
    Commonwealth versus The Town of Northampton.
    An indictment against a town for not providing a schoolmaster, which concludes, “ which is in subversion of the diffusion of knowledge,” &c., without alleging the offence to be contra formam slatuti, is insufficient, and this after a plea of nolo contendere has been received.
    This was an indictment against the town of Northampton for not providing schoolmasters, as required by the act of June 25, * 1789, entitled, “ An Act to provide for the instruc- [ * 117 ] tian of youth, and for the promotion of good education.”
    The indictment, after setting forth the offence, concluded in these words: “which is in subversion of that diffusion of knowledge, and, in hinderance of that increase of education, which the principles of a free government require, and against the peace and dignity of the commonwealth.”
    At a former term the defendants had appeared, and, by permission, had pleaded that they would not contend with the commonwealth. And now, at this term, they move in arrest of judgment, because that, if any offence is charged, it is created by statute, and it is not alleged in the indictment to be against the form of the statute, or of any law of the commonwealth.
   By the Court.

The indictment is clearly bad, and no judgment can be rendered, on the defendants’ plea.

Judgment arrested.

113 
      
      
         2 Hale, 192. — 2 Hawk. c. 25, § 116. — Rex vs. Clark, 1 Salk. 370. — Rex vs. Harrison, 2 Roll. R. 38. — As to the law respecting the conclusion of an indictment Bee Archbald, Pl. & Ev. in Crim. Cas. p. 50, 4th Lond. ed
     