
    State v. Messenger.
    An indictment, containing in one count so much of the language of two sections of the statute of embezzlement as to leave it uncertain which of two different crimes of embezzlement is charged, is insufficient.
    Indictment, for embezzlement, containing in one count so much of the language of ss. 7 and 8 of c. 257, Gen. St., that it is uncertain which of those sections the defendant is accused of violating. Motion to quash reserved.
    
      Woodward, for the defendant.
    
      Healey, solicitor, for the state.
   Doe, C. J.

The crime and penalty of the seventh section are different from those of the eighth. The indictment, not informing the defendant which crime he is charged with, is bad for uncertainty.

Indictment quashed.

Foster, J., did not sit.  