Temple University School of Law - Restatement Yearbook (Philadelphia, PA)

Page 101 text:

HISTORY

Page 103 text:

CASE OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, EX. REL. TEMPLE UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL us. 62 LAW STUDENTS 1. Crimes—Attempt to Study Law—Chorus Girls—Parties—Late Hours. Whether an alleged student charged with the crime of Attempt to Study Law can set up as his defense that inasmuch as throughout a period of four years, he attended gay parties at divers times and places, showed a natural propensity for the society of young women, kept late hours and was without visible knowledge of the existence of the Volstead Act (thinking same to be a Vaudeville skit) and therefore was not a “Law Student” within the meaning of the Act of Assembly. 2. Evidence of Criminal Intent—Liability of Owner of Law Looks for Non-User— Contributory Negligence in Accidentally Opening Law Looks as Leaving Ujwn Conviction for Attempt to Study Law. Held, that where an alleged student offers to show that he owns but did not use law books, evidence tending to raise any inference as to his contributory negligence in opening another alleged student’s law book, even by accident, is admissible as rebutting the presumption of his ignorance of the law. Appeal by defendants from Court of Como-on Please No. 13, September term, 1922, and continuing through three other terms. Argued June 18, 1926. Affirmed by a “full” court. OPINION BY HECK, P. J. This case is appealed by the appellants. In the lowest court, the appellants were convicted of the crime of attempt to study law and were sentenced to hard labor for life at practicing law. Appellants, GLADYS HOBART, “DADDIE” HOCKSTEIN, “CONGRESSMAN” COLDER, cl al, have taken this appeal and the case is now brought before us for review. The appellants assign as error, inter alia, the finding that they are endowed with capacity for acquiring legal knowledge, contending that no court would be justified in reaching this conclusion and therefore it is impossible that they be guilty of the crime charged. For a proper consideration of the questions presented by the appeal, it is necessary that a thorough review be made of the transactions out of which the charges arose and of the testimony adduced at the trial. The appellees contended that during a period of four years, the appellants, who originally numbered some 110 alleged students-at-law, sixtv-two of whom are now in the toils of the law, the remainder being still at large, attempted at various times to study law. J. CLAUDE BEDFORD, ESQ., called as a witness on behalf of the appellees, testified that on or about Monday, September 25, 1922, at 7.00 P. M., a polyglot group of non-descripts attended a mass meeting and riot, at which he entertained them with lurid tales of his six months in the state legislature. Thereafter, on successive Monday nights, he alleges that he lectured before this same group and endeavored to instil