
    Commonwealth vs. Frederick Dame.
    A conviction of the offence of maliciously obstructing the passing of cars on a railroad does not render the convict an incompetent witness.
    The defendant was tried before Merrick, J., in the court of common pleas, for selling liquor without license to Parker Cummings; who, being called as a witness for the prosecution was objected to by the defendant as incompetent, on the ground, that he had been convicted of the offence of obstructing the passing of cars on the New Bedford and Taunton Railroad by laying a log across the track, and by filling up the space between the rails with blocks and stones, and by forcibly taking up and removing one of the rails; and had been sentenced therefor to four years’ imprisonment in the state prison. And the defendant offered in evidence a copy of the record of the conviction and sentence. But the judge overruled the objection, and rejected the evidence. The jury returned a verdict against the defendant, who alleged exceptions to the ruling of the judge.
    
      A. Mackie, for the defendant.
    
      Clifford, (attorney-general,) for the commonwealth.
   Metcalf, J.

It is said in the text books that persons convicted of treason, felony, or the crimen falsi, are incompetent to be witnesses. Roscoe on Ev. 78; 1 Greenl. on Ev. § 373. But the offence, of which Cummings was convicted, was neither of these three, and we .nowhere find that a conviction of any other offence renders the convict incompetent to testify.

In the case of United States v. Brockius, 3 Wash. C. C. 99, it was decided that a person convicted of the crime of assault and battery with intent to murder was, nevertheless, a competent witness. That case is analogous to the present.

Exceptions overruled.  