Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Page 72795 of about 727,967 results (3.754 seconds)

1781

Respublica Vs. Mccarty

Court : US Supreme Court

RESPUBLICA v. MCCARTY - 2 U.S. 86 (1781) U.S. Supreme Court RESPUBLICA v. MCCARTY, 2 U.S. 86 (1781) 2 U.S. 86 (Dall.) Republica v. M'Carty* Supreme Court of Pennsylvania April Term, 1781 The defendant was indicted for High-Treason, in levying war, &c.; by joining the armies of the King of Great Britain. On the trial, the Attorney General offered to give the confession of the party in evidence made at the time of his arraignment; but Ingersoll objected, that a confession could only be admitted to be given in evidence by way of corroboration, and that, therefore, an overt act should be first proved. Fost. 10. 240. Bradford, Attorney General, contended, that the confession proved by two witnesses was of itself sufficient; but that, independent of that position, it was not necessary to prove the overt act, before the admission of the confession; and he referred to 5 Bac. Abr. 152. By the Court: No case of this kind has hitherto occurred in this Court. In the case of the Comm...

Tag this Judgment!

1781

Respublica Vs. Weidle

Court : US Supreme Court

RESPUBLICA v. WEIDLE - 2 U.S. 88 (1781) U.S. Supreme Court RESPUBLICA v. WEIDLE, 2 U.S. 88 (1781) 2 U.S. 88 (Dall.) Respublica v. Weidle* Supreme Court of Pennsylvania November Sessions, 1781 This was an indictment for misprision of Treason, in the defendant's speaking the following words 'that he had lived six years in London, and nine years in Ireland; and never lived happier in his life, than he had done under the English government; and that the King of England is our King, and Page 2 U.S. 88, 89 will be yours.' The words proved, by the evidence on the trial, to have been spoken were, that 'Weedle said he had lived six years in England, and nine in Ireland, and that he lived well, and that is was not so as people took it in this country; and he further said, the King would become King, and that the witness thought so too.' There was, however, some attempt to shew that he was intoxicated at the time of speaking the offensive words. The indictment was founded on the 4th ...

Tag this Judgment!

1780

iN RE JAMES' CLAiM

Court : US Supreme Court

IN RE JAMES' CLAIM - 1 U.S. 47 (1780) U.S. Supreme Court IN RE JAMES' CLAIM, 1 U.S. 47 (1780) 1 U.S. 47 (Dall.) JAMES'S CLAIM. April Term 1780 The case was this; John Parrock was attainted of High Treason, and his estate seized and advertised for sale. Abel James filed a claim, according to the act of Assembly, passed the 6th day of March 1778, in order to obtain a decree establishing his right, to what, he alledged, was a vested remainder in him, after the expiration of an estate for life, which, he contended, was all that John Parrock was possessed of in the premisses, and he never had any issue. [ In re James' Claim 1 U.S. 47 (1780) The question depended on the due construction of the following devise. 'I devise the residue of my estate to John Parrock, during the term of his natural life, and if he leaves lawful issue, then I give my real estate unto such issue: But, in case of his dying without issue, or they dying under the age of twenty one years, then I devise all my ...

Tag this Judgment!

1780

Montgomery Vs. Henry

Court : US Supreme Court

MONTGOMERY v. HENRY - 1 U.S. 49 (1780) U.S. Supreme Court MONTGOMERY v. HENRY, 1 U.S. 49 (1780) 1 U.S. 49 (Dall.) Montgomery v. Henry et al High Court of Errors and Appeals, of Pennsylvania April Sessions, 1780 This case, which was an appeal, from a decree in the Admiralty, having been elaborately argued on the 6th of May, the PRESIDENT delivered the opinion of the Court. REED, President: The case upon which we are now to give our judgment, comes before us under the following circumstances: Captain Montgomery was master and commander of the ship, called the General Greene, designed for a voyage to Martinica. While the ship lay in the river, a severe frost happened, which occasioned a great delay, and the owners thought proper to alter their plan. Differences then arose; they dismist Capt. Montgomery, and took the ship from him. Upon this he preferred his libel in the Court of Admiralty, complaining of the injury, as done to him in the port of Philadelphia, and within the jur...

Tag this Judgment!

1779

Respublica Vs. Sweers

Court : US Supreme Court

RESPUBLICA v. SWEERS - 1 U.S. 41 (1779) U.S. Supreme Court RESPUBLICA v. SWEERS, 1 U.S. 41 (1779) 1 U.S. 41 (Dall.) Respublica v. Cornelius Sweers Supreme Court of Pennsylvania April Term, 1779 At a court of Oyer and Terminer &c.; held at Philadelphia in November, 1778, the Defendant was indicted for Forgery upon two bills. The proceedings were removed by certiorari returnable into this Court, on the 5th day of December following; and the issues, on not guilty pleaded, were tried before a Special Jury on the 14th April, 1779, when the Defendant was convicted upon both indictments. Afterwards he filed reasons in arrest of judgment, of which a recapitulation will be found in the sentence of the Court; and these reasons were argued, and over-ruled, on the 19th day of the same month. The first indictment was for altering a bill of parcels and receipt given by Margaret Duncan, for goods bought from her, with intent to defraud the United States; and the charge was set forth in the...

