Unrrsn sums v. rom). r27
fore, alwaystbeen vague and indefinite. A mere intention, to commit a
crime does not render a person amenable to law. It must be manifested
by some accompanying act of willful wrong or culpable negligence to
make it criminal in law. A man’s motives and intentions can only be
properly inferred from the means which he uses, and the acts which he
does. An attempt imports something done towards the accomplishment
of a conceived purpose, without success. An attempt to commit a crime
is- an incomplete effort made by some act intermediate to a criminal in-
tention and a consummated crime. The intention of the actor can alone
be clearly ascertained by the movements which he has made to com-
plete his design. The criminal nature of an offense is a conclusion of
law derived from the facts and circumstances of the case. In an at-
tempt to commit a crime, the acts and words of a wrong-doer are, there-
fore, essential ingredients to constitute an offense, and show the purpose
he had in view. The wordV"attempt" is generally used in the law in
describing the offense of an unsuccessful effort to commit a crime; but
it has no technical meaning importing sufiicient legal certainty as to the
manner, the means used, and the intention of the wrong-doer. Its force
and effect in an indictment was dependent upon a statement of the facts
and circumstances that accompanied and constituted the illegal eiiort al-
leged. An assault is an attempt to do some personal violence to another,
and the word "assault" has acquired a technical signification that im-
ports an allegation of intentional violence and illegality. This definite
technical meaning of the word makes it unnecessary, in an indictment
for an assault with intent to commit a crime, to describe such offense
with the same particularity that would be required in an indictment for
the commission of the crime itself. In the indictment now before us,
for an attempt to rescue spirituous liquors duly seized by the otiicers of
the law, if it had been alleged that such attempt was made by an assault
upon such officers while in the discharge of their official duty, such
allegation wouldlhave been sufficiently definite, and would have been
supported by the evidence offered on the trial.
In 2 Whart. Crim. Law, § 2686, there is a definition of an indictable
attempt to commit a crime, and it is as full and accurate as can, prob-
ably, be made; but Mr. Wharton says, in a subsequent section, (2703,)
"Attempt is a term peculiarly indefinite."
. The indefinite nature of the offense, at common law, of an attempt to
commit a crime, has induced the enactment of many statutes in England
and this country, setting forth, in express terms, what acts shall con-
stitute an attempt to commit the crimes referred to in such statutes. In
a case not thus specifically defined, the offense of an attempt to commit
a crime, although declared, in general terms, in a statute as a crime, re-
mains as at common law, and its nature is dependent upon its peculiar
circumstances, and they must be distinctly alleged in an indictment.
The overt acts or words that indicate the intention of the alleged wrong-
doer must be considered by the jury, upon the evidence, in determining
the essential question—whethe1· such intention was criminal. Every-
thing necessary to be proved must be alleged.