annunciated that where a person parts with his money for an unlawful or
dishonest purpose, even though he is tricked into so doing by false
pretences, a prosecution for the crime of larceny cannot be maintained.

[Footnote 2: 46 New York 470.]

[Footnote 3: 47 App. Div. 283.]

In the McCord case, the defendant had falsely pretended to the
complainant, a man named Miller, that he was a police officer and held a
warrant for his arrest. By these means he had induced Miller to give him
a gold watch and a diamond ring as the price of his liberty. The
conviction in this case was reversed on the ground that Miller parted
with his property for an unlawful purpose; but there was a very strong
dissenting opinion from Mr. Justice Peckham, now a member of the bench
of the Supreme Court of the United States.

In the second case, that of Livingston, the complainant had been
defrauded out of $500 by means of the "green goods" game; but this
conviction was reversed by the Appellate Division of the Second
Department on the authority of the McCord case. The opinion in this case
was written by Mr. justice Cullen, now Chief Judge of the New York Court
of Appeals, who says in conclusion:

"We very much regret being compelled to reverse this conviction. Even if
the prosecutor intended to deal in counterfeit money, that is no reason
why the appellant should go unwhipped of justice. We venture to suggest
that it might be Well for the Legislature to alter the rule laid down in
McCord _vs._ People."