Tag this Judgment!

1778

Respublica Vs. Malin

Court : US Supreme Court

RESPUBLICA v. MALIN - 1 U.S. 33 (1778) U.S. Supreme Court RESPUBLICA v. MALIN, 1 U.S. 33 (1778) 1 U.S. 33 (Dall.) Respublica v. Molin Court of Oyer and Terminer, at Philadelphia September Sessions, 1778 Indictment for High Treason. The prisoner, mistaking a corps of American troops for British, went over to them. And now the Attorney General offered evidence of words spoken by the Defendant, to prove this mistake, and his real intention of joining and adhering to the enemy. This was opposed by the counsel for the Defendant, who contended, that as words did not amount to treason, no general evidence [ Respublica v. Malin 1 U.S. 33 (1778) could be given of a man's sentiments; but that the intention expressed by any words offered in evidence, must relate immediately to the overt act laid and proved on the indictment; that although an adherence to the British troops was treason, yet, an adherence to American troops, even under a supposition that they were British, did not amo...

Tag this Judgment!

1778

Respublica Vs. Carlisle

Court : US Supreme Court

RESPUBLICA v. CARLISLE - 1 U.S. 35 (1778) U.S. Supreme Court RESPUBLICA v. CARLISLE, 1 U.S. 35 (1778) 1 U.S. 35 (Dall.) Respublica v. Abraham Carlisle Court of Oyer and Terminer, at Philadelphia September Sessions, 1778 This was an indictment for High Treason, which was set forth in the following words: 'The Jurors for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, upon their oaths and affirmations, do present, That Abraham Carlisle, late of the city of Philadelphia, in the county of Philadelphia, carpenter; being an inhabitant of and belonging to and residing within the State of Pennsylvania, and under the protection of its laws, and owing allegiance to the same State, as a false traitor against the same, not having the fear of God before his eyes, but being moved and seduced by the instigation of the Devil, the fidelity which to the same State he owed wholly withdrawing, and with all his might intending the peace and tranquillity of this Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to disturb, and war...

Tag this Judgment!

1778

Respublica Vs. Roberts

Court : US Supreme Court

RESPUBLICA v. ROBERTS - 1 U.S. 39 (1778) U.S. Supreme Court RESPUBLICA v. ROBERTS, 1 U.S. 39 (1778) 1 U.S. 39 (Dall.) Respublica v. John Roberts Court of Oyer and Terminer, at Philadelphia September Sessions, 1778 Indictment for High Treason. A witness was called to prove, that the Defendant had attempted to prevail upon him to enlist with the British army; but that he did not succeed. This gave rise to a question on these words of the act of Assembly: 'That if any person or persons knowingly and willingly shall aid or assist any enemies at open war with this State &c.; by persuading others to enlist for that purpose &c.; he shall be adjudged guilty of high treason' 2 State Laws p. 18. 19. In support of the prosectuion, it was urged, that the attempt to prevail, constituted the crime; and that it was like the case of a man's sending intelligence to the enemy, which was an act equally criminal in the sender, whether the intelligence was received, or not. For the Defendant, ...

Tag this Judgment!

1776

Steiner Vs. Fell

Court : US Supreme Court

STEINER v. FELL - 1 U.S. 22 (1776) U.S. Supreme Court STEINER v. FELL, 1 U.S. 22 (1776) 1 U.S. 22 (Dall.) Steiner v. Fell and others Supreme Court of Pennsylvania April Term, 1776 Plaintiff brought an action of debt on an arbitration Bond in Bucks County, Common Pleas. Defendant pleaded nun award. Plaintiff replied, and set forth an award. In September Term, 1775, Plaintiff got a rule for rejoinder in six weeks, or judgment, Before the six weeks expired, defendant's attorney gave him a rejoinder, and, at the same time, showed him a Habeas Corpus, by which he intended to remove the cause to the next Supreme Court. Plaintiff, choosing that the proceedings should go up above, as they were below, took out a Certiorari, and, going into court the first day of the term, got it allowed. The next day the defendant presented the Habeas Corpus, to which plaintiff's attorney objected, for that the record was removed by the Certiorari. The Court below agreed to send up both writs, and let...

Tag this Judgment!

1776

Wheeler Vs. Hughes

Court : US Supreme Court

WHEELER v. HUGHES - 1 U.S. 23 (1776) U.S. Supreme Court WHEELER v. HUGHES, 1 U.S. 23 (1776) 1 U.S. 23 (Dall.) Wheeler Assignee of Baynton v. Hughes Ex. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania April Term, 1776 John Hughes, the 16th of February 1763, gave his bond to John Baynton, conditioned for the payment of one thousand pounds. On the 3rd September, 1764, John Baynton and Samuel Wharton, became bound jointly and severally, to John Hughes in a bond conditioned for the payment of six hundred and eight pounds fifteen shillings. On the 8th of May 1765, John Baynton, assigned the one thousand pound bond to the plaintiff, Ann Wheeler, for a just debt, she being ignorant of any dealing, between Hughes and Baynton. This action was brought on the assigned bond; the defendant pleaded payment, and offered in evidence the bond dated in September, in bar of the plaintiff's recovery. To this the council for the plaintiff objected, and this day, viz. 23rd April, the cause came on to be argued. [ Wh...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //