Commonwealth v. Perkins

18 Mass. 388

• Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
• Decided: March 15, 1823
• Status: Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

It is said, on behalf of the Commonwealth, that junior is no part of the name.² This is true, but another objection to the indictment is, that the defendant is called Thomas instead of Thomas Hopkins. In 5 D. & E. 195, a person was sued by the Christian name, James Richard, instead of Richard James, and it was held a misnomer on account of the transposition. The indictment must give the defendant his right Christian name.³

Defendant discharged.

2 See Dekentland, v. Somers, 2 Root, 437.

3 Where C. J. H. was enrolled in a company of militia by the name of C. H.. it was held, that he was not duly enrolled. Commonwealth v. Hall, 3 Pick. In Keene v. Meade, 3 Peters’s S. C. R. 7, Thompson J. said, that “it may well be questioned whether the middle letter of a name forms any part of the Christian name of a party.” See Wood v. Fletcher, 3 N. Hamp. R. 61; .Arbouin v. Willoughby, 1 Marsh. 447 ; Hutchins v. Gilbie, 2 Chitty’s R. 335