State v. Merchant

Citations

• 48 Wash. 69
• 92 P. 890
• 1907 Wash. LEXIS 857

Syllabus

<p>Statutes — Titles and Subjects. The failure of the title of an act to indicate that the act carries a penalty for violation of its provisions, does not necessarily invalidate the act as containing more than one subject not expressed in the title.</p> <p>Same — Sufficiency of Title — Corporations—Officers—Liability. The title of an act limited to the protection of “stockholders or other persons dealing with the corporation,” is not sufficiently broad to include provisions making it a penal offense to issue false statements to persons “dealing with the stock of the corporation,” and the act is void as to such provisions, although valid as to its provisions relating to dealings with the corporation, and is not restricted to dealings with “stockholders” only.</p> <p>Corporations — Officers —■ Criminal Liability —■ Information — Duplicity. An information alleging the violating of a statute as to dealings with “the corporation and its stock,” which statute was valid as to dealings with the corporation, but void as to dealings with its stock, is not duplicitous, since it alleges the dealings with the corporation, and the allegations as to dealings with the stock charges no crime and is immaterial.</p> <p>Same — -Evidence—Criminal Law — Trial. Under such an information, it is error, upon evidence that the prosecuting witness bought stock in the corporation and arranged to take charge of one of its offices, to submit the case to the jux-y on the theox-y that the defendant would be guilty by reason of the dealings with the stock as well as by reason of the dealings with the corporation.</p> <p>Same — Evidence—Best Evidence — Corporate Capacity. Upon a prosecution for the violation of a statute relating to dealings with a coi’poration, it is error to admit, over the defendant’s objection, oral evidence of the incorporation of the company.</p> <p>Criminal Law- — Trial—Right to Joint Trial. One jointly indicted has no right to demand that he be jointly tried with his co-defen