THE STATE v. STEPHEN, a slave

THE STATE v. STEPHEN, a slave. .1. Upon the indictment of a slave, for the murder of a white man, a finding by the jury, that the prisoner is “ guilty of voluntary manslaughter,” is sufficient to authorize the court, to sentence the slave to the punishment of death. Error to the Circuit Court of Sumter. Before the Hon. George Goldthwaite. This wás an indictment against the plaintiff in error, for the murder of William Hadden, a white man. On the trial the jury returned the following verdict: “ We, the jury, find the defendant Stephen, a slave, guilty of voluntary manslaughter.” The counsel of the accused moved in arrest of judgment, on account of the defect in the verdict; but the court overruled the motion, and pronounced sentence of death on the accused. The judgment of the court is now assigned as error. Huntington, for plaintiff. Attorney-General, for the State. [MAJORITY — CHILTON, J.] CHILTON, J. The prisoner was tried and convicted upon an indictment, charging him with the murder of one William Hadden, a white man. The jury returned their verdict as follows : “ We, the jury, find the defendant guilty of voluntary manslaughter.” The only question is, whether this verdict of the jury is sufficient to authorize the court to pronounce sentence upon the prisoner ? We are clearly of opinion that it is. In Nancy, a slave, v. The State, 6 Ala. Rep. 483, this court held, that the omission of the jury to find the., entire charge, if it is sufficiently certain in ascertaining the guilt of the prisoner, as to any one offence which is included in the charge laid in the indictment, will not vitiate. In that case, as in this, the jury found the lesser offence, and their verdict was, that the prisoner was guilty of an assault with intent' to kill, without stating, “ as charged in the bill of indictment.” This court say, it would seem absurd to conclude that the jury found any other assault than that named in the indictment. The facts of the case from which I have quoted, and the opinion of the court seem so apposite to the case at bar, as to render a further examination unnecessary. That case was well considered, and we are satisfied the court states the law correctly. Our conclusion is, that the judgment must be affirmed, and that sentence of death upon the verdict, be here pronounced against the prisoner, in accordance with the statute.