Commonwealth v. Comly
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In error from the Common Pleas of Northumberland county. July 22. Debt on bond of collector of tolls appointed by the Canal Commissioners of the Commonwealth, against one of his sureties. The bond recited the appointment, and was conditioned that “ he shall account for and pay over all moneys he may receive for tolls.”
Read the full summary
In error from the Common Pleas of Northumberland county. July 22. Debt on bond of collector of tolls appointed by the Canal Commissioners of the Commonwealth, against one of his sureties. The bond recited the appointment, and was conditioned that “ he shall account for and pay over all moneys he may receive for tolls.” The plaintiff having proved the settlement of the account of the principal; the defendant, under objection, gave evidence of a larceny of the moneys received for tolls from the desk of the collector, in the night-time. The money had been deposited in a secret apartment of a…
1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.
The opinion of the court in the case of the United States v. Prescott is founded in sound policy and sound law. The responsibility of a public receiver is determined not by the law of bailment, which is called in to supply the place of a special agreement where there is none, but by the condition of his bond. The condition of it in this instance was, to “ account for and pay over” the moneys to be received; and we would look in vain for a power to relieve him from the performance of it. True, there are many cases of relief against a legal right arising out of a contract; not one of which,…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Wiley v. City of SpartaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Margiotti v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Witherow v. WeaverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Estate of Frank A. BoswellSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Potter County v. PageSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.