Long v. The State Of Ga.

Decision Date31 October 1852
Docket NumberNo. 51.,51.
Citation12 Ga. 293
PartiesElias Long, plaintiff in error. vs. The State of Georgia, defendant.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

[COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.]

Indictment for robbery, in Gwinnett Superior Court. Tried before Judge James Jackson. March Term, 1852.

The Grand Jury of Gwinnett County found the following bill of indictment against Elias Long and others.

Georgia, Gwinnett County.

The Grand Jurors sworn, chosen and selected for the County of Gwinnett, to wit, &c. in the name and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, charge and accuse Jesse F. Dishough, Williamson Cruse, Elias Long, Henry R. Swinford and Charles N. Johnson, of the County and State aforesaid, with the offence of robbery.

For, that the said Jesse F. Dishough, Williamson Cruse, Elias Long, Henry R. Swinford and Charles N. Johnson, on the ninth day of October, in the year eighteen hundred and fifty, with force and arms, in the County aforesaid, in and upon one George Braswell, in the peace of God and said State, then and there being, wrongfully, fraudulently, feloniously and violently did make an assault; and him, the said George Bras-well, in great bodily fear and danger of his life, personal liberty and reputation, then and there, by force, intimidation, feloniously did put; and one negro girl, Lucy, of the value of seven hundred dollars; one set of blacksmith tools, of the value of ten dollars; one two-horse wagon of the value of fifteen dollars; five barrels of corn, of the value of sixteen dollars, and one bill of sale for said negro girl, Lucy, of the value of sevenhundred dollars, of the goods and chattels of the said George Braswell; and from the person of the said George Braswell, by force and intimidation, wrongfully, fraudulently, feloniously, violently, and without consent of the said George Braswell, did take and carry away, with intent to steal the same, contrary to the laws of said State, the good order, peace and dignity thereof.

On this indictment, the defendant, Elias Long, was put upon his separate trial, and the following testimony was introduced for the State and the defendant, and the several points of law made and decided, as set forth.

George Braswell being sworn, said, that about the ninth day of October, in the year eighteen hundred and fifty, he was going from his house, in this County, towards the house of Jesse F. Dishough, with his wagon, having on board a pair of buggy wheels, which, according to promise, he was taking to Dishough; and when he reached the woods beyond Charles N. Johnson's house, his horses appeared frightened, and seeing something white out on one side of the road, he drove his horses out one side of the road, and got down to see what it was. About this time, some person near him, said in a loud tone of voice—don't shoot, boys, don't shoot; at the same time some person came up behind him, and clasped him tight around the waist; did not know who it was; Williamson Cruse came up and caught hold of him by the arm; the person who first caught hold of him, who he ascertained to be prisoner, Long. Long said—God damn you, I have got you, and I intend to send you to the penitentiary. Cruse said, if you attempt to escape, I will blow a ball through you. Long said, have you got any weapons? and then proceeded to examine witness, and found no weapons upon him. Witness then commenced telling them all about it; said he knew if Dishough was present, he would let him go. Long said damn you, I have got you, and I intend to send you to the penitentiary for stealing my buggy wheels. Witness again said if Dishough was there he would let me go. He promised me, if I would bring the wheels and put them in the corner of his field, he would not prosecute me. About this time, Charles N. Johnson cameup, and witness appealed to Johnson; began to tell him all about it; and said if Dishough was here all would be right. Johnson then said he would go and see Dishough, if witness wished. Johnson then left, and after being gone some little time, Johnson and Dishough came, and about the same time, Henry R. Swinford came. While Johnson was gone, Long said, God damn you, if you attempt to escape, I will kill you. I intend to send you to the penitentiary. When Dishough came back, witness appealed to him, and stated over the agreement about returning the wheels. Dishough said, boys that\'s right; said Long was too hard upon witness, and to let him go. Long said no, I will not; I have got him, and I intend to prosecute him. Witness then asked Dishough to beg Long for him. They then went off, and talked awhile, (Cruse having hold of him;) when they came back, Dishough said, I cannot do anything with him; it only makes him worse. Something was then said by some of the party, about making it up. Witness asked Long if he would take fifty dollars, and make it up? Long said he would not make it up for all witness was worth, for he intended to send witness to the penitentiary. Dishough then said to witness, you had better make it up. Johnson and Long went off, and talked awhile, and came back; when witness said to Johnson, they have got me in a bad fix, and asked Johnson what he had better do? Johnson said he thought he had better pay Long something, and make it up.

Witness again asked Long what he would take and make it up? Long said he would not take a thousand dollars. Dishough and Johnson told Long he was too hard on witness. Long said he had taken his advice once in a case, and had lost three hundred dollars, and he would not settle it. Dishough persuaded Long not to prosecute, and Long swore he would, and send him to the penitentiary. After some talk, Long said, what property have you got? Witness said—some land, some stock, his wagon and horses, and some corn and fodder. Long said he did not want that; and asked witness if he did not have a negro girl? Witness said he had; but did not want to part with her, as he was a ruined man, and he wanted to take her away with him.

