Wilson v. Sproul
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Allegheny county. This was an action on the case brought by Robert Sprout against John Wilson, for debauching Polly Porter, the alleged servant of the plaintiff. She was sworn, and testified as follows: “That the plaintiff is her brother-in-law; she had resided at his house nine years before the child was born.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Allegheny county. This was an action on the case brought by Robert Sprout against John Wilson, for debauching Polly Porter, the alleged servant of the plaintiff. She was sworn, and testified as follows: “That the plaintiff is her brother-in-law; she had resided at his house nine years before the child was born. That on the 27th of March, 1826, she was gotten with child by the defendant; that it Was born on the 27th of November, 1826, at which time she was twenty-eight years old. The defendant was intimate in the family of plaintiff, and lived one-fourth mile…
1Opinion of the Court
*51The opinion of the court was delivered by
Ross, J.
The legal foundation of this action, and that which constitutes the plaintiff’s right to recover, is the loss of service. The relation of master and servant must exist between the plaintiff and the person seduced, at the time when the injury is committed. If the daughter be under the age of twenty-one, she is the. servant of her father, de jure; and his right to command her services will be sufficient proof of her being his servant. But if she be above the age of twenty-one, there must be some evidence of the relation of master and servant —…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hornketh v. BarrSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1822