Case ID: njl_53/html/0664-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JOHN L. HARING, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR.
    On error to the Supreme Court. For opinion of Supreme Court, see 22 Vroom 386.
    For the plaintiff in error, John W. Griggs.
    
    For the defendant in error, William B. Gourley, Prosecutor of the Pleas.
    
   Per Curiam.

We agree with the opinion of the Supreme Court except so far as it construes the act of March 30th, 1887. It is unnecessary to pass upon that part of the opinion, because we find the act to be unconstitutional.

Let the judgment below be affirmed.

.For affirmance—The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Mague, Reed, Scudder, Brown, Clement, Smith, Whitaker. 9.

For reversal—None.