Pike County press. (Milford, Pa.) 1895-1925, 1903-10-30
SUPERIOR COURT REVERSED.
JUDGE PURDY SUSTAINED
Judge Dean Holds That Title of the
Act is Misleading-Park not a
Public But a Private Corpor-
alton - May Reorganize
In THE SUPREME OoURr OF Penn.


from Judgment of
Superior Court re-
CHAs HAzEN versing said Court Of
Quarter Sessions.
Argued Feb. pa, O3. Filed Oct 10, o.
DEAN, Justice.
The appellant, Charles Hazen,
was summarily convicted before
Calvin o. Billings, a Justice of the
Peace of Pike county, for the viola
tion of the special Act of Assembly
of March %, 1871, in killing a deer
belonging to The Blooming Grove
Park Association and protected by
the penal clauses of that Act.
The Justice of the Peace imposed
a fine of $50 and cost and in default
of payment he was sentenced to
the county Jail
Hazen appealed to the Court of
Quarter Sessions, which court, in
opinion filed, held the act referred
TO, to be unconstitutional, in that I;
/. The subject of the act is not
clearly expressed in It's title. @ The
body of the act contains more than
one subject. 3. 1t deprives the de-
fendant of the right of trial by jury
in a case where at common law, be-
fore the adoption of either of the
Constitutions of this Commonwealth
such right existed. Whereupon, he
quashed and set aside the proceed
ings, further directed that defendant
be discharged. From this Judgment
the Commonwealth took an appeal
to the Superior Court, which court
being of opinion that the special act
was constitutional, directed that the
order Of the Quarter Sessions setting
aside the proceedings and discharg-
ing the defendant be reversed, and
that procedendo be awarded to
the lower court directing it to hear
the case on its merits.
A constitutional question being
involved an appeal of course under
the Superior Act lay to this court
which was promptly taken by de-
fendant. Averment of the appellant
is, that the Superior Court erred
in declaring the special act oonsti-
tutional.
The "Blooming Grove Park As
sociation," from a mere perusal of
the act is clearly a private copora-
tion. It is merely an association of
individuals united for a special pri-
vate purpose, permitted to do bust
ness under a particular name and
have succession without dissolution.
The members could have bought or
leased the land they claimed to own
and could have enjoyed it in much
the same way, under the protection
of the general laws of the Common
wealth, but the ASSOCIATION would
have been subject TO the disruption
and allthe inconvenience incident to
the death Of members or assignment
of their interest by any of the men,
bers. Its charter conferred upon
the association perpetuity and the
privilege Of suing aud being sued by
its corporate name. Its purpose was
not a public one, it met no public
want, as a turnpike company, rail-
road company, or street railway
corporation. And while the pur-
poses of such a corporation are
those which in a restricted sense,
the sovereign who make the grant
is desirous Of promoting, for that
desire is the very consideration of
the grant, yet in the grant of a fran
ohise to a public corporation, the
consideration Is much higher and
broader Ia the last It is the desire
TO benefit and promote the interest
of all the public as we'll as the in-
dividual interest Of the oorporators ;
and the public by the very fact Of
the grant have rights and privileges
which they can enforce at law
against the corporation. Therefore,
considering the purpose Of the Park
Association as distinguished from a
public corporation it is a private one
and in determining the legality Of
its creation and its corporate exist
anoe we must view it as a private
corporation whose members are the
principal, and except to a very slight
extent, the only ones interested. in
it, survival.
The title Of the act Is. "An Act to
Incorporate the Blooming Grove
Park Association. The c0nsti-
tphQpal provision as TO the titles