Commonwealth v. Aurand
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal by the defendant from the decision of Rogers, J., holding a Circuit Court for Berks county. Action of assumpsit. Plea non assumpsit. The suit was. to recover the alleged amount of militia fines in the hands of the defendant, as late deputy marshal.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendant from the decision of Rogers, J., holding a Circuit Court for Berks county. Action of assumpsit. Plea non assumpsit. The suit was. to recover the alleged amount of militia fines in the hands of the defendant, as late deputy marshal. By act of congress of the 4th-of May, 1822, all the right of the United States to fines assessed upon citizens of the state of Pennsylvania for non-performance of militia duty, during the late war, were vested in the said state, to be recovered by the same, under such regulations, provisions, and restrictions, as shall be prescribed by the…
1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.
I consider the point made here as already, determined, there being no difference between the present case and Reigart v. M'Grath, except that the necessity which dictated the practice there was not near so urgent. Were the powers of the treasurer limited to a' discharge of-his duties in'person, the whole fiscal concerns of the government would , suffer derangement: an evil npt to be endured. The existing practice is shown to be coeval with the constitution; and if the legislature, haying the appointment of the officer committed to it, and the superintendance of his business peculiarly with*289in…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Ashton's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
- Estate of QuinPennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County · 1891
- Philadelphia v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1866
- Philadelphia & Reading Railroad v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1883
- Spangler v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1839
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.