Long said, he did not want any of his property, and intended to prosecute him, and take him before a Justice of the Peace. After some consultation, witness offered him his negro girl. Long said he would not take her. Witness then offered the girl and his wagon; then his blacksmith tools, in addition; and then a load of corn. Long said, if you will make it five barrels, I will agree to it. Witness then agreed to it. After Dishough talked awhile, he said to Cruse and Long, who were holding witness, boys let him go; he won\'t run off; when they let him go; and Long said, if you attempt to run, I will kill you. Something was said about a bill of sale for the negro, and Dishough went off, and came back with a bill of sale. Witness signed it, and agreed to give up his other property before stated, and leave the country in a few days.

Long said witness must leave the country and never come back. And asked witness about the titles to his negro, and if there were any executions against them; said if there was any, and he lost the property, he would have witness if he was on land, or out of hell. Long said we had better go and get the property. Witness agreed to it. Long said, we had better go before day, as you are a ruined man, and will have to leave the country; and when it gets out, your creditors will be on you.

Long and Dishough then promised to aid him in getting off; and to get persons to come and buy him out. Dishough said he would take care of the wagon. It was then proposed to keep the whole matter a secret; to which witness agreed.

And Dishough said he would put out the tracks in the road. It was then agreed that witness, Long and Cruse, should go to witness' house after the negro. About the time they were going to start, Johnson said he would give witness a way-bill to Florida, as he had to leave the country.

Witness, Long and Cruse then went off together, on horseback, each on his own horse; witness being at liberty, went on to witness' own house; got there about day. Witness, Long and Cruse went into the yard; his wife was not up. They then went into the kitchen. Witness delivered the negro girl.

Long took her up behind him and then went off. Witness bought wheels of Bolls, all finished but boxing.

Bolls left the country before October election, 1849. Dishough and Long bought his shop, and claimed it; were in possession, after Bolls left. Witness contended he had two titles to the wheels. Bolls gave them to his wife, one time when he came over and got him to go his security. Witness could not go his security; went in to consult with his wife. Bolls said if she would let witness go his security, he would give her a pair of buggy wheels. She agreed to it. Witness then went his security on a note for $100. Got up a fuss about its being forged; and witness went over to see Bolls. Bolls agreed to settle it. Got Dishough to give him a note for $30.00; to give him a note on Todd, and the buggy wheels. Witness set the wheels aside by the bellows, in the shop. Negro girl was worth about $700; wagon was worth $15 or $20; corn was worth fifty-five cents a bushel.

Cross-examined.—Was over at the shop on Tuesday evening, when it was found out that Bolls had run away. Dishough, Long, old Mr. Shamble, old Mr. McGinnes and several others, were there; wheels were in the shop; witness waited till they all went to the house; took the wheels out; carried them about fifty yards into the woods, and set them up by a tree. It was about sun-down when he to ok them; no one was present when he took them; came early next morning, before breakfast, with a two-horse wagon, and took the wheels home; put them in his barn; covered them with fodder; kept them there secreted about a year; told Swinford he had the wheels; offered to sell them to Mr. Crowell, at the Stone Mountain. Never told any one else; witness never told Rans. B. Martin, two or three days after this transaction, about one-half mile from witness' house, that he went to the shop one night; saw Cruse and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
144 cases
  • Sorrells v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • April 13, 1932
    ...State v. Burgdorf, 53 Mo. 65; Walter v. State, 40 Ala. 325; to prosecutions for highway robbery: Rex v. McDaniel, Fost. 121, 128; Long v. State, 12 Ga. 293; to prosecutions for assaults, which are not in themselves offenses against the public peace: Rex v. Wollaston, 12 Cox, C. C. "(2) When......
  • Adams v. Carlisle
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • March 30, 2006
    ...is discussed fully below in Case No. A05A1838. 20. Moll v. United States, 413 F.2d 1233, 1236(I) (5th Cir.1969). See also Long v. State, 12 Ga. 293(4) (1852) ("It [was not only the right but] the duty of a private person, who [was] present when a felony [was] committed, to apprehend the fel......
  • In re Travis W.
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • March 25, 2003
    ...v. Perley (1894) 86 Me. 427, 432, 30 A. 74, 76; State v. Burke (1875) 73 N.C. 83, 86; James v. State (1875) 53 Ala. 380, 387; Long v. State (1852) 12 Ga. 293, 321.) The most common form of the coercion is physical harm from violence. Death is always a possibility. (See People v. Alvarado (1......
  • Werk v. Big Bunker Hill Mining Corp.
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • November 18, 1941
    ... ... The ... defendant contended also that the so-called Sitton line had ... been established by long acquiescence ...          On ... the trial it appeared that the plaintiff had title to the ... land lots claimed by him, that the ... other necessary expense and damage in the sum of five ... thousand dollars. The rule in this State is that a defendant ... may not in his answer by way of cross-action set up claim for ... damages against the complainant for suing out the ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • A Better Orientation for Jury Instructions - Charles M. Cork, Iii
    • United States
    • Mercer University School of Law Mercer Law Reviews No. 54-1, September 2002
    • Invalid date
    ...unprofessional men, the utmost plainness and painstaking in its elucidation are desirable, and for the most part necessary." Long v. State, 12 Ga. 293, 329 (1852) (holding that instructions should be in plain language). See Kimmel v. State, 261 Ga. 332, 335, 404 S.E.2d 436, 439 (1991); Colq......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT