State v. Smith
Supreme Court of Vermont
Upon the trial of this cause the respondent introduced several-: witnesses to impeach the character of Harriet Quackenbush and-Rosetta Van Wait as to truth and veracity, whose testimony tended to prove that said witnesses were common prostitutes.
Read the full summary
Upon the trial of this cause the respondent introduced several-: witnesses to impeach the character of Harriet Quackenbush and-Rosetta Van Wait as to truth and veracity, whose testimony tended to prove that said witnesses were common prostitutes. This was objected to, and the court decided that the evidence was inadmissible; to which decision the respondents excepted, and the-cause passed to this court for revision. — 1. The testimony should have been admitted, because it was' well' calculated to aid the jury in placing a proper estimate on the credit of the two witnesses sought to be…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Williams, Ch. J.
The question here presented has been directly decided, as appears by the case of Morse vs. Vinco, 4 Vt. Rep. 281. A similar decision was made in Windsor county. These authorities are decisive on this question. There is no reason why any inquiry should bo permitted to impeach the character *143of a witness, except as to bis truth and veracity. It is true the practice of most of the vices tend to impair the moral sense, and weaken the force of the obligation to speak or act with a due regard to truth. A continued habit of intemperance has…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Jackson ex dem. Boyd v. LewisNew York Supreme Court · 1816
- Morse v. PineoSupreme Court of Vermont · 1832
3Cited by10 opinions
- Fletcher v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
- State v. StimpsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1905
- Fenner v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1929
- State v. FournierSupreme Court of Vermont · 1896
- State v. DuncanMontana Supreme Court · 1928
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.