¶1delivered the opinion of the court.
¶2This is an appeal from a judgment convicting the defendant of aggravated assault and battery. The record does not contain a transcript of the testimony, hut the defendant raises two questions of law.
¶3The defendant first contends that the complaint does not allege the aggravation required by the Act of March 10, 1904, which replaced § 237 of the Penal Code. (Penal Code, 1937 ed., pp. 154-5.) The complaint alleges that the assault herein was committed “with the club.” We need not pass on the question of whether such an instrument comes within the terms of paragraph 6 of § 6 of the 1904 Act.
¶4 The second point the defendant makes is that since the complaint describes him as “Víctor Malavé, P. I. No. 1350,” he could not be accused of aggravated assault and *631battery. His contention in brief is that an insnlar policeman can never be prosecuted for assault and battery, but must be prosecuted if at all under § 138 of the Penal Code
¶5The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.
¶6 That paragraph provides that assault and battery is aggravated ‘ ‘ when tho instrument or means used is such as inflicts disgrace upon the person assaulted, as an assault or battery with a whip, cowhide or cane.”
¶7 That Section reads as follows: ‘ ‘ Every public officer who, under color of authority, without lawful necessity, assaults, wrongs, oppresses or beats any person, is punishable by fine not exceeding five thousand (5,000) dollars, and imprisonment in the jail not exceeding five years.”