187 A. 710 (Me. 1936), State v. Martin

Citation187 A. 710, 134 Me. 448
Opinion JudgeDUNN, Chief Justice.
Party NameSTATE v. MARTIN.
AttorneyFrancis H. Bate, Co. Atty., of Winthrop, for the State. Joseph E. F. Connolly, of Portland, and Arthur F. Tiffin, of Augusta, for defendant.
Judge PanelArgued before DUNN, C. J., and STURGIS, BARNES, THAXTER, HUDSON, and MANSER, JJ.
Case DateOctober 13, 1936
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine

Page 710

187 A. 710 (Me. 1936)

134 Me. 448

STATE

v.

MARTIN.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

October 13, 1936

Argued before DUNN, C. J., and STURGIS, BARNES, THAXTER, HUDSON, and MANSER, JJ.

Francis H. Bate, Co. Atty., of Winthrop, for the State.

Joseph E. F. Connolly, of Portland, and Arthur F. Tiffin, of Augusta, for defendant.

DUNN, Chief Justice.

The counts in the indictment, six in all, are for the common-law crime of bribery.

Each count, so far as need be recited here, alleges that:

"George W. Martin of Augusta in said County of Kennebec, on the twenty-third day of August in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred thirty-four at Augusta in said County of Kennebec being then and there entrusted with a public duty, to wit, being then and there in charge of the clothing warehouse of the Emergency Relief Administration of the State of Maine at said Augusta, engaged in the distribution of clothing for the relief of distress within the State of Maine and in the purchase of said clothing for distribution for the relief of distress within the State of Maine under the supervision of and subject to the approval of one John A. McDonough, Administrator of the Emergency Relief Administration of the State of Maine, unmindful of and not regarding the trust so reposed in him, the said George W. Martin, but perverting the trust so reposed in him, the said

Page 711

George W. Martin, and contriving and intending the citizens of the State of Maine for the private gain of him, the said George W. Martin, to oppress and impoverish and to impede and obstruct the general welfare of the said State of Maine and to impede and obstruct the relief of the distress of the citizens of the said State of Maine, under the color of the trust so reposed in him, the said George W. Martin, a certain sum of money, to wit, the sum of ...... hundred dollars from one John H. Vickery of Brewer in the County of Penobscot in the State of Maine, then and there the agent of W. S. Emerson Company of Bangor, Maine, to influence him, the said George W. Martin, so that the said John H. Vickery, agent as aforesaid of said W. S. Emerson Company, might obtain orders for clothing from said Emergency Relief Administration of the State of Maine for said W. S. Emerson Company, then and there unlawfully, unjustly and extorsively did accept, receive and have ......"

After unsuccessfully pleading that offense, if any, did not directly affect the state of Maine or its population, but was distinctively against the United States, respondent entered his plea of not guilty, and was put on trial by jury. The judge, in charging, instructed the jury to return, as to the first count, verdict of not guilty, assigning the applicable evidence insufficient to warrant conviction. As to every other count, the verdict was guilty.

The case is forward on exceptions: (1) To the overruling of the plea setting up absence of jurisdiction of the court; (2) to a portion of the charge; (3) to the denial of motion, by respondent, after the conclusion of all the evidence, and before the charge was given, for the direction of a verdict in his favor.

The main question arising on the record, and which only it seems necessary to consider, is whether the motion already mentioned, the ground of which was a failure of the prosecutor to offer proof, either positive or inferential, to...

To continue reading

Request your trial