Davey v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Benton Circuit Court; I. S. Maples, Judge; 1. The demurrer 'to the indictment should have been sustained because .the act under which the indictment was brought applies to .banks organized or doing business under the laws of the State of Arkansas, and the indictment does not allege that the Bank of Siloam was either org-anized or doing business under the laws of the State of Arkansas.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Benton Circuit Court; I. S. Maples, Judge; 1. The demurrer 'to the indictment should have been sustained because .the act under which the indictment was brought applies to .banks organized or doing business under the laws of the State of Arkansas, and the indictment does not allege that the Bank of Siloam was either org-anized or doing business under the laws of the State of Arkansas. Kirby’s Digest, •§ § 18x3, 1814. This is a criminal statute, which must be strictly construed. No case can be brought within its provisions unless it is within both the letter and the spirit of the…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
The grand jury of Benton County returned the following indictment (omitting caption) against the defendant, Ered A. Davey:
“The said Fred A. Davey, in the said county of Benton in the State of Arkansas, on the 4th day of August, 1910, being then and there the cashier of said ‘Bank of Siloam,’ said bank being a corporation, and doing a banking business in the city of Siloam Springs in said county, unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously did accept and receive on deposit in said ‘Bank of Siloam,’ a corporation as aforesaid, of and from F. L. Main, to his own personal account, the sum of $18 in…
2Cited by3 opinions
- McElroy v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Skarda v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Morris v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912