Myers v. Foster
New York Supreme Court
On error from the C. P. of Schenectady county, where the cause came by appeal from the justices’ court of the city of Schenectady, - a collector on the Erie canal, sued Foster for $25, the penalty given by the 17th section of the act for the maintenance and protection of the Erie and Champlain canals, (sess. 43, ch. 202.) This section requires that every boatman, or person having charge of property mov-*1, , . ,, , , 1 . , xng on the canal, shall give to the collector, &c. a…
Read the full summary
On error from the C. P. of Schenectady county, where the cause came by appeal from the justices’ court of the city of Schenectady, - a collector on the Erie canal, sued Foster for $25, the penalty given by the 17th section of the act for the maintenance and protection of the Erie and Champlain canals, (sess. 43, ch. 202.) This section requires that every boatman, or person having charge of property mov-*1, , . ,, , , 1 . , xng on the canal, shall give to the collector, &c. a just account or bill of lading, &e. signed by the person, &c. conveying such property, &c. containing a statement of…
1Opinion of the Court
Savage, Ch. Justice.
The only question seems to be, whether passengers are property. No mention is made of persons, and there is not a word in the act from which we can infer that the legislature intended to make them the subject of toll. The law will not extend a penal statute by equitable construction.
SuthereaND, J.
It. is impossible that this law could contemplate passengers as the subject of toll. There is nothing either in the sense of the words used, or in the context, to warrant the construction contended for. It Would be extending a penal statute beyond what was ever heard or thought of…
2Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. GideonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1856
- Ferrett v. AtwillU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1846
- United States v. ComerfordDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · 1885