| Mass. | Mar 17, 1884
The omission of the plaintiff to testify in explanation of testimony against him, given by others in his presence, was a proper matter of consideration by the court and of comment by the opposing counsel.
If this were otherwise, the plaintiff should have taken his objection at the trial, and he could not raise the question for the first time upon a motion for a new trial, so as to make it the ground of an exception. Caverly v. McOwen, 126 Mass. 222" date_filed="1879-01-07" court="Mass." case_name="Caverly v. McOwen">126 Mass. 222.
Exceptions overruled.