404 CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS. [ART. 27

the recovery of the value, thereof. An action of assumpsit lies to recover
stolen money, and an attachment may issue. Downs v. Baltimore City, 111
Md. 689.

Where there are several counts in an indictment charging the defendant
with more than one distinct and separate felony, the court may in its dis-
cretion either compel an election between the counts, or in a clear case
may quash the indictment. Several counts held to relate to the same
transaction and the indictment held valid. While ordinarily a motion to
quash is addressed to the discretion of the court, its discretion is to be
governed by rules, and if it acts in violation of those rules, its judgment
may be reviewed. State v. McNally, 55 Md 563 (decided prior to the act
of 1882, ch. 84).

Larceny defined. The offenses of principal and accessory before the fact
in larceny are distinct, and there can not be a conviction of one charge
upon an allegation of the other, and an acquittal upon one charge is no
bar to a trial upon the other. Suit on a liability bond guaranteeing against
embezzlement or larceny. Canton Bank v. American Bonding Co., 111 Md.
51.

Larceny defined. When a person steals goods in another state and
brings them into Maryland, he cannot be indicted here for the crime com-
mitted in the other state; but the act of bringing such stolen goods into
this state is a new larceny for which he may be indicted here. Worthington
v. State, 58 Md. 403 (decided July 11, 1882).

An indictment charging that the property stolen was worth so many
dollars, current money, whereas this section required the value to be of
$5, meaning gold or silver, is valid in the light of article 29, section 1. et
seq.; at most the words objected to were surplusage or such as should
have been excepted to on demurrer. An objection that the record did not
show the original indictment, overruled. Suggestion of removal made
in time. Gardner v. State, 25 Md. 150 (decided prior to the act of 1882,
ch. 84.)

An indictment describing the articles stolen as "one hide of the value,"
etc., is sufficient. State v. Dowell, 3 G. & J. 310.

See section 124.

As to thieves and pickpockets, see section 444, et seq.

As to receiving stolen goods, etc.. see section 423.

As to indictments for larceny, see section 502.

1004, art. 27, sec. 262, 1888, art. 27, sec. 157. 1860, art. 30, sec. 100. 1809, ch. 138,

sec. 6. 1868, ch. 214.

286. If any person shall feloniously steal, take and carry away
personal goods of another under the value of five dollars, or if any
person shall break into any shop, store-house, tobacco house or ware-
house, although the same be not contiguous to or used with any man-
sion house, and steal any money, goods or chattels under the value of
one dollar, the same order and course of trial shall be had and observed
as for other simple larcenies, and being thereof convicted he shall be-
deemed guilty of petty larceny and shall restore the goods and chattels.
so stolen or pay the full value thereof to the owner thereof, and be
further sentenced to the penitentiary or to the jail of the county in
which the offense may have been committed, or of the city of Balti-
more if the offense be committed in said city, in the discretion of the
court, for not more than eighteen months.

The statutory offense of petit larceny cannot be classed with misde-
meanors. This section referred to in holding article 52, section 12 (as it
stood prior to the act of 1906, ch. 475), invalid in part. Banner v. State,
89 Md. 224. And see Baum v. Warden, 110 Md. 584.
See notes to section 285.