Hellings v. Commonwealth

5 Rawle 64, 1835 Pa. LEXIS 8
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided January 12, 1835·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The offence here is laid as embezzlement at the common law. Sir "William Blackstone, speaking of misprisions in public trusts and employments, remarks in the fourth volume of his Commentaries p. 121: “Hitherto also may be referred the offence of embezzling the public money, called by the Romans peculatus, which the Julian law punished with death in a magistrate, and with deportation or banishment in a private person. With us it is not a capital crime, but subjects the committer of it to discretionary fine and imprisonment.” He refers to no-authority for the last position; but we find in Moulsworth’s case, Comb. 187, w here an overseer had charged the parish three pounds for putting out an apprentice who was in fact not put out, the expression of an opinion that there might be remedy by indictment; and in Mr. Chitty’s Criminal Law, vol. 3, p. 701, we have two precedents of an indictment for embezzlement at Common Law.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hellings v. Commonwealth, 5 Rawle 64, 1835 Pa. LEXIS 8 (Pa. 1835).

5 Rawle 64 (Hellings v. Commonwealth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

KELLEY v. WOLVERINE TUBE, INC.
2017 OK CIV APP 19 (Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, 2017)
Commonwealth ex rel. Barr v. Naylor
34 Pa. 86 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1859)