
    Brown vs. The State.
    An indictment or presentment for gaming, is good against one, though there may be many others found in the indictment, who were not connected in gaming with that one.
    The presentment in this case charged, that Brown and several others (who were named in the indictment) had been engaged in gaming and betting at cards, &c. The defendant, Brown, pleaded not guilty. Upon the trial, it appeared that Brown had been concerned in gaming, but not with those persons named in the presentment. The circuit court charged the jury, that it was sufficient to convict the defendant, if the proof showed that he had been gaming within six months, although it might appear that he had not played or betted with one single person named in the indictment. The jury found the defendant guilty. A motion having made for a new trial, was overruled, and an appeal in the nature of a writ of error taken to this court.
    
      Win. B. Campbell, Attorney General, for the State.
   Peck, J.

delivered the opinion of the court.

Under the statutes against gaming, the presentment is sustained. The principal objection to it, as the court view it, is the joining in the same presentment sundry other offenders not connected in the gaming with Brown; but if these all be stricken out, the presentment will be left good against Brown.

Judgment affirmed.  