« ForrigeFortsett »
DEDICATION OF HIGHWAY. officii, or whose money was received, or Evidence of, 60
(Platt, B., dubitante,) to negative that it
was received for the use of the Queen. DEFENCE.
The judgment for the offence was, that
the defendant should pay a fine, and should Where two are jointly indicted, 56
forfeit a sum of money being the full value DEMURRER.
of the gift, and that defendant should be
imprisoned until he should have paid the On information for seditious libel, 93
fine and forfeiture. The gift consisted of Practice as to, 215
rupees, and their value at the time of the
receipt of them was found by the jury. DEPOSITIONS
Held, first, that as the gift was money, Of a deceased witness, 90
there was no option to exercise, whether the
gift or the value of it should be forfeited, DESCRIPTION
and that therefore the judgment was right;
secondly, that the value of the rupees was Of child in an indictment for child murder,
properly estimated at the time when the de300
fendant received them; and, thirdly, that the DESERTION
forfeiture being part of the punishment, the
court had power to order imprisonment until Of an infant, indictment for, 569
it was paid. Douglas v. The Queen, 163 DISCONTINUANCE.
Where there has been a written agreement
between master and servant, in which the A room within twenty miles of the cities of
nature of the service is defined: London and Westminster, used for the
Held, on an indictment for embezzlement purpose of music and dancing, and to which
against the latter, that parol evidence of the the public are admitted on payment of
service was inadmissible, unless notice had money, is a disorderly house within the 25
been given to produce the agreement. Reg. Geo. 2, c. 36, s. 2, unless it has been duly v. Clapton, 126 licensed, although no improper or disorderly
" conduct is allowed in the said room.
If a servant, in the course of his employment, The onus lies upon the defendant of
receives from a fellow servant the money of proving that he has a licence. One of the
his master, and his duty being to hand it defendants had his name over the house as a
over to another servant of the prosecutor, by free vintner, and another had contracted to
whom it would be delivered to the master, supply the visitors with refreshments, but
he fraudulently intercepts it in its passage neither took any acting part in the manage
and appropriates it, he is guilty of embezzlement, although they were sometimes seen in
ment. Reg. v. Masters, 178 the room. Held, that they were not shown to be
EMBEZZLEMENT BY AGENTS. persons having the management within the If any chattel or valuable security is entrusted 8th section. Reg. v. Wolf and others, 578 to any broker or agent originally for the pur
pose of sale, but the authority to sell is DUPLICITY.
afterwards countermanded, and the broker or When indictment not bad for, 215
agent, notwithstanding that countermand,
sells the goods in violation of the orders of DYING DECLARATION, 84 his principal, such broker or agent may be
convicted of misdemeanor, under stat. 7 &
8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 49. Reg. v. Gomm, 64 EAST INDIA COMPANY.
EVIDENCE. An information against an officer of the East
CONFESSION. · India Company for receiving gifts, under 33 The prosecutor, in the presence of the constable, Geo. 3. c. 52, s. 62, which follows the words said to the prisoner, “ It will be better for of the statute, is sufficient after verdict, and you to tell the truth, as it will save the shame it is unnecessary to allege the receipt of the of a search warrant in your house." The money to have been extorsive or colore statement was rejected. The constable then
took the prisoner into a loft, and in the draw the confession from the jury, and the absence of the prosecutor, the prisoner made prisoner was convicted; but the learned a statement. The evidence was rejected. judge reported, that if the surgeon had in Half an hour after, the constable took the the first instance stated that he had used prisoner to the station-house, and on the that expression to the prisoner, he should way cautioned him not to say anything, after not have received the confession. which he made a statement.
Held, that the conviction was wrong. Reg. Held, to be inadmissible, as the induce-1 v. Garner, 175 ment was still operating. Reg. v. Collier and another, 57
PRACTICE. A statement made by one of two prisoners to Where a witness for the prosecution has given
the other after an inducement suggested by an account of what was said by the defenthat other in the presence of the constable in dant at a particular transaction, and a witness whose custody they are, and uncontradicted is called for the defence to give a different by the constable, is inadmissible in evidence. one, it is not allowable for the defendant's Reg. v. Miller and another, 507
counsel to put to him the precise words used
by the first witness, and ask if they were · Dying DECLARATION.
