevant procedure for one township’s annexation of land from another under the statutory “alteration of lines” provision was definitely established in 1859 and was never…