Werfel v. Commonwealth
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. THE plaintiffs in error were indicted in the Quarter Sessions of Lancaster county, for that, “ on the 5th “of April 1810, at the township oí Conostogoe in the “county, with force and arms they did erect, build, set up, “repair and maintain, and did assist and abet in erecting, “building, setting up, repairing and maintaining a certain “ mound, made of logs and stones, of the height of “ feet, and length of eighteen yards, commonly called a fish- “ ing battery or…
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. THE plaintiffs in error were indicted in the Quarter Sessions of Lancaster county, for that, “ on the 5th “of April 1810, at the township oí Conostogoe in the “county, with force and arms they did erect, build, set up, “repair and maintain, and did assist and abet in erecting, “building, setting up, repairing and maintaining a certain “ mound, made of logs and stones, of the height of “ feet, and length of eighteen yards, commonly called a fish- “ ing battery or wharf, in the river Susquehanna, in that “part thereof declared to be a public highway, to wit, be- “ tween- Burkholder's…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
The error assigned, that no venire facias issued in this case, is contradicted bv the record. For it is set forth in the usual manner, that the sheriff returned the precept to him directed duly executed. I do not think it necessary to be more particular on this point, as my opinion is founded on another part of the record. The indictment is for erecting a mound in the river Susquehanna, of the height of seven feet, the length of eighteen yards, and the breadth of fifteen yards, commonly called a fishing battery or wharf for the purpose of taking fish in the said river,“ to tht…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Johnson v. BowdenTexas Supreme Court · 1875