Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court And, at Law, in the Court of Errors and Appeals of the State of New Jersey (Volume, Volume 59
General Books LLC, 2010 - 448 pages
This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1897. Excerpt: ... SO Vroom. Parks v. State. bidding on the property, that money had been lost there the night before. The substance of this inquiry first appears on the crossexamination of the state's witness, Meyers; the subsequent prosecution of it occurs in the defence offered by Parks, and there is no force in any suggestion of defect as to time or method in the putting of this question. As already observed, the defendant Parks was not in possession of the premises at the time the offence is charged to have been committed by him, but he was an intending, or at least a possible, purchaser, and as such of course had an interest in the character and repute of the house. If it could be shown that he closed his eyes to the circumstances or suffered in silence the doing of wrongful acts there, an inference of participation might be drawn by the jury on this trial. If, on the other hand, it could be shown that he denounced the conduct of the occupants to themselves, or that he complained of the guilty acts to the authorities of the borough, that, too, would certainly be proper matter for the consideration of the jury, who had a right to hear what he said or did, and to form their own conclusions upon the good faith and sufficiency of his objections and efforts. That they might do this fairly to both parties to the inquiry, it was proper and necessary that they should be told just what the defendant did and said before the officers of the law had interfered. An actual complaint made to the chief police official of the locality is more than a declaration of feigned or real sentiment; it is an act, and the full significance of it can only be ascertained by an acquaintance with its terms. A mere statement that complaint was made "concerning these premises" is not enough. The jury...
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.