Anonymous
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Mr. Solicitor General Davis suggested to the Court that the honorable Mr. Dane, a counsellor practising in this Court, having been examined as a- witness by the grand jury, it appeared on his examination that he held in his possession a certain paper, purporting to be a promissory note, which, on behalf of the commonwealth, Mr. Solicitor was desirous to lay before the grand jury, believing that public justice might be promoted thereby ; but which Mr. D. had declined…
Read the full summary
Mr. Solicitor General Davis suggested to the Court that the honorable Mr. Dane, a counsellor practising in this Court, having been examined as a- witness by the grand jury, it appeared on his examination that he held in his possession a certain paper, purporting to be a promissory note, which, on behalf of the commonwealth, Mr. Solicitor was desirous to lay before the grand jury, believing that public justice might be promoted thereby ; but which Mr. D. had declined producing without the direction or advice of the Court; which the solicitor general requested might be given accordingly. Mr.…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,.
We can give no such advice. This paper was intrusted to Mr. Dane, as a counsellor or an attorney of the Court. It is in the keeping of his c^ent, as much as if it were in his own pocket *310Non constat that it will ever be produced. The party may repent of his ill intention, and any crime contemplated may never be com mitted.
Note. — It seemed to be understood that this paper was a forged note, upon which the grand jury might have founded an indictment against Mr. D.’s client.
2Cited by6 opinions
- Foster v. HallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1832
- Durkee v. LelandSupreme Court of Vermont · 1832
- Clarke v. DavisNew York Surrogate's Court · 1863
- Petition of SnowSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1908
- Brown v. PaysonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1833
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.