Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 10.djvu/130

104 104 HARVARD LAW REVIEW. change assumes constitutional difficulties which do not exist; that these from frequent assertion have acquired thereby a certain degree of respect. Certainly useful changes have been prevented by this assumption of difficulty. The objection is that sin>plyfying the indictment to any considerable extent would be contrary to that article, and consequently unconstitutional. It therefore is necessary to see what the article is, and what it means. The portion which concerns us is that the crime shall be " fully and plainly, substantially and formally described." These few words have stood in the way of the enactment of statutes, and have been the bete noire of pleaders. Fortunately the courts have given their interpretation of the meaning of the words from time to time. More than sixty years ago it was said of the article : — "Whilst it is important to the administration of public justice and the reasonable execution of the laws that indulgence should not be too readily yielded to mere technical niceties and subtleties, it is also important that every man accused of crime should have a reasonable opportunity to know what the charge is, that he may not be called to meet evidence at the trial that he could not have anticipated from the charge, that the court may know what judgment to render, and that the party tried and either acquitted or convicted may be enabled, by reference to the record, to shield himself from any further prosecution for the same offence."^ Again, it was said by the same justice : — "The object of the Declaration of Rights was to secure substantial privileges and benefits to parties criminally charged ; not to require par- ticular forms, except where they are necessary to the purposes of justice and fair dealing towards the persons accused, so as to ensure a full and fair trial." 2 In Com. V, Robertson,^ where the Attorney General broke away from some of the technical allegations until then incorporated in indictments for murder, the indictment was held good, and within the constitutional limit. Knowlton, J., said : ** The provisions of Article XII. of the Declaration of Rights, which secure to the accused person the right to have his crime or offence * fully and plainly, substantially and formally described to him,* only require such particularity of allegation as may be of service to him in enabling him to understand the charge and to prepare his defence." 1 Shaw, C. J., in Com. v. Phillips, i6 Pick. 2ii, 214 (1834). 2 Com. V. Holley, 3 Gray, 458.
 * 162 Mass. 90.