uttered; but the witness should be called Where the deceased having said that he thought upon in the first instance to give his version
he should die, made a statement, and two or of the matter, and when he has so done, he three days afterwards expressed his belief may be asked whether this or that expression that he should recover, and he lived some was used. Reg. y. Fussell, 291 days after that:
A person was in the habit from time to time, Held, that the statement was inadmissible.
and within two hours of their occurrence, of Reg. v. Taylor and another, 84
reporting to a police inspector proceedings
that had taken place at certain meetings DEPOSITION OF DECEASED WITNESS.
where a treasonable conspiracy was carried Quære.--Is the deposition of a witness before on. The inspector took down the purport
the committing magistrates, where the attor of the report from his dictation, but not in ney for the prisoner abstains from asking | the very words he used. When finished, any question, in consequence of the witness some of the reports were read over by the being too ill to hear any further examination, witness, and some were read to him, and all sufficiently complete to render it evidence were signed by him : against the prisoner where the witness dies Held, that on examination he might use before the trial ? Reg. v. Hyde, 90
those reports for the purpose of refreshing
his memory. OF A DISTINCT FELONY.
A person employed by Government to mix Evidence of a distinct felony may be given in
with conspirators, and pretend to aid their re-examination where it will serve to explain
designs for the purpose of betraying them, an apparently contradictory fact elicited by does not require corroboration as an accomcross-examination. Reg. v. Chambers, 92
In general, witnesses to character cannot CONFESSION.
be examined after verdict and before sentence, A statement of a prisoner is admissible in
where the defendant might have examined evidence although he was previously told them upon the trial. Reg v. Mullins, 326 that whatever he said would be used against him." Reg. v. Chambers, 92
CORONER'S STATEMENT. Upon the trial of an indictment for attempting Where a prisoner had made a statement which
to poison, the only evidence of intent was a accounted for the possession of stolen proconfession proved by a medical man, he perty before search made, or any suspicion denying at first that he had held out to the created, held, admissible for him. Reg. V. prisoner any inducement to make the state Abraham, 430 ment. It was afterwards proved by another Semble, the rule of evidence which prohibits witness, that before the statement was made, an attorney who has received documents from the surgeon had said to the prisoner in the a client in a professional character from propresence of her mistress (whom she had ducing them in evidence against that client, attempted to poison), “ it will be better for applies to documents which are the subjectyou to tell the truth; " and the surgeon, on matter of the charge. being recalled, admitted that he might have The rule extends to cases where the attorsaid so. The learned judge refused to with-! ney has a lien upon the documents.
Notice to produce a document, served | Of receiving by wife in the absence of her upon the defendant's solicitor the day before husband, 125 the trial, but after the commencement of the Of robbery with violence, 432 assizes, is sufficient to let in secondary evi-Of false declaration under Pawnbrokers' Act, dence. Reg. v. Hankins, 434
Of manslaughter, 439 DEPOSITIONS OF ABSENT WITNESS. Of maliciously wounding, 441, 442 Upon the trial of an indictment for false preOf corrupt receiving of reward for helping to tences, a witness being ill, her deposition,
stolen goods without bringing the thieves to taken before the committing magistrate, was
justice under 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 58, 462 tendered in evidence. The caption of that
Of rape, 481, 543 deposition stated that it was taken before the
Under Crown and Government Security Act, committing magistrate in the presence of
509 the prisoner, on a charge “for obtaining
Of declaration and acts of co-conspirators, money, and valuble securities for money, I
517 from M. R.;” not saying illegally or by false
Of receiving, 533 pretences. It was objected that it was not
Of extortion by charging an unnatural crime, admissible, because no offence was shown to 034 have been charged.
