Mcfarland v. People of State
| Decision Date | 30 June 1874 |
| Citation | 72 Ill. 368,1874 WL 8826 |
| Parties | JOSEPH MCFARLANDv.THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
WRIT OF ERROR to the County Court of Marion county; the Hon. JOHN G. VAUGHAN, Judge, presiding.
Mr. W. STOKER, for the plaintiff in error.
Messrs. CASEY & DWIGHT, for the defendant in error.
This is a writ of error to the county court of Marion county on a judgment for bastardy.
There was, on the trial in the court below, a direct conflict between the testimony of the prosecutrix and that of the defendant, she swearing positively to his guilt, and he as positively denying that he had, at any time, illicit sexual intercourse with her. Her testimony was, in part, corroborated by circumstances proved by other witnesses, and he proved by other witnesses that, about the time the child must have been begotten, she had illicit sexual intercourse with other men.
The court, at the instance of the prosecution, gave, among others, the following instruction to the jury:
This instruction was erroneous, and calculated to mislead the jury. It should not have been given.
It is insisted by the counsel for the prosecutrix that it is sustained by the language of this court in Jones v. The People, 53 Ill. 367. The only language used in the opinion in that case, bearing upon the question, instead of sustaining the instruction, is in conflict with it. It is this: “Though the mother of the child is most likely to know who its father is--by whom it was begotten--yet she may not always tell the truth.”
Whether the evidence of the prosecutrix is entitled to greater or less weight, on this or any other point, than other witnesses, depends upon the degree of fidelity with which she and they adhere to the truth, and must be determined by the jury, from all the evidence submitted in the case. The court was not authorized to declare, as a matter of law, the comparative weight of her evidence.
The following instruction was asked by the defendant, but refused by the court:
“That, in this case, both the mother of the child and the defendant are competent witnesses; and if one swears that defendant is the father of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wheat v. Summers
...jury was against the evidence, cited Wade v. Atkins, 58 Ill. 65; Evans v. George, 80 Ill. 51; Bonnell v. Wilder, 67 Ill. 330; McFarland v. The People, 72 Ill. 368. As to the exclusion of defendant's deposition: 1 Greenleaf on Evidence, 10th ed. § 462; Stone v. Cook, 79 Ill. 429; Robbins v. ......
-
Robnett v. the People
... ... People, 19 Ind. 152; People v. Carney, 29 Hun (N. Y.), 47.As to evidence: Benham v. State, 91 Ind. 82; O'Brien v. State, 14 Ind. 469; Smith v. Nevlin, 89 Ill. 193; Farwell v. Warren, 51 Ill. 470; Tracy v. People, 97 Ill. 103; Deagling v ... 325; Johnson v. People, 94 Ill. 505.Mr. H. C. GOODNOW and Mr. W. D. FARTHING, for appellees, cited R. S., 1883, p. 177, 6; McFarland v. People, 72 Ill. 368; McElhaney v. People, 1 Bradwell, 548.CASEY, P. J.In this proceeding appellant is charged with bastardy. It is alleged that he ... ...
-
Mcelhaney v. the People
... ... 551] Mr. James Shaw, for appellant; that it was competent for the parties to make a settlement of the prosecution, cited Holmes v. The State, 2 Green, 501; Blackhawk Co. v. Cotter, 32 Iowa, 125; Coleman v. Frum, 3 Scam. 378; Mann v. The People, 35 Ill. 467; Holcomb v. The People, 79 Ill. 09.That it was incumbent upon the prosecution to make out a case by a preponderance of testimony, as in other civil cases: McFarland v. The People, 72 Ill. 368.Upon the question of rescission of the contract as embodied in appellant's fifth instruction: Smith v. Doty, 24 Ill. 165; ... ...
-
People ex rel. Lyke v. Rucker
...of the record, we must conclude that there was ample evidence to support the findings of the trial court. Defendant relies on McFarland v. People, 72 Ill. 368. In that case, the trial judge erroneously instructed the jury that the mother's testimony with respect to the time of conception wa......