History
  • No items yet
midpage
Commonwealth v. Peirce
32 Mass. 170
Mass.
1833
Check Treatment

Certiorari to the Police Court of Salem, before whom one Kimball had been fined for non-appearance at a muster of a volunteer company in the militia. The evidence produced before that court to prove his absence, was a roll of the company, with pencil marks against the names of some of the members of the company, which marks were arbitrary and were explained by the clerk of the company to denote the absence of those members. It was resolved by this Court, that the roll and pencil marks were of themselves insufficient to prove Kimball’s absence, and that the clerk’s testimony *171in explanation of the marks was inadmissible ; Commonwealth v. Paull, 4 Pick. 251 ; and the proceedings were quashed. Lord, for the commonwealth.

Choate, for the defendant.

Case Details

Case Name: Commonwealth v. Peirce
Court Name: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Date Published: Nov 15, 1833
Citation: 32 Mass. 170
Court Abbreviation: Mass.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.