The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1881-03-09
True Bill.
MM- II. MCGuEE. foreman.

HIiIPNitu lHto NoolC NpOi biC loiioh u
grounds:
|. Because simple assault and battery, i. G.
assault and battery without aggraratlOn, be.
ing q statutory offenSc underline General Stat
utes of South Carolina, it Is pain on the face
of the Indictment that both counts thereof are
fatally defective in that they fail to allcgc that
the Ofltnso charged was committed contrary
and provided"
2. because the Court of General Sessions has
not jurisdiction In cases Of assault and bnttcry
exccptin such rs are Of Il high and aggravated
nature, requiring greater punishment than
that prescribed by the Statutes, made and pro-
vidcd in cases of simple assault and battery
and because the General Statutes Of South
Carolina vest Courts ofIriaI Justices with ex-
elusive jurisdiction in cases OF ommon or sim
pie assault and battery.
3. Because If the oticnsc charged were one OF
assault and battery Of q high and aggravated
nature in which the COur of General sessions
would have jurisdiction, the said indictment
Is fatally defective in that IT docs not set out
the nSgraratiOn.
The grounds ofaprcal raise the questions:
!. AS to the conclusion Of the indictment.
=. AS to the jurisdiction of the Court OF Cen
eral Sessions In cases of 0ssault and battery.
3. AS to the allegations necessary in un In.
dictment for assault and battery.
The Constitution, Art. Nv, Sec. 81, requires
that all indictments shall conclude against
the peace and dignity OF the State
And 1t IS well settled law, that In all statu-
tory Offences the indictment should conclude
against the form OF the Act" etc. This was
held In the recent case of the State rs. Strick
on crimina practice and %plcudinGs, and y fail,
urc in this respect renders tho Indictment Ia
tally defective. The State ". Strickland, SIT
pra. Is the offense charged in this indictment
u statutory or common Law oliensr?
Act OF 1870 Gen. Stat, 1851 were punishable
at common law, and hence, up to The passage
Of that Act. they were al common law OF
frn-es: The Act OF 1870, however. conferred
upon Trial Justices jurisdiction in cases Of as
sault aud battery where the oftense Is not OF
n high ana aggravated nature" and fixed tho
punishment for such assaults and batteries by
fine not exceeding one hundred dollars or I'M
since the passage OF this Act, this class of MS
sluits and batteries has been punishable I'M
der it's provisions. the common law punish
ment having been repealed thcrcby.-lStntc
Is. Ripley, 2 Brew. 800; State Is. Gray. IA Rich.
1.-The common law is superseded by q stat
ute. in SO far us 1t Is repuSnnut 10 the latter
First-ThOsc OF n high and aggravated M.
%ture;" and, I'd, Those below that sr"de, Iuris'
dicti0n as to the latter being conferred by the
Act upon Trial Justices with authority 20 in
hundred dollars or Imprisonment not exceed
ing thirty days. The first class WAS left TO the
common law until 1878, when the General AZ.
seinbly passed IAN Act entitled An Act 4:
NtlCllu lIle IL ECStCClllS Nv III
crlme.'"-lXVI Stat. 49, This Act altered
and changed The common law punislmcnts
in which imprisonment had been provided ;s
q punishment In whO.e Or In part, and sub'
jpcteu offenders in such cases to i;ilriSUn'
ment In the penitentiary with or without hard
labor, or IN the county Jail with o. without
hard labor, at the discretion of the Circuit
Judge. This included assaults and batteries
of the second class, and under the operation OF
the principle referred to above. this class by
that Act and Immediately upon It's passage
became statutory offenSes; SO that now all as
saults and batteries are punishable by statute,
such being the fact, whether the oifense
charged in this indictment be assault and bat
terry OF q high and aggravated nature or ono
below that grade, the law absolutely requires
upon his trial in such cases must conclude
"ugainst the form Of the Act" cic., etc.-tState
Us. Strickland, supra.
The indictment In this case In neither Of lis
that in this respect 1t is fatally defective.
