Hinson v. . King

50 N.C. 393

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: June 5, 1858
• Status: Published

Opinion

Pearson, J.

Upon the question of the “scienter,” the testimony of Malone was admissible, and it was for the jury to estimate the weight to which it was entitled. Suppose one passes a counterfeit bank bill; to meet the imputation that.he knew it to be counterfeit, he would certainly be allowed to prove that he received it at par, and that the person of whom he received it, said it was good, or passed it as good-. We see no distinction between the two cases. It will be conceded, we imagine, that the defendant was at liberty to prove that he bought the mare; such testimony would be relevant, as tending to shew that he was less apt to have known the condition of the animal’s eyes than if he had raised her. The same reason applies to the fact that he gave a fair price, and to what he was told by the vendor at the time of the sale; it was part of the res gestee, and was relevant in respect to the “ sci-enter.” We concur with his Honor in the view taken by him of the testimony of Archibald. As he could not say whether the conversation took place ~before or after the sale, of course the jury could not; so the testimony amounted to nothing.— Edmonston v. Shelton, 4 Jones’ Rep. 451; Mathis v. Mathis, 3 Jones’ Rep. 132, Sutton v. Madre, 2 Jones’ Rep. 320.

PeR Cueiam, There is no error. Judgment affirmed.