Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 Mass. 523

Commonwealth v. Cony

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1807-06-15

The indictment charges that the defendant, being a deputy sheriff of this county, with force and arms, by color of his office, did wilfully and corruptly demand and receive of one Joseph Clif ford, for the service of a certain execution against the said Clifford, and wherein one Theophilus Hamblin was the creditor, a greater fee for the service of the said execution than by law was provided, viz., 9 dollars and 17 cents, when in fact there was due to him no more than 1…

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1982

1 state decisions

Cited in Bouvier (1914)’s definition of “Extortion”

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1807-06-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

* By the Court.

¶1It is our opinion, after considera tian, that the evidence does not support the indictment. The defendant is charged with extortiously receiving 9 dollars and 17 cents; but the receipt of a negotiable note, by which that sum is promised to be paid, is not. the receipt of money. The statute on which the indictment is drawn, commonly called the Fee Bill, provides for the payment of certain fees for the services therein de scribed, and prohibits the wilful and corrupt taking of greater fees, under the penalty of 30 dollars. If the indictment had conformed to the evidence, we should have doubted whether the statute would have been pursued.

¶2To constitute extortion at common law, there must be the receipt of money, or of some other thing of value. (1) This note, when made, was ipso facto void, the consideration of it being illegal, and it was consequently of no value.

¶3If this statute should be revised, it would deserve consideration whether it would not be proper to extend the penalty of extortion to the unlawful receiving any promise or security for the payment of fees not allowed, agreeably to the provision of 27 Eliz. c. 6, and further, to make such promise or security, like a usurious contract, absolutely void, so that the party injured might be protected against even an innocent endorsee. (a)

¶4Let the verdict be set aside, and a new trial granted.

¶5Co. Litt. 368, b.

¶6Commonwealth vs. Pease, 16 Mass. Rep. 93

/2/mass/523 · .json · Public domain