State v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company
Decision Date | 17 June 1907 |
Citation | 103 S.W. 623,83 Ark. 249 |
Parties | STATE v. ST. LOUIS & SAN FRANCISCO RAILROAD COMPANY |
Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Sharp Circuit Court; J. W. Meeks, Judge; affirmed.
STATEMENT BY THE COURT.
This is a prosecution, by indictment, for the alleged violation of an act approved April 23, 1903, which is as follows:
Section 6219, Sand. & H. Digest, to which reference is made in this act, reads as follows:
The indictment alleged as follows:
"The grand jury of Fulton County, in the name and by the authority of the State of Arkansas, accuse the St, Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company of the crime of misdemeanor committed as follows, to-wit: The said St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company in the county and State aforesaid on the 20th day of January, A. D. 1906, then and there being owning and operating a line of railroad in this State and in and through the town of Mammoth Spring, the same being then and there an incorporated town in Fulton County in said State, did then and there unlawfully fail to construct and maintain two water closets at their passenger depot in said incorporated town of Mammoth Spring, one for males and one for females, and did then and there unlawfully fail to designate said closets by proper lettering, against the peace and dignity of the State of Arkansas."
Defendant demurred to this indictment as follows:
The court sustained the demurrer, and the State has appealed.
Judgment affirmed.
William F. Kirby Attorney General, and Daniel Taylor Assistant, for appellant.
1. Under the law the crime consists in "failing to provide for the comfort and accommodation of railway passengers," which may be committed in any or all of the modes set out in the statutes, and the indictment should have so alleged, instead of charging the "crime of misdemeanor;" but this defect is not fatal, since a particular offense was made definite by the statement of facts constituting it and the name of the crime is controlled by the specific acts charged. 36 Ark. 242; 71 Ark. 80; 77 Ark. 480.
2. The indictment does not charge two offenses, but one offense committed in two ways. Kirby's Digest, §§ 2228-2230.
L. F. Parker and W. J. Orr, for appellee.
1. An indictment must set forth the facts constituting the alleged offense so clearly as to advise the accused of the charge which he has to meet, to give him a fair opportunity to prepare his defense, to enable him to avail himself of a conviction or acquittal in bar of another prosecution for the same offense and to enable the court to determine whether or not, under the law, the facts therein...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company
...the agent and the company are liable to the penalty, under the police power of the State. 32 F. 722; 15 S.W. 43; 66 N.H. 342; 97 Ky. 207; 83 Ark. 249; Id. 576; 67 Id. 566; 69 Id. 376, 378; 76 Id. 303; 65 Id. 521, 532; 71 Id. 556, 561; 74 Id. 303. W. F. Evans and W. J. Orr, for appellee. The......
-
Williams v. State
... ... 693; ... State v. Davis, 80 Ark. 310, 97 S.W. 54; ... St. Louis & San Francisco Rd. Co. v. State, ... 83 Ark. 249, 103 S.W. 623 ... ...
-
Williams v. State
...State et al., 47 Ark. 572, 2 S. W. 337; State v. Ellis, 43 Ark. 693; Davis v. State, 80 Ark. 310, 97 S. W. 54; State v. St. L. & San Francisco R. Co., 83 Ark. 249, 103 S. W. 623. The judgment is therefore reversed, and the cause is remanded, with directions to sustain the ...
- Barber v. State