The Abbeville banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1847-1869, 1847-06-23

tnct, that is, an exact and accurate, state
ment of the offence is required, as we'll by
the principles ofjustice, as by the positive
words of the law Time, to reasonable
certainty, should be stated--place also: and
that the place is within the District where
the trial is had ! and the essential ingredi-
cnts of the offence must be set out, either
by some word which contains them, or by
separate enumeration.
Now what has this slave been tried for?
For burning? 1t IS not every burning, OF
the burning of every thing that is unlaw
full, much less punishable by death.
l. Was he charged of burning stable,
as arson at common law? Then it should
have been stated and proved that the stable
was an out house, appurtenant to dwell
ling, and that it was burnt wilfulIy and ma
liciously. After conviction, sentence Of
death could not have followed; for slave
(except for particular offences enumerated
In the Act of l74O. Sec l6, vol, p. 402
Statutes) can be punished capitally, only
for some offence which is felony without
benefit of clergy, (Sec. Is Of Act 1740,) and
arson at common law, although felony, is
entitled to the benefit Of clergy
g. Was he charged under the 16 Sec. of
the Act Of l740, of burning fodder, or some
other article, which was amongst the goods
or commodities of the growth, produce or
manufacture ofthis State? Then it should
have been stated and proved, that the arti-
Gle burnt was of the growth, produce or
manufacture Of this State, such as is con-
templated by the section above mentioned,
and that it had been willnlly and mali
ciously set fire to, burnt or destroyed" Af
ter conviction, sentence OF death might have
followed but in the discretion of the Court,
according to circumstances, a mlldcr pun
ishment might have been imposed.
3. Was he charged of burning barn
having grain in it? an offence from which
the benefit of clergy has been taken away,
by Statute %, Henry 8, c.l, e Stat, 49,
and Statute and 5, Philip and Mary, c. 4.
| G Stat, 4S4). Then it should have been
stated and proved that the house burnt was
a bny;-that is, house used for storing
grain or provendcr-and that grain or corn
(that is some breadstuf) was in it.; and
that it had been wilfully burnt. After con-
viction, sentence of death, OF Of mldcr pun
lshmcnt, according to circumstances, might
have been awarded.
4. Was he charged under the Statute
% and 23 Charles 2, C. 7, g Stat, 521, }
Of having in the night time maliciously un-
lawfully and wilfnIly burnt stack of grain,
or building! Then it should have been
stated and proved, that he did wilfully, un-
lawfully and maliciousl ly IN the night time
burn stack Of grain, (no, loose straw,) OF
some house or building contemplated by
that Statute. After conviction, sentence oi
death CO uld not have followed !; for although
the offence is made felony, punishable by
death, the benefit of clergy is not taken
away. See l Hawkins, Pl. G.. 306.
Ofany one, two or more of these four dis
tinct offences: the prisoner might have been
accused and tried. But Of whatever he wa:
tried. there should have been dstinc
statement and before conviction, proof te
sustain the statement. If he had beer
charged of several forms Of offence upon one
trial, the judgment should have ascertaincc
the particular form or forms of offence. o
which he was guilty: and sentence have
been awarded accordingly.
There was error and irregularity in ad
mitting against the prisoner evidence of hi
bad character, and of previous misdced
committed by him. If the defence of goot
character had been mad: the prosecution
might hass hssas esssssj q
hs n! Z S. 6! s,s