¶1 Forcible trespass on personal property is the taking by force the personal property of another in his presence. The forcible taking is the ingredient which distinguishes the offence. “ Putting in fear ” is not necessary. If it were, then one man’s guilt would depend upon another man’s nerve. Force is necessary to constitute the offense, because it tends to a breach of the peace; and this is done *373 whether the owner is put in fear or not-; and the rather if he is not put in fear.
¶2 His Honor who tried the case was evidently of the opinion that, in order to the guilt of the defendants, the owner of the property must have been “intimidated,” or “alarmed,” In this he was mistaken. It is only necessary that the force should be such as was calculated to intimidate or alarm or involve or tend to a breach of the peace.
¶3 Such were the facts of this case; and there was error in setting aside the verdict of guilty.
¶4 This opinion will be certified to the court below, to the end that said court may proceed according to law.
¶5 Per Curiam. There is error.