State v. Hull

The defendant, who was found guilty in the Court of Common Pleas at the September term 1891, of keeping and maintaining a common nuisance, to wit, a house of ill-fame, in the city of Providence, now petitions this court to grant her a new trial on the grounds, first, that the court below erred in admitting testimony relating to the reputation of the' defendant, and second, that certain remarks made to the jury by the Attorney General in his argument, were improper and prejudicial to the rights of the defendant.

The Attorney General was permitted by the court, against the objection of the…