
    *House v. Commonwealth.
    December, 1837.
    Criminal Law — Aiding Slave to Escape — Indictment-Sufficiency, — Indictment on the statute of January 27, 1829, Supp. to Eev. Code, ch. 184, § l, charging that defendant did aid, abet and assist a cei tain negro man slave, viz. the slave of a certain G. E. D. to escape from his owner. — without specifying in what manner the slave was aided to escape, and without naming the slave, — held sufficient.
    Same — Same—Verdict Fixing Punishment. — On such Indictment, the jury find defendant guilty, ascertain the term of his imprisonment, and assess the fine; and the court renders judgment according-to the verdict: Hekd, there is no error in such proceeding.
    Petition for writ of error to judgment of the circuit superiour court of law and chancery for Hampshire county, upon an indictment against the petitioner, for aiding slaves to escape from the possession of their owners. The prosecution was founded on the statute passed January 27, 1829; Supp. to Rev. Code, ch. 184, $ 1, p. 243.
    The first count of the indictment charged that Samuel House, on the first day of September 1836, at the county of Hampshire, did unlawfully and wilfully aid, abet and assist a certain negro man slave, viz. the slave of a certain George E. Deneale, to escape from the possession of said Deneale, the owner of said slave, ’with intent in so-doing to deprive the said Deneale of the use and benefit of the said slave, and that the said slave, then and there, by such aiding, abetting and assisting of said Samuel House, did escape from the possession of said Deneale, whereby the said Deneale lost the said slave, to the great injury of the said Deneale, contrary to the form of the statute &c.
    The second count charged that the said Samuel House ‘ ‘did unlawfully and wilfully aid,abet and assist another negro man slave, the owner of which last mentioned slave is unknown to the jurors, to escape from *the possession of his said owner.”
    In other respects, this count was like the first.
    The defendant demurred generally to the indictment; and the court having overruled the demurrer, he thereupon pleaded not guilty. The jury found him guilty on the first count, ascertained the term of his imprisonment to be six months, and assessed his fine to 200 dollars; and they found him not guilty on the second count. Whereupon he moved the court to arrest the judgment, on the ground that there was not sufficient certainty in the charge laid in the indictment, and on the ground that the slave therein mentioned was not described b3’i-name. The court overruled the motion in arrest, and pronounced judgment that the defendant be imprisoned in the jail of Hampshire county for the term ascertained by the jury, and pay the fine assessed by them, and also the costs of the prosecution ; and that he remain in custody until the fine and costs be paid.
    In this court it was contended for the petitioner, that the indictment does not specify the offence with reasonable particularity ; 1. because it does not allege in what manner the defendant aided, abetted or assisted the slave to escape; 2. because it does not describe the slave by name. It was also said to be erroneous for the jury to ascertain the term of imprisonment, as that is the province of the court at common law, and the statute has prescribed no other rule.
    C. Robinson, for petitioner; the attorney general, for the commonwealth.
    
      
      Criminal Law — Verdict Fixing Punishment. — The principal case was cited with approval in Harvey v. Com., 23 Gratt. 948.
    
   PER CURIAM

— Writ of error denied.  