Commonwealth ex rel. Bache v. Binns
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
QUO WARRANTO. • This was a rule to show cause why an information, in nature of a quo warranto, should not be filed against the defendant, John Binns, to inquire by what authority he exercised. the office of an alderman of the city of Philadelphia. ' It appeared that the defendant was duly commissioned an aider-man of the city of Philadelphia, on the 2d oí December, 1822, by Governor Heister, and had, since that time, continued to exercise the duties of the office.
Read the full summary
QUO WARRANTO. • This was a rule to show cause why an information, in nature of a quo warranto, should not be filed against the defendant, John Binns, to inquire by what authority he exercised. the office of an alderman of the city of Philadelphia. ' It appeared that the defendant was duly commissioned an aider-man of the city of Philadelphia, on the 2d oí December, 1822, by Governor Heister, and had, since that time, continued to exercise the duties of the office. In the month of December, 1825, being then and since editor of the Democratic Press, a daily paper, published in this city, he…
1Opinion of the CourtTod, J.
It seems to me that this case, if it c'an come at all within" the act of assembly, müst come within it because an engagement, under the act of congress, by a printer, to publish the laws of the. United States, is an office, or an appointment in the nature of an office: or, if the printer is not to- be ranked as an officer of the United States, yet, that he is included in the description of subordinate officer or agent, or person employed; or, lastly, though.not falling within the] precise words, yet that his case may be fairly construed to come within the spirit and intent of .the law. My…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Shepherd v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1814
- Commonwealth ex rel. Lehman v. SutherlandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1817
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States ex rel. Noyes v. HatchWisconsin Supreme Court · 1842
- Application of the Emoluments Clause to a Member of the President's Council on Bioethics, Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel2005
- Officers of the United States Within the Meaning of the Appointments Clause, Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel2007