State v. Armstrong

From a general verdict of “not guilty'” in the Court below, no appeal lies to this Court.

CeimiNAl action for refusing to work on a road, tried at the Fall Term, 1874, of Tyrrell Superior Court, before his Honor Judge Eure. The action, originally commencing: in a Justice’s Court, (Bat. Rev., chap. 104, sec. 10,) was carried by appeal on the part of the State, to the Superior Court. On the trial in that Court, the Solicitor for the State offered to prove by farol that the defendant was liable to work the road, upon which he had been nptified to work by the overseer. His Honor rejected the evidence. The Solicitor then asked his Honor to charge the jury, K that the State having proved that the defendant lived on said road, he was presumed to be a hand thereon and liable to work the same.” This instruction his Honor declined to give, and charged the jury that the State having failed to prove that the defendant had been assigned as a hand to work said road, or that he lived in a road district in which the hands had been assigned to work said road, no case was made against the defendant, and he was entitled to- an acquittal. To this charge the Solicitor excepted, for error in law. The jury returned a verdict of “ not guilty,” whereupon the State appealed.