The person, who erected the gate and those who have kept it up and used it, are guilty of the of-fence charged in the indictment. But the defendant is not responsible for their acts, in which he had no participation by aiding in or procuring them to be done. Any person might abate the nuisance erected on the defendant’s 1 and; but he, merely as owner, is not more under an obligation to do so, than any other citizen. If one cut a tree across the road on another’s land, the owner of the land is not obliged to remove it, but the overseer of the road. The tenants, who use the gate by keeping it closed and impeding the travel, are, no doubt, guilty. But a landlord is not answerable crimi-naliter for nuisances erected or continued by the lessee. To make one guilty of a crime, some personal agency or delinquency of his own is requisite.

Per Curiam, Judgment affirmed.