Tucker v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from St. Francis Circuit Court; Hance N. Hutton, Judge; 1. The information is not sufficient to charge any affirmative act on the part of the appellant to entice or. induce the boy to leave his employer, and is therefore not in compliance with the statute. 2. If it be held that the information comes within the terms of the statute, then it is in conflict with the Constitution. Art. 2, § 21, Const. As to the validity of such legislation, see 63 Cent.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Francis Circuit Court; Hance N. Hutton, Judge; 1. The information is not sufficient to charge any affirmative act on the part of the appellant to entice or. induce the boy to leave his employer, and is therefore not in compliance with the statute. 2. If it be held that the information comes within the terms of the statute, then it is in conflict with the Constitution. Art. 2, § 21, Const. As to the validity of such legislation, see 63 Cent. Law Journal 43 and cases cited. See also 58 Ark. 407. 3. It is in evidence that Sweet did not contract with the boy’s mother, she being an…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, J.
Appellant was tried before a justice of the peace and convicted of a misdemeanor under an affidavit and warrant of arrest charging him with having wilfully interfered with and knowingly employed one Neely Johnson, a laborer, who was then under contract with one Sweet. On appeal to the circuit court he was again convicted, and has brought the case to this court on writ of error.
The court overruled a demurrer to the affidavit, which is the basis of the prosecution, and this is assigned as error. It is contended that the affidavit is defective because it does not contain 'the allegation either…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kinkead v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1885
- Tarpley v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1885
- Hoole v. DorrohMississippi Supreme Court · 1897
- Hightower v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1884
- Tartt v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Johns v. PattersonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
- Mayfield v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Dudney v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
- Lismore v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Park v. DepriestSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919