Fairbanks v. Town of Antrim
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Under our statute of February 9th, 1791. a town is Hable to a penalty, if it neglect either to build or keep in repair a pound sufficient to confine cattle. A penal statute should not be construed with such strictness as to defeat what was probably the intention of the makers of it, but which the language used might otherwise not be thought to embrace.
Read the full summary
Under our statute of February 9th, 1791. a town is Hable to a penalty, if it neglect either to build or keep in repair a pound sufficient to confine cattle. A penal statute should not be construed with such strictness as to defeat what was probably the intention of the makers of it, but which the language used might otherwise not be thought to embrace. But the declaration upon a penal statute must describe, with strict certainty, suffi* cient facts to constitute an ofíence ; and when the declaration is for a penalty, incurred by neglect either to build or repair a pound, it must allege the…
1Opinion of the CourtWoodbury, J.
The first section of our statute of February 9th, 1791, declares, “ that there shall be made and maintained in every « town in this state, a good and sufficient pound,” &c.(l) It then proceeds to enact, that, “ if any town shall not be “ provided with such pound within two years from the pass- “ ing of this act, they shall forfeit and pay to any person, “ who will sue for the same, the sum of ten pounds, and the “ same sum for every year afterwards, that they shall be “ destitute of such pound.”
A rigid construction of the above section might, as the defendants contend, limit the penalty to a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- United States v. FurlongSupreme Court of the United States · 1820
3Cited by2 opinions
- Pike v. MadburySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
- Wilson v. WentworthSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1852