State v. Stone
Supreme Court of Missouri
The indictment is bad, because it does not negative (hat the labor done on Sunday was the household office of daily necessity or other work of necessity or charity. The indictment negatives that it was a work of daily necessity, household office of daily necessity and of charity. But that is not sufficient, it should negative also that it was a work of necessity, without the qualifying word “daily.” It is very clear from the statute Eev.
Read the full summary
The indictment is bad, because it does not negative (hat the labor done on Sunday was the household office of daily necessity or other work of necessity or charity. The indictment negatives that it was a work of daily necessity, household office of daily necessity and of charity. But that is not sufficient, it should negative also that it was a work of necessity, without the qualifying word “daily.” It is very clear from the statute Eev. Code page 404, sec. 31, other work of necessity besides those negatived by the indictment is allowed to be done on Sundays. It may all be true as alleged in…
1Opinion of the CourtRjftAtfc, J.
Benjamin Stone, the plaintiff in error was indicted by the grand jury of Greene county, at the December term of the oirouit court in the year 1850, for Sabbath bseakiug.
He appeared to the indictment at the June term 1851, and moved the court to quash the indictment. The court overruled his motion. He thereupon plead guilty and was fined two dollars by the court. He afterwards moved in arrest of judgment; assigning in support thereof the insufficiency of the indictment. This motion was likewise overruled; the defendant below excepted to the opinion of the court in overruling the motion in…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Morris v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1869