, 1870-03-19
THE COURTS.
The Exact Time when a Feion
Becomes Too Infamous
to Give Testimony.
Cost of Two Drum SoIos-The
Crosby Anniversary, and
Billy Nevans' Drum,
Additional Tax Judgments-Araign.
ment Of Prisoners in the Re-
corder's Court.
supreme Court Of Illinois.

coNr1cTs TESTIMONY. --..
The question OF the liability OF pawnhsoIess IN
the matter 0f the receipt Of stolen eo'os Is auu
ally becoming well defined, and the sentencing OF
several Of them to shr Pen!tcntia5J Is advancing
Lesson TO the Eholc body. Some time since one
Albert Fauuce went to the rcnltenttAyJ for such
crime and, being dIscouented with his lot he Ap-
peAlcd his cause TO tic Supreme Court whence 1t
returns the conviction by the Jury and the Law an
nounce,i by Judge McA'llstcr being sustained At
cscyy point One OF the matters decided Ia espe-
cta!y Interesting. as setting At rest the question
when the conv.et, hy las, becomes infamous In the
Walker Justce, and Is as follows:
The reccrl shows that plaintiff In error was ln-
.',c.ed lon:! With Mrs Stephens for rsceivtng
upon thu pieaaings In the case but number OF
cI1,rs arc assigned on the various rulings Of the
court
permitting Mnarc, who had been convicted Of
stealing ;he c,ods which the accused was charged
win sonceaing Int wao asd Is not been sennsaced
tarpry aimtts that At the common Law there must
te Scsdc. Of guilty, followed by Judgment, to
insist that the rule has been changed by our stat
Ute. The s3ath section Of the criminal code de-
clared that each and every person eons!cted o. any
cenv Is one, shall be deemed Infamous, and sha!l
ferIyer thereafter ae rendered Incapable cf hold
Ing any cf1ce OF honor, trnst, ct psons; o1 Young
at anv election; Of serving as JUROR, and OF CIV
THIS presents tho ques1ion Of what is convic-
teuec OF judgment rendered On such verdict? So
far Is onr knowledge Of the practice extends Under
tas tcs5 ssson T., fPss seD is unofm a1R' Inst he
sas euy 1nisa SSfnfaa seaaers The steasea ,neus
and the lar is entitled TO no small weight 10 the
Of sssa saeh
existed, We must conclude that the qcest1on would
long since have tecn presented to MS coaftfos
i rrfsrrner to the eighth section. Article ",
Of our constitution, will I'll 1w the construction TIC
conyictcn. ,Sn after eonirrrlnE upon the Governor
The noWer to grant rcprieves, commutatons ahl
rsou a!er eonyieoa sn cases for Of an @neac
mSs1 sxssr' # Iteas'a ,ise,slss sa H.. "he shah
h.enntally communicate tn the General Assembly
each sa,Inp 2, spFfGs Ss name q he eonse
The crime for which be was convicted. ne
sentence a :s ds.e aa " s's a!s 81 man
fes5y contemplate. Judgment or sentence a a
necessary 10 conviction, or why require u ea:h
case Of conviction and rerrseve, communication ; q
The verdict ef guilty constituted the consictlon
thfs would NOT have required IN ever! case tne
sentence and Us date 70 nasF osen o nnot ssts
nnon the uniform construction given to the stat
u1e abore referred to, which WAS tnen and est
'0nI uu sxaminatIon Of the aajudeea cases IN thu
yarcns states Of tie Cnion, where substantial!
the sane laws arc IN force VIII show tnas 90
rui1ty. nor tic pun1shment, nor the Infamous rs
turc of the punishment, but the dna JUDGMENT Q
the Cou7 that renaeFs r. sa.n, aTe 1ose1 s,5
that a rarty n convicted on the finding Of a vel
dict aeainst him. It Is tue, in sense, that =
ndsnen, ia 9nen IS renIered Is he eonSiets ae law
s. i. S.ss;sI 9sS L Ii. The se9s ss
nc intention to Change the commo
law rule. And III matter Of sacn Eaxe IN! imnoiE ~
vel expressed before We could give the construc
tion eon1ended for hy rlaintin IN error.
4 qESs s sef Gn iae ess ID
CONNECTED as partners In the pawnDtokers' bust
ness, md MIA stephens in the nrEt instance e
% luovIedEe de- hat they isad heen stolen IN Fanu.e.
absence, Yeti Faauce Afterwards learned wha
Mr Stephens had done, md also aSgu5ssa asa ,rol
the iact that these goods had been stolen and Wit
that knowledge he assumed the control Of th
goods in connection wn M M StepnGs ,er hpn 81
the purpose Of preventing the owner 81 Hal
goods from again possessing the same, tnen
should he found guilty, the same as II he original
received the goods directly from the peEE
knowing them to have hecn stolen, for the putpo
Of preventing the owner from assin possessing. g!
il, ind one defendant guilty, and the Other
guilty."
II appears Inc tW0 QfaeQuHutS NEEc OuAAH w
ness ia connection, and that the goods, soon at
they were E1alen, were taken to the brokers' OIL
and offered for Baie, but plaintiff Ia error not u
but said that Moorr would have 70 Wais y,
plAtnt1 in error came In the Office Moore left
goods on the show case, III the ONCE. he calle
formed him that the detectives were nfter 3
Moore swears that plaintiff in error told hiLu ,i y
told him to come hack in the morning, and Il
detectives Cid not come around he would give
something for the property. On The police on
ignorance IN reie1ence' 70 he properly, .cas
under u counter and handed II to Tue ofncer.
also apl&.rs that the police ortcers had called
: scT1bed the property, but he denied all lnoW1s
OIL and did not enter 1t ~ his booEs
1 10 sy naa9 III u as se4 @
their concealment, and from his knowledge
they were stolen hts denial that he knew Of
goods and the fact that when demanded he at
handed them from their place Of conecaime,
the officer. The tusy we're warranted tn concla
that he had them under bis control and hat
1t Ia next urged that defendants we're tndl
y fora Joint receipt Of the good. and The evids
ehows that the goods were lett with Mia Stept
when plaintiff IN er1ur wRs not present
Ills urged that proof that one received the 20
: In the absence Of the other, and Afterwards de
:; rrad them to the other. will not warrant . con
ton for joint receipt Of the goods That
ccsstvc receivers are all separately guilty. Such
be the law, hut in this case plaintiff IN error c
ing to purchase the goods, II the detective did
:. iute1fcrp, he retained tie goods. Ills comm,
!: cation with the the thief vas as direct as
what Ills code1endant has said to the thleL
are unable to see that the authorities referee
L rs eses ,aa paes snasd da no M
gain, but 10 have acted separately and not jo!l
nor az I'll who we're accused communicate dill
: The evidence, we think, susta1ns the yer,