2 Years Transportation Progress Volume 36

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1896 edition. Excerpt: ... cases, in great number, might be cited to the same effect, but as we have found none in conflict with them, it is unnecessary. From these cases we understand the rule of cross-examination of a defendant in a criminal case to be, that he may be inquired of in relation to the facts brought out on his direct examination, as well as of all other facts pertinent to the issue, whether the subject of direct examination or not, and that facts tending to discredit him as a witness, or impeach his moral character, may also be elicited; that while the trial court may, in the exercise of its discretion, still further restrict the cross-examination, it cannot extend it beyond the limits of such rule. The defendant's counsel, on his direct examination of the defendant, did not open the door for the cross-examination we are considering. It is not pretended that it was pertinent to the issue before the court, and it need not be argued, we take it, that proof that a witness ami mulated between $9,000 and $10,000 in 17 years does not tend to discredit him, or impeach his moral character. It follows that, if the views expressed be sound, the judgment of conviction must be reversed, and a new trial granted. VAN BRUNT, P. J., concurs. POLLETT, J. I caunot concur in the conclusion reached in the prevailing opinion, that the testimony of Edwards and Whispell. detailing the conversation had between themselves and Policeman Augustus J. Thorne, in March, 1891, was irrelevant or incompetent. Edwards testified: "He [Thorne] said: 'I am the captain's private ninu. The captain uses considerable fruit, and, If you have no objections, will take fruit from you In place of money for protecting you on the sidewalk.'" Whispell testified: "Thorne said we had a new captain, ...