EX OFFICIO. Held, that it was admissible; as it sufficiently appeared from the examination itself, Information for seditious libel, 93 that it related to the charge upon which the prisoner was being tried. Reg. v. Langbridge,
Of an infant, indictment for, 559
On the trial of an indictment for causing a Of larceny by finding, 277
person of an unnatural crime with intent to Of larceny by servant, 74, 241, 245
extort money—the prisoner being a soldier, Of conspiracy, 76, 229
and the accusation having been made while In forgery, 80
he was on duty as sentry-evidence of deIn forgery, of guilty knowledge, 88
claration made by him on a former occasion, In forgery, of intention to defraud, 160
on coming off guard, that he had obtained In embezzlement, of service, 126
money from a gentleman by threatening to On an indictment under 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 86,
take him to the guard-house and accuse him 8.41, for falsely stating facts to be inserted in
of an unnatural crime, was held admissible. marriage register, 127
The prisoner was proved to have made the In an indictment under 27 Geo. 3, c. 15, for
accusation in these words, “I charge this an assault to deter a party from giving evi-|
man with indecently assaulting me." dence, 137
Held, that it was a question for the juryUnder the Arms Act (11 & 12 Vict. c. 11), 158
taking into consideration the prisoner's conOf embezzlement, 178
duct throughout the transaction—whether Of indecent exposure, 183, 248
by those words he did not mean to allege Of false pretences, 201, 284
that the prosecutor had solicited him to the Of prisoner's statement before justices, 223
commission of an unnatural offence. Reg. Of felonious assault, 225
v. Cooper, 547.
Under Pawnbrokers' Act, indictment for, 437 Of perjury in the County Court, 279 Of unlawful possession of naval stores under 9 & 10 Will. 3, c. 41, 281
FALSE PRETENCES. Of a riot, 288
Where an indictment charges a false pretence Of maliciously damaging warp under 7 & 8 of an existing fact calculated to induce the Geo. 4, c. 30, s. 3, 295
| confidence which led to the prosecutor's
parting with his property, though mixed up any further charge, is a chattel of value, with false pretences as to the prisoner's within the meaning of 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, future conduct, it is sufficient.
s. 53 ; and a person obtaining such a ticket Where the false pretence is as to the by false pretences from a servant of the railstatus of the party at the time, or as to any way company is guilty of a misdemeanor. collateral fact supposed to be then existing, Reg. v. Boulton, 576. it will equally support an indictment under
Indictment for, on a false presentation rethe statute. Reg. v. Bates and another, 211
1 specting the value and history of a horse On an indictment for false pretences, it was which prisoner sold to prosecutor, App. xlix.
proved that the prisoner was foreman to the prosecutor, and that as such foreman it was his duty to keep an account of the work
FELONY. done by the men, and to obtain at the end | Misdemeanor not merged in, 229 of the week a cheque from his master for the sum due to the men for wages, and pay
FINDING. them accordingly. On the day in question he demanded and received a cheque for a Larceny by, definition of, 277, 453 larger amount than the correct one, alleging that such larger amount was due, and he
FORGERY. appropriated the balance to his own use.
Held, that the evidence supported the The cheques of a provident society having charge.
different branches were drawn in the name Quære, whether an indictment which of the society, and signed by the chairman charges the defendant with having obtained
and three of the committee of any branch of an order for the payment of money withfintent the society. They were then countersigned to cheat and defraud the prosecutor of part of
by the clerk of the whole sociery. The the proceeds of the same is within the 7 & 8
bankers did not know the names or signaGeo. 4, c. 29, s. 53 ? Reg. v. Leonard, 284
tures of the chairman or committee-men,
but relied upon the counter-signature of the The omission of the word “knowingly,” in an
clerk as a voucher for their authenticity. indictment for false pretences, is no objection
Held, that a forgery of the signatures of in arrest of judgment; even if it would be
the chairman and three members of the on demurrer. An indictment for false pre
committee of a branch of the society, by tences charged that J. B., on, &c., at, &c.,
means of which the genuine signature of the unlawfully did falsely pretend to H. that he
clerk was obtained, was a forgery of a warhad caused a writ of right to be issued at
rant or order for the paymunt of money. the suit of M. W. (the mother of the said H.) and others for the purpose of establish
Reg. v. Lee, 80 ing the right of the said M. W. and others Quære,-On an indictment foruttering a forged to a certain estate ; and then requested the acquittance, not being an instrument of orsaid H. to advance the said J. B. some mo dinary transmission from hand to hand, can ney towards carrying on the said action : by similar instruments, uttered by the prisoner means of which said false pretences the said on other occasions, be given in evidence to J. B. did then and there unlawfully obtain prove a guilty knowledge ? Reg. V. James from the said H. the sum of 11., &c., with Phillips, 88 intent to cheat and defraud the said H. of Lan indictment for forging a will, charged an the same. Whereas in truth and in fact the
intent to defraud a person or persons unsaid J. B. had not and never has caused a
known. writ of right or any other writ whatsoever to
It was proved that the prisoner was the be issued at the suit of the said M. W. and
son of the deceased, whose will was forged ; others, or at the suit of the said M. W.
