In describing property in an indictment, a detail description as to color, kind, quality and the like is not required; but if such description is given it cannot be treated as surplusage. The description may be very general. Thus an indictment charging the stealing of "four pairs of shoes" is sufficient;55 or the stealing of one hog, or one cow is sufficient.56 So in an indictment for the stealing of money, describing it as "twelve five dollar and one ten dollar notes," to-wit, United States promissory or bank notes of the value of seventy dollars is sufficient.57 But a general description of the money as "one hundred dollars" is plainly not sufficient without a reason being stated in the indictment for a better description.58 An indictment charging the stealing of coin should describe the coin as so many pieces of gold or silver money, giving the name or denomination. But where the description is unknown then a general description will answer, such as so many dollars in specie, coin of the United States, the denomination and description of which is to the grand jury unknown.59

53 Hughes' Cr. Law, Sec. 2722;

State vs. Erickson, 45 Wis., 86;

Eggart vs. State, 40 Fla., 527. " Bromley vs. People, 150 Ill., 302;

Waters vs. State, 53 Ga., 567;

3 Greenl. Ev., Sec. 10; Black vs. State, 57 Ind., 109.

65 State vs. Curtis, 44 La., 320; Powell vs. State, 88 Ga., 32.

56 People vs. Standford, 64 Cal., 27; State vs. Crow, 107 Mo., 341.

57 Bell vs. State, 41 Ga., 589; State vs. Boyce, 65 Ark., 82.