Next: AS to the jurisdiction of the Court Of
Gcncral Sessions In cases of assault and bat
terry. Article ~, Section Is, of the ConStitu
lion provides that the Court of General SEES.
sionS shall hnve exclusive Jurisdiction over
al criminal cases which shall not be other
wise provided for by law"
Article l, Section ~, OF the same 'nStrumcn
provides THAT all otfenSeS less than felony
and in which the punishment does not exceed
q fine OF one hundrc dollars or imprison'
ment for thirty days, shall be tried summari
~ before a justice OF the pcucc or other Office,
The Justice Of the Peace Court has never
been established, but a Trial Justice Court has
been, by Act OF iS'o, and It's jurisdiction there
in defined almost In the same lnnGulSe rs
that of Article /, Section 10, above the Of Con
siitution, comforting jurisdiction upon Jus,
tices of the Peace or other officer authorized
by law. In the case of the State rs. Fillebrown
rs. C., 4Oi', It was held That me General AS
.~ nj p,trtf pnlfnr on nm infnrtDr IL tIlnpl
created by itself, the same powers which the
Constitution intended for Justices OF the Peace
The Trial Justice Court Is, therefore, a consti
tutional Court, or rather It's creation was au.
;horized by the Constitution, and it is entitled
TO exercise the powers which the Act creating
IL has conferred upon 1t. This Act, rs we have
seen, has given this Court Jurisdiction IN cases
of assault and battery of grade below that Of
q high and aggravated nature, aid where tho
punishment does not exceed q fine or SlGD OF
by imprisonment of thirty days; and 1t has
conferred this jurisdiction In language whicl
indicates that 1t was the intention OF inc zen
eral Assembly that 1t should be exclusive
The Jurisdiction Is conferred upon the Trial
Justice, as the other officer than the Justice OF
the Pence referred to in Article /. Section 10.
There can be no doubt that had the Justice
of the Peace Court been established and the
powers embraced In Section ID had deVolTed
upon that Court, as would have been the cast
BY virtue Ofthe Section Itself. that Court would
have had exclusive jurisdiction In all ofienScs
less thar felony where the punishment die
not exceed SlW or the imprisonment thirty
days.
This conclusion is reached by the very
strong Language OF the section itsclf. and !:
sustained by the principle upon which thi
State IS. Williams mot yet rcported) orerruied
the case OF the state Us. Harper, e ;: G, 4Gi:
In the case of the state ". Harper the Courl
had decided that Trial Justices had EXCLUSIVE
Jurisdiction in cases OF petit larceny: Thisdt'
cision was Overruled in the case of the State
rs. Williams on the ground that the punish
ment in petit larceny had not been limited &c
500 fine and thirty days imprisonment. which
was required to make exclusive jurisdiction
attach 10 Trial Justice Courts under Article /
Section ~, OF the Constitution.
however, below the grade "of q high and az
gravatcd nature is thus limited. This facl
distinguishes assaults and batteries Of thai
class from petit larceny, and Is the fact on &C
count Of which the Trial Justice Is entitled tc
exclusive jurisdiction in such cases.
to Section ~, Article I. and to Section is, Arti
Gle ", of the Constitution, construed In the
light of the case OF the Stale rs. Williams, and
the Act of 1870 in reference to Trial Justices
that Trial Justices have exclusive Jurisdiction
In cases of assault and battery not OF q thigh
and aggravated nature" and that the Court
Of General Sessions has exclusive jurisdiction
Now there is nothing on the face of this in.
dictment which marks II AS r case OF q high
and aggravated nature, and In tho absence o.
some distinguishing feature of that kind the
Court OF General Sessions was without JurlS'
diction In the case.
We come now to the third ground Of appeal
which involves an examination into the ne
ccssary allegations In an indictment FOR as
sault and battery in the Court of General Scs'
sIons. An indictment Is the complaint OF the
State against the accused. Upon this the &C
cused Is put upon his trial. 1t should charge
some OffenSc cOGn!Zablr 10y thrfoi!rt, and lii
olIrns", whnicE"r it. may hr; should be c'Vifil
80. a 4 I tt,,t la. 81. IL wi u n riH,n ia - HI