Commonwealth v. Booth

2 Va. 394
General Court of Virginia·Decided June 15, 1824·Published

Opinion

*R. E. PARKER, J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court:

(After stating the Case,) he proceeded thus : The last clause in the special verdict, is understood to refer the following question to the Court. Under an Indictment in the common form for an aggravated assault, upon the slave of Robert Fenn, can the Defendant be found guilty, and punished, upon evidence proving him to have made such assault upon a slave held by himself as an hireling, that is, upon his own slave for the time being ? If this is the question propounded by the jury, and we can give these words no other construction, a majority of the Court, think it ought to be answered in the negative.

The Indictment is in the common form, and will reach all cases where the first assault is unlawful per se, no matter what peculiar circumstances attended the catastrophe. But where the original assault is justified by the relation of master and slave, and the gravamen of the charge is the want of moderation in the subsequent chastisement, we think the Indictment ought to be more special than the one at bar, and ought to state distinctly, the connection of the parties, and to shew that it is the excess of the punishment which is complained of, and not, that the right to punish.at all, is questioned. Tn looking into the forms of Indictment against masters for ill-treating their apprentices,

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Commonwealth v. Booth, 2 Va. 394 (Va. Super. Ct. 1824).

2 Va. 394 (Commonwealth v. Booth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.