[Cite as Commonwealth v. McNulty, 28 Leg. Intel., 389, 8 Phila. 610 (Penn. 1871).]
[Leg. Int., 1871, p. 398.]
A Policeman may be convicted of carrying concealed weapons; the presumption that he carries them lawfully may be rebutted.
The defendant herein, who had recently been acquitted of the charge of murder, was tried for assault and battery with intent to kill, and carrying a concealed deadly weapon. In support of the latter charge, it was shown that the defendant, a police officer, having been relieved from duty, went to the house of the prosecutors, and in the course of a personal altercation, drew from beneath his coat a pistol, with which he beat them. His counsel contended that there could be no conviction on this indictment, because the defendant was armed by the public, as a conservator of the peace, and was required by his office to carry the weapon.
The court held that the offence of carrying a concealed deadly weapon could be committed by a police officer, as well as by a private citizen; the difference being, that a private person was presumed to carry it for an unlawful purpose, while an officer was presumed to have it for a lawful purpose, either presumption being liable to be rebutted by proof.
Verdict guilty.