
    John W. McKissick vs. The State.
    To charge in an indictment that the defendant “ did bet at a certain gaining bank then and there exhibited and kept, called monte,” described with sufficient certainty the offense inhibited by the statute.
    The appellant was indicted for a violation of the 4th section of the act of 1840, “ to suppress gaming.” There was a motion to quash the indictment, which was overruled, and the defendant being convicted, he appealed to this court.
    
      Mayfield, for appellant.
    
      Harris, Attorney General, for the state.
   Mr. Justice "Wheeler

delivered the opinion of the court.

It does not appear upon what grounds the motion to quash was founded. The indictment charges that the appellant “ did bet at a certain gaming bank then and there exhibited and kept, called monte,” etc. This charge appears to us sufficiently certain and descriptive of the offense inhibited by the statute, and the indictment seems in all other respects to be sufficient.

There being in the record no statement of facts, bi.ll of exceptions or error apparent, we are of opinion that the judgment be affirmed.  