satisfaction in disencumbering the case of such vexatious trifling--for such we consider it--and laying before our readers the remaining four questions which tended to raise the SINGLE POINT on which the judgment was reversed; a point, be it observed, which was not, as it could not in the nature of things have been, made in the court below--arising out of proceedings which took place after the court below, having discharged their duty, had become _functi officio_. Those questions were, respectively, the first, second, third, and last, (the eleventh,) and as follow:-- _Question I._--"Are all, or any, and if any, which of the _counts of the indictment, bad in law_--so that, if such count or counts stood alone in the indictment, _no judgment_ against the defendants could properly be entered upon them?" _Question II._--"Is there any, and if any, what defect in the _findings of the jury_ upon the trial of the said indictment, or in the _entering_ of such findings?" _Question III._--"Is there any sufficient ground for _reversing the judgment_, by reason of any defect in the indictment, or of the findings, or entering of the findings, of the jury, upon the said indictment?" _Question XI._--"In an indictment consisting of counts A, B, C, when the verdict is, _guilty of all generally_, and the counts A and B are good, and the count C is bad; the judgment being, that the defendant, '_for his offences aforesaid_,' be fined and imprisoned; which judgment would be sufficient in point of law, if confined expressly to counts A and B--can such judgment be reversed on a writ of error? Will it make any difference whether the punishment be discretionary, as above suggested, or a punishment fixed by law?"