Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

7 N.C. 224

State v. . Brown

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1819-05-05

1 > From Camden. J The indictment against the Defendant was in the following words, to wit, “ The Jurors for the state, upon their oaths present, that John Brown, “ late of the County of Camden, shop-keeper, on the first day of February, li 1817, and continually thereafter up to the time of taking this inquisi-ci tion at Camden aforesaid, was, and yet is, a common Sabbath-breaker “ and prophaner of the Lord’s day, commonly called Sunday ; and that “ the said John Brown, on…

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1842

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1819-05-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

IIeNBErsoN, Judge,

¶1 delivered the opinion of the Court:

¶2 The indictment charges that the Defendant is a common Sabbath-breaker and prophaner of the Lord’s day. If it had stopped here, it would certainly have been insufficient, as it would not shew how or in what manner he was a common Sabbath-breaker and prophaner of the Lord’s day. The Court upon an inspection of the record, must he able to perceive the alleged criminal act: for an indictment, as was once well observed from this bench by Judge Lowric, is a compound of law and fact — the latter part of the indictment charges that the Defendant kept an open shop and sold divers goods, wares and spirituous liquors to negroes and others on the Sabbath. This offence, as charged, is not punishable by indictment for if the act can be intended to be lawful, it shall be so presumed, unless it be charged to be done under circumstances which render it criminal, and be so found by a Jury. For ought that appears to the contrary, this sale might have been to the lame or weary traveller, or to others to whom it was a merit to sell instead of a crime ; and nothing shall be intended against a Defendant. And if this were the Sabbath-breaking spoken of in the foregoing part of the indictment, taking the whole together, the Defendant well might have done all charged against him, and yet have *226 committed do crime ; and as tins may have been the case, wo are bound to presume it ; at least, not to presume to the contrary. — The judgment must be arrested. -

/7/nc/224 · .json · Public domain