Commonwealth v. Carmalt
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
THE defendant was indicted in the Quarter Sessions 0f , Montgomery, for having, by colour of being gatekeeper of the Chesnut-Hill and Springhouse Turnpike unlawfully demanded and received of one Aaron Keyser, the sum of four cents, for openjng the gate of the said company, and permitting him to pass with a sled and two horses.
Read the full summary
THE defendant was indicted in the Quarter Sessions 0f , Montgomery, for having, by colour of being gatekeeper of the Chesnut-Hill and Springhouse Turnpike unlawfully demanded and received of one Aaron Keyser, the sum of four cents, for openjng the gate of the said company, and permitting him to pass with a sled and two horses. Upon the trial of the indictment before the Chief Justice on the Montgomery Circuit in June 1808, the jury found a special verdict to the following effect: That Keyser resided in Flour-town on the Chesnut-Hill and Springhouse Turnpike Road, and had there six acres of…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
By the act of the 17th March 1806, certain privileges were given to the Chesnut-Hill and Spring-house Turnpike Company, provided that they should not have the benefit of that act, unless they relinquished their right of taking tolls from any person, “ when passing from “ one part of his or her farm to the other along the said “ road.” After,the company had accepted the benefit of this act, the defendant took the toll for which he was indicted. It is now made a question whether upon the finding of the jury7, Keyser was passing from one part of his farm to the other.
The…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Burt v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1866
- Van Buren v. WylieMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- Cummings v. WaringNew York Supreme Court · 1862
- Respublica v. CarmaltSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1807