and although one of the witnesses stated alone; and there was then no action com
that he had heard a rumour that the demenced or to be carried on, in which the
ceased had had another son by a former said M. W. was in any way interested :
marriage, of whose existence, however, he Held, a good count after verdict.
knew nothing, except by report, there was Semble, per Lord Denman, C. J., that it
no other evidence of any former marriage, would be good upon demurrer; and that R.
or any children of such marriage. v. Henderson (2 Moo. C. C. 192), is wrongly
Held, that there was not sufficient evi. decided. Reg. v. Bowen, 483
dence of an intention to defraud any one, to A railway ticket entitling a passenger to travel support a conviction. Reg. v. Tufts and
upon a railway to a certain place, without others, 160. .
WARRANT OR ORDER.
| Indictment for false pretences, 28+ A forged authority to draw money, which is
ch is Indictment under Crown and Government well described as a "warrant," is not an
Security Act, 320 "order" for the payment of the money, and
Indictment for high treason, 361 an indictment describing such a forged au
Indictment for mutiny under the Merchant thority for the payment of money as “a
Seaman's Act, 443 warrant and order,” is bad. Reg. v. Ann
Indictment for obtaining a marriage licence by Dixon, 289
perjury and false personation before a surOn an indictment for forging an order for the rogate, 467 delivery of goods, the instrument alleged to Corrupt appo
Corrupt appointment to an office in the East have been forged being an order on a dock
dock! India Company's service, 499 company to permit the bearer to taste wines
o Indictment for obtaining money on a false rein the dock belonging to the alleged drawer:
presentation, respecting the value and history Held, that the giving out at the docks a
of a horse which the prisoner sold to the portion of the wine for the purpose of its
prosecutor (No. 5) App. xlix being tasted there by the person presenting
Manslaughter by driver of a railway engine, the order was a delivery of goods within the
indictment for, App. lvii 1 Will. 4, c. 66, s. 10.
Of allocutus, 360 In the ordinary course of business at the ma
the Indictment under 7 & 8 Vict. c. 22, for felodocks, the tasting order being directed tol niously transposing goldsmiths' marks (No. the dock company, and being signed by the merchant owning the wines, is taken to a
bon . Indictment under 7 & 8 Vict. c. 112, for clerk at the docks who writes his name
attempting to traffic in seamen's tickets (No. across it, and this signature is an authority,
1) App. xxxi to the cooper, without which he is not justi- ||
Indictment under 49 Geo. 3, c. 126, for traffickfied in acting.
ing in appointments to public offices (No. 2) Held, that such an instrument was an
App. xxxiii order as soon as it left the hands of the
Indictment for libel, and a plea of justification merchant properly drawn up, and that the under Lord Campbell's Act (No. 3) App. signature of the dock clerk was not essentiall. XXXVII to give it validity as an order.
Indictment for maliciously damaging a warp
Reg. v. Ilirige, 552
under 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 30, s. 3, 295
Indictment for attempting to commit, 570
GAOL DELIVERY. libel, 106
Commission of, does not extend to prisoners Indictment for sedition, 123 Indictment under 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 86, s. 41,1
in house of correction, 431 for falsely stating facts to be entered in
GOLDSMITHS' MARKS. register of marriage, 127 Indictment for wounding with fire-arms, with Indictment for feloniously transposing, form intent, &c., 141
of, App. xliv. Assignment of errors thereon, 143 Of indictment for manslaughter of a railway
GOODS AND CHATTELS. porter by neglect of duty in omitting to give In an indictment, definition of, 460 a signal by which accident occurred to the train, 191
GRAND JURY. Assignment of errors on a record in a con
Con- | Is the number necessarily limited to twentyviction for perjury, 208 Order for surgeon to inspect contents of
three ? 433 stomach on part of prisoner, charged with murder by poisoning, 227 Indictment for conspiracy by workmen to dye materials belonging to strangers, with the
HIGH TREASON. dye of their masters, 229
In the caption of an indictment for high trea Indictment for indecent exposure, 248
son, it was stated that the indictment was Indictment for perjury, 254
found " At a Special Session of Oyer and VOL. III.