Commonwealth v. Murray
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
On a former day, Milnor obtained a rule to show cause, why an information in nature of a writ of Quo warranto, should not be filed against Simon Murray, to show by what authority he exercised the functions of minister, in charge of Wesley church, in Lombard, between Fifth and Sixth streets in the city of Philadelphia.
Read the full summary
On a former day, Milnor obtained a rule to show cause, why an information in nature of a writ of Quo warranto, should not be filed against Simon Murray, to show by what authority he exercised the functions of minister, in charge of Wesley church, in Lombard, between Fifth and Sixth streets in the city of Philadelphia. The application was made on behalf of Robert Brown and others, in whom the legal title to the church was vested, and who alleged, that they represented the majority of an association, formed for religious worship, without charter. It appeared on the hearing, that the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Tilghman, C. J.
A rule having heen laid on the defendant, to show cause why an information, in nature of a Quo ioarranto, should *74not be filed against him, to show by what authority he exercises the functions of u Minister in charge of'Wesley Church.” It is objected by his counsel, that the religious office which he exercises, is not the subject of a Quo warranto. ’
The statute of 9 Ann. ch. 20, not having been extended to this commonwealth, all our proceedings in nature of Quo warranto are at common law. The ancient writ of Quo warranto haying been found…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. WoelperSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1817
- Commonwealth v. CainSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1820
3Cited by2 opinions
- People ex rel. M'Kinch v. Directors of Bristol & Rensselaerville Turnpike RoadNew York Supreme Court · 1840
- Commonwealth ex rel. Clements v. ArrisonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1827