It is indisputable that an indictment should show on its face jurisdiction of the offense in the grand jury by which it was found, and this it cannot do unless it show that the offense was committed in the county in which the grand jury was organized. In that respect the present indictment is clearly defective. It lays the venue of nearly every act and event mentioned either by an original specification or by a “then and there,” except of the act which constituted the crime charged, and that was omitted,— probably through inadvertence.
The indictment charges, by way of inducement, that on a day named, at the city of Rochester, in the county of Monroe, the defendant was acting as trustee, etc., having theretofore been duly appointed as such by the surrogate of Monroe county, then and there having full power, etc.; that he then and there duly qualified as trustee, and thereupon received a sum of money named, then and there deposited in the savings bank at Rochester, H. Y., the property of the person for whom he was then and there trustee as aforesaid; and then it proceeds: “And this grand jury do further say that thereafter, and on the said 17th day of October, 1889, the said. Alfred Horton did unlawfully and feloniously secrete, withhold, and appropriate to his own use,” etc., “the sum of,” etc., “good and lawful money of,” etc. This was the charging part of the indictment. The act here specified was that which constituted the offense, and to it no venue is attached. It does not appear