The following judgment was delivered :KINGDON, C.J., NIGERIA.
In this case, tried in the Enugu Division of the High Court, the two appellants were charged, together with first appellant's wife, named Nwashin Ede, under two counts, with slave dealing. A nolle prosequi was entered by the Crown in respect of the wife, but both appellants were convicted under each count and sentenced to three years' imprisonment with hard labour on each count, the sentences to run concurrently.
The charge in the first count was for slave dealing contrary to section 369 (3) of the Criminal Code, which reads :-
•• Any person who places or receives any person in servitude as a pledge or security for debt whether then due and owing. or to be incurred or contingent, whether under the name of a pawn or by whatever other name such person may be called or known is guilty of slave dealing."
And the particulars given were :-
" Chukwu Abia and Obasi Okoronwe and Nwashin Ede on or about the 20th day of January, 1936. in the Province of Onitsha placed or received Olife in servitude as a pledge or security for debt to be incurred, by the said Chukwu Abia."
The charge in the second count was for slave dealing contrary to section 369 (2) of the Criminal Code, which reads :-
•• Any person who deals or trades in, purchases, sells, transfers or takes any person in order or so that such person should be held or treated as a slave is guilty of slave dealing."
And the particulars given were :-
•• Chukwu Abia and Obasi Okoronwe and Nwashin Ede on or about the 20th day of January, 1936, in the Province of Onitsha dealt or traded in, purchased, sold, transferred or took Olife so that the said Olife should be held or treated as a slave."
In the case of each count the particulars given are not sufficiently Rex explicit to give the accused proper notice of the exact offences with Chukwu which they were charged.
This point is of considerable importance because there are two possible sets of facts upon which the convictions might be based ... These are :-
(a) That first appellant handed his child, Olife, to second appellant, his near relation, for the second appellant to take to Aro-Chuku there to raise money by pledging or selling the child, that second appellant set out for Aro-Chuku with the child in pursuance of that object, but was apprehended and arrested before he reached Aro-Chuku.
(b) That first appellant placed his son Olife, in servitude with second appellant, and second appellant
