Commonwealth v. Brown
Opinion of the Court
After the testimony had concluded, the Recorder said, the facts which appear are these:
That the prisoner was delivered of a living child; that when accused of having been so delivered, she did not deny it; that she was not aware of her condition prior to the delivery; that the time when, or under what circumstances, the child died, are not known nor pretended to be susceptible of clear proof; no facts were in evidence which raise the presumption that the prisoner either killed her offspring, or that she was even aware of its death. As to the charge of concealment, the evidence strongly proves that if any concealment existed, it was to conceal its birth. Under the act of assembly of the 17th of April, 1794, the words of which are “ if any female shall endeavour privately, either by herself or the procurement of others, to conceal the death, &c.,” the only criminal act is, the concealment of the death. So that if the birth is concealed, and death unknown to the mother, or even suspected by her or her friends or companions, it seems under the words of the act, that the death following the concealment of the birth, is no crime.
In the case of Commonwealth v. Emenetta Clark, 2 Ashmead 111, judge King has so construed the law as
It does appear to me that the position of the prisoner’s counsel is sound, and the prisoner is therefore discharged. To punish such offences in future, the legislature should explain the law referred to; as it stands in the statute book, it is almost a dead letter.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.