Intent is not an essential element of the offense unless made so by statute. The obstruction is sufficient to constitute the offense, even though the accused believes in good faith that the obstruction is on his own land.165

So the fact that one on whose land a public road had been established was advised by his attorney that the proceedings establishing the road were void, cannot be urged as a defense for obstructing the road by putting a gate therein.166

159 Com. vs. King, 13 Met. (Mass.), 115. 160 State vs. Men-it, 35 Conn., 314;

State vs. Beal, 94 Me., 520;

Com. vs. Dicken, 145 Pa. St., 453. 161 Com. vs. Blaisdell, 107 Mass., 234. 162 2 McClain Cr. Law, Sec. 1186;

State vs. Smith, 54 Vt., 403.

163 New York, etc., R. Co. vs. State, 53 N. J., 244; Com. vs. New York, etc., Co., 112 Mass., 412. (Liable for its servants' acts.)

164 Illinois, etc., R. Co. vs. People, 49 Ill. App., 540. 105 Hughes' Cr. Law, Sec. 1317; Com. vs. Dicken, 145 Pa. St., 453; State vs. Gould, 40 Iowa 372.