Parker v. Dudley
| Decision Date | 30 October 1875 |
| Citation | 118 Mass. 602 |
| Parties | Mary A. Parker v. Willard S. Dudley |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Worcester. Complaint under the bastardy act, Gen. Sts. c. 72 charging the respondent with being the father of a bastard child, alleged to have been begotten on or about July 6 1873, and born March 16, 1874.
Trial in the Superior Court, before Aldrich, J., who, after a verdict of guilty, allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as follows:
The respondent denied the charge against him, and contended that one Waldo Parker and one Albert Matthews had intercourse with the complainant within the period of gestation, before the birth of the child, and introduced evidence that the complainant, during pregnancy, stated in substance, that Parker was the father of the bastard child, and also introduced evidence that Matthews had sexual intercourse with the complainant on July 3, 1873.
The complainant, upon her direct examination, in answer to a question asked by her counsel, without objection, testified that she had never had sexual intercourse with any one, or upon any other occasion, than with the defendant on said July 6. Upon cross-examination, the complainant was asked whether she was not more intimate with Waldo Parker than with other men, and was not, in 1872, engaged to be married to him, and remained so engaged till after the child was begotten, and whether Parker did not give her an engagement ring on or previously to July, 1872, all of which the complainant denied. The defendant offered evidence tending to show that the complainant, in July, 1872, said that she was going to marry Parker as soon as he came from the West, and at the same time exhibited a finger ring which she said had been given to her by him as an engagement ring; but upon the complainant's objection the testimony was excluded.
The complainant, upon cross-examination, denied having had intercourse with Matthews, and said that she never liked him and he was always disagreeable to her. The respondent offered evidence tending to show that while the complainant and Matthews were living together as household servants in 1872 they appeared friendly and intimate with each other, and that Matthews was repeatedly in her bedroom with her in the night time; but upon the complainant's objection the evidence was excluded.
To the above rulings, and to the exclusion of the evidence offered, the defendant alleged exceptions.
Exceptions overruled.
G. A. Torrey, for the respondent.
F. P. Goulding, for the complainant.
The respondent had offered evidence tending to show that one Parker was the father of the child, and also that the complainant had sexual intercourse with one Matthews in July 1873, in which month the child was begotten. In confirmation of this evidence, he desired to show that she had said in July, 1872, that she was engaged to Parker, and also that in 1872 she was friendly and intimate with Matthews, and that he was repeatedly...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
G.E.B. v. S.R.W.
...unless it is so near in time as to afford some evidence that it resulted in begetting the child named in the complaint"); Parker v. Dudley, 118 Mass. 602, 605 (1875) ("In a proceeding of this nature [paternity], the character of the complainant for chastity is not put in issue, and such evi......
-
State v. Slane
... ... Under the heading of curative ... admissibility, a matter within the discretion of the court, ... we cite: 22 C. J. 195-7; Parker v. Dudley, 118 Mass ... 602; Bennett v. Susser, 191 Mass. 329; Jones v ... Werthan Bag Co., (Mo.) 254 S.W. 4 ... Chester ... Ingle ... ...
-
Com. v. Schnackenberg
...to which there was no objection, the defence then may similarly introduce such testimony over proper objections. See Parker v. Dudley, 118 Mass. 602, 605. Reliance is placed on the statement in Commonwealth v. Britland, 300 Mass. 492, 495--496, 15 N.E.2d 657, 659, 118 A.L.R. 132, that where......
-
Goodyear Park Co. v. City of Holyoke
...of the court.’ Theat v. Curtis, 124 Mass. 348, 352;Commonwealth v. Fitzgerald, 2 Allen 297;Mowry v. Smith, 9 Allen 67;Parker v. Dudley, 118 Mass. 602, 605;Commonwealth v. Matthews, 129 Mass. 485, 487;Bennett v. Susser, 191 Mass. 329, 330, 77 N.E. 884;Commonwealth v. Wakelin, 230 Mass. 567, ......