Case Name: State v. Josiah Hardy & als.
Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire
Decision Date: 1867-12
Citations: 47 N.H. 538
Docket Number: 
Parties: State v. Josiah Hardy & als.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Hampshire Reports
Volume: 47
Pages: 538–538

Head Matter:
State v. Josiah Hardy & als.
Two distinct offences are not charged by an indictment alleging that the respondents made an assault upon, one B./attempting thereby by intimidations to procure said B. to avoid voting at an annual town meeting. • • ■ . . . , •
Indictment alleging that the respondents on the. twelfth • day' of March, ''1861,■ at Haverhill,-in! said county, withi force -and- -arms,’did make an assault upon orieGeoi-ge-G».Butler/-and'hinq the said Butler, ■- did then and: there, :b eat,, bruise-, kick, wound and ill treat,: attempting thereby by intimidations to procure said Butler to. avoid voting at: the: annual town meeting :of said town of Haverhill, the said town meeting being then and there legally.and duly held and in, séssion-.”’
Respondents-moved to quash the. indictment, upon-the : ground that iff charged two distinct offences'.:- The court overruled the .motion, and respondents-excepted,, arid the questions of law are .reserved.
¿Solicitor, fdr.the.-Stát’e.:
■ H. S G. A- Bingham, and .Putnam, for respondent...

Opinion:
Smith; J.
'This is'a good indictment for violation off sec..2Q,- chap.' 26, Comp.,-Statutes',-which inflicts,a-penalty on :any. person who shall attempt- to - procure,-by -threats .-or 'intimidations,,.any .other person to ay.oid:voting at ariyotownuneeting.-. 'The.-assault set forth.in this indictment is mot alleged ns. a substantive'offence/ but ,aa a -specific. statement' of.the.mariner/in.-iyhich/thé; respondents' -atterripted' to... prevent ¡Butlerf from-voting! - .The -gist- of tbe 'offence laid is .the' attempt,-., and the-.as-.. sault is alleged merely to describe "the act, which, in,. combination, with, ? tbe intent, is sigriifieel-iby'-the .word.of, compound, meaning; 'attempt.'!
It- is .questionable.-, whether fthe* indictment- would, have- béenósufficieut; if it had not contained the averment of an assault. See Randolph v. The Commonwealth, 6 Serg. & Rawle 398; Commonwealth v. Clark, 6 Grattan 675; 1 Bishop on Criminal-Procedure; secs. 566-8.
Exception overruled.