Serlested's case, 1 N.C. 202, 1 Mart. 202 (1793)

1793 · United States Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina

1 N.C. 202, 1 Mart. 202

Serlested’s case.

Trin. 3. Car

HE was indicted for cozenage eo quod one Proud, existens miles sub one Hammond, his captain, &c. Serlested, pretending that he had power to dischacge soldiers, took of the said Proud, as well for discharging him, &c.

The first exception was that it is said existens miles, without saying how, or where. But it was held well enough.

Whitlock, J.

It is well enough under the statute 11 H. 7.

2. It is said, he pretended to have power to discharge soldiers; which is impossible, for it appears by the statute that he had no such power: but the captain or general has. Therefore the indictment is bad.

Curia. It is this, that makes the deceit. He pretending to have a power, which he had not.

3. It is said that he did not discharge him at tunc et ibidem, viz. the time and place where the money was taken; perhaps he discharged him at some other time.

Curia, pleads this, if yon please. The indictment is well enough.