State v. Long
| Decision Date | 31 December 1859 |
| Citation | 52 N.C. 24,7 Jones 24 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE v. HENRY M. LONG. |
Where there are three counts in a bill of indictment, and testimony was offered with respect to one only, a verdict, though general, will be presumed to have been given on that count to which the testimony was applicable.
Where a negro, having a jug, was seen going, in the night time, into the house of one who kept spirituous liquor for sale, and after a delay of ten minutes, returned with his jug containing liquor, it was certainly not erroneous in a Judge to instruct the jury, they might infer that the liquor was purchased of the owner of the house.
INDICTMENT for trading with a slave, tried before CALDWELL, J., at the last term of Columbus Superior Court.
The indictment contained three counts. The first charged that the defendant, “did unlawfully sell to Luke, a negro slave, one gill of spirituous liquor,” the said slave not having a permission to buy, &c.
The second count, which is the more material one, from the view taken of the case by this Court, was as follows:
“And the jurors aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid, do further present, that Henry M. Long, late of the county aforesaid, on the day and year aforesaid, in the night time of the same day, between the hours of sunset and sunrise, at and in the county aforesaid, unlawfully did trade with Luke, a negro slave, contrary to the form of the statutes in such cases made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the State.”
The third count charges that the defendant, “did unlawfully deliver to Luke, a negro slave, one gill of spirituous liquor,” without the slave's having a written permission.
Nathaniel Soles, a witness for the State, testified that he was at the house of the defendant, on a certain night, about eight or nine o'clock; that he heard a noise like a tap on the door; that the defendant opened it, and he saw a negro at the door, but who it was, he did not know; that he knew a slave named Luke, the property of James Beach, but whether it was Luke or not, he could not say; that after the negro came to the door, the defendant went out, and shortly afterwards came back into the house with a jug, that would hold a quart or more, which he filled with liquor, out of a barrel, and carried it out; that after a while, the defendant came back without the jug.
Daniel P. Beach testified, that he was the son of James Beach, the owner of Luke; that he went to watch, whether the defendant traded with the said slave; that early in the night, he saw Luke go towards the house of the defendant with a jug, which held between two and three quarts; that he (witness) was about twenty-five yards from the house; that the negro remained some ten minutes, and returned with the jug, which then had liquor in it. The witness stated, that he did not know whether the jug had liquor in it, when the slave went towards defendant's house or not. It was insisted, by the defendant's counsel, that there was no evidence before the jury, that the trading spoken of by the two witnesses, was one and the same transaction. The Court charged that there was evidence to submit to them, that it was the same transaction, of the weight of which, they were the proper judges; that they had the right to convict on circumstantial evidence, and that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Anderson, 721.
...or counts to which the evidence relates. State v. Snipes, 185 N.C. 743, 117 S.E. 500; Morehead v. Brown, 51 N.C. 367, 369; State v. Long, 52 N.C. 24, 26; State v. Leak, 80 N.C. 403, 404; State v. Thompson, 95 N.C. 596, 597; State v. Stroud, 95 N.C. 626, 627; State v. Cross, 106 N.C. 650, 10......
-
Griffin v. United States
...and general verdicts returned on multicount indictments where some of the counts were unsupported by the evidence, see, e.g., State v. Long, 52 N.C. 24, 26 (1859); State v. Bugbee, 22 Vt. 32, 35 (1849); 1 J. Bishop, supra, § 1014, p. 630. It also applied to the analogous situation at issue ......
-
State v. Anderson
... ... judgment to be suspended upon good behavior being shown at ... February and November terms of Alamance superior court ... The ... defendants appeal, assigning errors ... John J ... Henderson, of Burlington, Clarence Ross and J. Elmer Long", ... both of Graham, David Levinson and Ralph T. Seward for ... appellants ... A. A ... F. Seawell, Atty. Gen., and John W. Aiken, Asst. Atty. Gen., ... for the State ... STACY, ... Chief Justice (after stating the facts as above) ... \xC2" ... ...
-
State v. Bell
...applies to one count only, a general verdict will be presumed to have been rendered on the count to which the evidence applies. State v. Long, 52 N.C. 24; State v. 132 N.C. 1021, 43 S.E. 819; State v. Gregory, 153 N.C. 646, 69 S.E. 674; State v. Strange, 183 N.C. 775, 111 S.E. 350. From his......