¶1 There is no ground, upon which the judgment ought to be arrested. On the contrary, the Attorney General has framed an indictment, unencumbered by useless words; which, from -its brevity and clearness, may well be adopted as a precedent.
¶2 The averment, that the defendant “unlawfully did sell and deliver” to the slave, would not be supported by proof of a sale and delivery to the slave as the agent and for and on account of his owner ; nor is it necessary to negative an order of the owner or manager, the offence having been committed in the night time. State v. Miller, 7 Ired. 725, decides both points.
¶3 The slave is sufficiently described by his name. A further description, by giving the name of the owner, Í3 *358 not necessary. The law only requires “certainty to a certain intent in general” in indictments for this offence.
¶4 The Court below erred in arresting the judgment. There must be a judgment for the State.
¶5 Per Curiam. Ordered to be certified accordingly.