Foulke v. Commonwealth

May 26, 1879
Reporters:
,
Before:
Gordon

The judgment of the Supreme Court was entered

Per Curiam.

In Scully v. Kirkpatrick, 29 P. F. Smith 331, ‍‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌‍there was no forfeiture of the bond. The very groundwork of the decision was that the judge had no power to decree such forfeiture, or enter it of ‍‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌‍record. Here there was a regular, formal forfeiture of the recognisance. The liability of the recognisors was absolutely fixed by it: Mishler v. Commonwealth, 12 P. F. Smith 59. Their ‍‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌‍remedy was by petition ,to the court below to respite the recognisance. They could have done this under the Act of 1783. Besides, the affidavit showed no good ‍‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌‍reason why the defendant Foulke did not appear and offer to submit himself to trial, on which alone would there be any ground to respite the recognisance. Letters ‍‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌‍written to him by the counsel for the Commonwealth certainly were no reason.

Judgment affirmed.