The opinion
Claek, C. J.,
dissenting: Laws 1911, ch. 64, sec. 4, provides that “It shall be unlawful to work persons convicted of felony in other than the uniform of a felon, or to clothe a person convicted of a misdemeanor in the uniform of a felon.” Section 5 provides: “Any superintendent of convicts, or other person in authority, who shall violate this law shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.” The defendant violated this law by working the person “convicted of a felony in other than the uniform of a felon,” and it follows that he was guilty of a misdemeanor. It is true *730 tbat another section of tbe same chapter requires that the “judicial officers of the State, in assigning any person to work the public roads of a county, shall designate in each judgment that such as may be convicted of a felony shall wear a felon’s stripes.” But this is simply a direction to the judges, for which if they do not obey they are responsible; but it is not made a condition precedent or a guide as to the officers whose duty in regard to clothing a convict is set out in sections 4 and 5.
Whether a convict is a felon or not is a matter of knowledge easily accessible to such officers, who must look to the mittimus for a description of the offense for which each person has been committed to their charge. Whether such offense is a felony or not is a matter of law, and “Every one is presumed to know the law.” It is the duty of those in charge of convicts to ascertain the law and obey it. If they fail to do so, they have violated the law and are subject to the prescribed penalty. The special verdict finds that the defendant did not require the convict in this case, who was a felon, to wear the dress prescribed for felons.
Such officers are not excused because the judges have not obeyed another section of the act in wording their judgments. The duty prescribed by sections 4 and S for those in charge of convicts is not made dependent in any respect upon the judges observing the requirement that they should add certain matters to their judgments. As already said, that is not made a condition precedent by this statute. Whether a convict is a felon or not does not depend upon the wording of the judgment, but solely on the crime for which each prisoner has been convicted. S. v. Fesperman, 108 N. C., 770 .
Upon the special verdict the defendant should have been adjudged guilty.