The general reputation of the inmates and frequenters of the house for chastity, including the keeper, is competent against the accused for keeping a house of ill-fame.86 So is the lewd conduct and conversations of the accused in the presence of the inmates competent.87

73 Fahnestock vs. State, 102 Ind., 156; State vs. Garing, 74 Me., 152; People vs. Gastro, 75 Mich., 127; State vs. Clark, 78 Iowa, 492.

79 State vs. Calley, 104 N. C, 858; People vs. Buchanan, 1 Idaho, 689; State vs. Lee, 80 Iowa, 75.

80 People vs. Malette, 79 Mich., 600; Ramey vs. State (Tex. Cr. App.), 45 S. W., 489.

81 State vs. Smith, 15 R. I., 24.

82 State vs. Mullin, 35 Iowa, 207.

83 Com. vs. Wood, 97 Mass., 225;

Sparks vs. State, 59 Ala., 82; State vs. Nixon, 18 Vt., 70; State vs. Clark, 28 Iowa, 492; People vs. Hampton, 4 Utah, 258

84 McAlister vs. Clark, 33 Conn., 81; Crofton vs. State, 25 Ohio St., 249; People vs. Saunders, 29 Mich., 269; Com. vs. Harrington, 3 Pick, Mass., 26.

85 People vs. Sadler, 97 N. Y., 146; Com. vs. Goodall, 165 Mass., 588; Hughes Cr. Law, Sec. 2103.