Haring v. State

23 A. 581, 53 N.J.L. 664, 24 Vroom 664, 1891 N.J. LEXIS 17

Opinion

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.