State v. Blair

Devine, Associate Justice.

The indictment charges that appellee “did unlawfully bet at a certain gaming table, which said gaming table was then and there exhibited for gaming contrary,” &c. There were numerous exceptions taken to the sufficiency of the indictment, among which were—“ 1st. That the indictment charged no offense known to the laws. 2d. That no offense was set forth in plain and intelligible language. 3d. That defendant was not charged with having bet at any game prohibited by the statute, and because the indictment is vague, uncertain, indefinite, and ambiguous.” The District…