#### STATE v. J. A. BRYSON and others.

Inclietment — Coiielusion of.

llt'is no-ground for an arrest of judgment that an indictment charging only-a common law offence, concludes “ contra formam, statuti,” and “ against the peace and dignity of the State. The conclusion against .the statute may he rejected as surplusage.

(State v. Lamb, 65 N. C. 419, cited and approved.)

’IndiotmbNT for disturbing a Religious Congregation tried .-.at Spring Term, 1878, of Henderson Superior Court, before ¡Cloud,.,!.

*652There was a verdict of guilty, motion in arrest of judgment, motion overruled, and appeal by defendants.

Attorney General, for the State.

Mr. J. II. Merrimon, for the defendants.

EaiRCLOTh, J".

The defendants were indicted for disturbing a religious congregation which is a common law offence,, and the" indictment concluded contra formam statuti, and against the peace and dignity of the State. After conviction they moved in arrest of judgment on the ground that-the indictment concluded against the statute. It has often been held that this part of the conclusion is merely sur-plusage. State v. Lamb, 65 N. C. 419; Com. v. Hoxey, 16 Mass. 385; 2 Leach Cr. Law, 584; 2 Hale 190. The objection is not sustained. Let this be certified and the Supeiioi-Court will proceed according to law.-

No error. Judgment affirmed.