State v. Bregard

The indictment charged that defendant on, etc., at, etc., “ did unlawfully set up and keep a common bawdy house.” The indictment is well enough, since it follows the language of the statute on which it is bottomed. R. S. 1879, p. 270, § 1550.

The only particular in which the precise language of the statute is not followed, is in the substitution of the word and for the word or; but this is proper as recently *323decided by this court. State v. Pittman, ante, p. 56. The authorities cited by the State fully sustain the validity of the indictment. Therefore, judgment reversed and cause remanded.

All…