Opinion · Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. Williams

75 N.C. 134

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction
North Carolina
Date
1876-06-15
Topic
general

Bynum, J. When the prosecutrix refused to submit to the ceremony of expulsion established by this benevolent Society, it could not be lawfully inflicted. Rules of discipline for this and all voluntary associations must conform to the laws. If the act of tying this woman would have been a battery had the parties concerned not been members of the Society of “ Good Samaritans,” it is not the less a *136battery because they were all members of that humane institution. The punishment inflicted upon the person of the prosecutrix was wilful, violent and against her consent, and thus contained all the elemenis of a wanton breach of the peace.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed State v. Williams. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
4 opinions
STATEv. WILLIAMS,75 N.C. 134(1876)
STATE v. WEBSTER WILLIAMS AND OTHERS.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
June Term, 1876.
Voluntary Associations — Assault.

Rules of discipline for all voluntary associations must conform to the laws:Hence, when a member of such associations refuses to submit to the ceremony of expulsion established by the same, which ceremony involved a battery, it cannot be lawfully inflicted.
ASSAULT and battery, tried beforeMoore, J., at Spring Term, 1876, of MARTIN.

The defendants and prosecutrix were members of a benevolent society in Hamilton, N.C. known as the "Good Samaritans," which societyPage 109had certain rules and ceremonies known as the ceremonies of initiation into and expulsion from the society. The prosecutrix, having been remiss in some of her obligations, and having been called (135) upon to explain, become violent.

The defendants, with others, proceeded to perform the ceremony of expulsion, which consisted in suspending her from the wall by means of a cord fastened around her waist. This ceremony had been performed upon others theretofore, in the presence of the prosecutrix. She resisted to the extent of her ability.

There was conflicting evidence as to whether they lifted her from the floor or intended to treat her differently from others who had been expelled, and it was shown that as soon as she cried out that the cord hurt her she was released, and fainted immediately. Her dress was torn from her.

The defendants' counsel contended that if defendants only intended to perform the usual ceremony of expulsion and were actuated by no other motive, and did not intend to hurt her, they were not guilty. That in order to commit a crime there must be an unlawful act, coupled with a vicious will.

His Honor held that in any view of the case, if the defendants tied the cord around the waist of the prosecutrix as stated, they were guilty.

There was a verdict of guilty and judgment thereupon. The defendants appealed.
Attorney-General Hargrove for the State.Mullen Moore and Walter Clark for the prisoner.
BYNUM, J.
When the prosecutrix refused to submit to the ceremony of expulsion established by this benevolent society it could not lawfully be inflicted. Rules of discipline for this and all voluntary associations must conform to the laws. If the act of tying this woman would have been a battery had the parties concerned not been members of the society of "Good Samaritans," it is not the less a battery because they were all members of that humane institution. The (136) punishment inflicted upon the person of the prosecutrix was willful, violent and against her consent, and thus contained all the elements of a wanton breach of the peace.Bell v. Hansley,48 N.C. 131. There is

PER CURIAM. No error.Page 110