Carlisle v. State

The indictment charged that the defendant “unlawfully did defraud and cheat W. A. Holmes in the sum of one hundred and twenty-five dollars, by reason of the following deceitful means and artful practice, to wit: . . said Carlisle and Burpee represented to said Holmes that said Carlisle owned a certain red-colored horse mule, for the purpose of selling said mule to said Holmes; and, relying upon said representation being true, he, the said Holmes, bought said mule from said Carlisle and Burpee, and paid therefor the sum of one hundred and twenty-five dollars, when said representations were…