Slocum v. Perkins
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. ERROR to the Common Pleas of Luzerne county. This was an action for the recovery of the penalty of 50 pounds, under the act against clandestine marriages, passed the 14th February, 1729-30, brought against the defendant, a justice of the peace, for marrying the son of the plaintiff, an infant under the age of 21 years, without his father’s consent. • ' On the trial of the cause in the Court below, the plaintiff offered in evidence, the copy of a notice served on…
Read the full summary
In Error. ERROR to the Common Pleas of Luzerne county. This was an action for the recovery of the penalty of 50 pounds, under the act against clandestine marriages, passed the 14th February, 1729-30, brought against the defendant, a justice of the peace, for marrying the son of the plaintiff, an infant under the age of 21 years, without his father’s consent. • ' On the trial of the cause in the Court below, the plaintiff offered in evidence, the copy of a notice served on the defendant, thirty days before the commencement of the action. It was signed by the attorney foi the plaintiff, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
Our act of assembly is nearly iti the words of the English statute 24 Geo. II. c. 44, on the con, struction of which many cases are to be found in the English books. Those cases shew a more rigid construction than we have thought proper to make, but the act of assembly must be substantially complied with. What the law has required, no Court has power to dispense with. Whether it is essential, that the name of the attorney, together with his place of abode, should be written on the back of the paper containing the notice, it is unnecessary to decide, because there is another…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Litle v. TolandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1813
3Cited by3 opinions
- Boyd v. BoydSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1833
- Wise v. WillsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1828
- Searight v. CraigheadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1829