Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

Formerly there was another plea, now abrogated, that of sandiwary; wrich is, however, necessary to be lightly touched upon, as it may give some light to many parts of our antient law: it being introduced and continued during the superstitious veneration that was paid to consecrated ground in the times of popery. First, then, it is to be observed that if a person accused of any crime . (except treason, wherein the crown, and sacrilege, wherein the church, was too nearly concerned) had fled to any church or churchyard, and within forty days after went in sackcloth and confessed himself guilty before the coroner, and declared all the particular circumstances of the offence, and thereupon took the oath in that case provided, viz., that he abjured the realm, and would depart from thence forthwith, at the port that should be assigned him, and would never return without leave from the king; he by this means saved his life if he observed the conditions of the oath by going with a cross in *his hand and with all convenient speed to the port assigned and embarking.

[*333 For if, during this forty days' privilege of sanctuary, or in his road to the seaside, he was apprehended and arraigned in any court for this.felony, he might plead the privilege of sanctuary, and had a right to be remanded it taken out against his will.(a) But by this abjuration his blood was attainted, and he forfeited all his goods and chattels.(6) The immunity of these privileged places was very much abridged by the statutes 27 Hen. VIII. c. 19, and 32 llen.VIII. c. 12. And now, by the statute 21 Jac. I. c. 28, all privilege of sanctuary, and abjuration consequent thereupon, is utterly taken away and abolished.

Formerly also the benefit of clergy used to be pleaded before trial or conviction, and was called a declinatory plea; which was the name also given to that of sanctuary.(c) But, as the prisoner upon a trial has a chance to be acquitted and totally discharged, and if convicted of a clergyable felony is entitled equally to his clergy after as before conviction, this course is extremely dis advantageous; and therefore the benefit of clergy is now very rarely pleaded, but, if found requisite, is prayed by the convict before judgment is passed upon him.

I proceed, therefore, to the five species of pleas before mentioned.

I. A plea to the jurisdiction is where an indictment is taken before a couri that hath no cognizance of the offence; as if a man be indicted for a rape at the sheriff's tourn, or for treason at the quarter sessions : in these or similar cases, he may except to the jurisdiction of the court, without answering at all to the crime alleged.(d)?

II. A demurrer to the indictment. This is incident to criminal cases as well as civil when the fact alleged is *allowed to be true, but the prisoner joins issue upon some point of law in the indictment, by which he in- [*334 sists that the fact, as stated, is no felony, treason, or whatever the crime is alleged to be. Thus, for instance, if a man were indicted for feloniously stealing a greyhound, which is an animal in which no valuable property can be had, and therefore it is not felony, but only a civil trespass, to steal it: in this case the party indicted may demur to the indictment; denying it to be felony, though he confesses the acı of taking it. Some have held(e) that if, on demurrer, the point of law be adjudged against the prisoner, he shall have judgment and execution as if convicted by verdict. But this is denied by others,(f) who hold that in such case he shall be directed and received to plead the general

(a) Mirr. c. 1, 2 13.2 Hawk. P. C. 335.

(0) 2 Hawk. P. C. 52.
( 2 Hal. P. 0. 236.

(d) Ibid. 236.
(*) Ibid. 257.
(1) 2 Hawk. P. C. 334.

1 Benefit of clergy is abolished in all cases of felony, by 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 28, s. 6.Світтү.

? An affidavit of the truth of the plea must be made.

In some cases the defendant may take advantage of the want of jurisdiction, under the plea of not guilty, as where a statute directs the offence shall be tried only within a certain boundary or by certain magistrates, (1 East, 352,) or where the objection proves that no court in England can try the in«lictment, (6 East, 583;) and an objection to the jurisdiction, apparent on the face of the proceedings, may be taken advantage of on demurrer. 1 T. R. 316.--Cutty.

*335]

issue, 10t guilty, after a demurrer determined against him. Which appears the more reasonable, because it is clear that if the prisoner freely discovers the fact in court, and refers it to the opinion of the court whether it be felony or no, and upon the fact thus shown it appears to be felony, the court will not record the confession, but admit him afterwards to plead not guilty.(9) And this seems to be a case of the same nature, being for the most part a mistake in point of law, and in the conduct of his pleading; and though a man by mispleading may in some cases lose his property, yet the law will not suffer him by such niceties to lose his life. However, upon this doubt, demurrers to indictments are seldom used : since the same advantages may be taken upon a plea of not guilty, or afterwards in arrest of judgment, when the verdict has established the fact.

III. A plea in abatement is principally for a misnomer, a wrong name, or false addition to the prisoner. As if James Allen, gentleman, is indicted by the name of John Allen, esquire, he may plead that he has the name of James and not of John; and that he is a gentleman, and not an esquire. And if either fact is .

found by a jury, then the *indictment shall be abated, as writs or decla

rations may be in civil actions, of which we spoke at large in the preceding book.(h) But in the end there is little advantage accruing to the prisoner by means of these dilatory pleas; because, if the exception be allowed, a new bill of indictment may be framed, according to what the prisoner in his plea avers to be his true name and addition. For it is a rule upon all pleas in abatement that he who takes advantage of a flaw must at the same time show how it may be amended. Let us, therefore, next consider a more substantial kind of plea, viz. :

IV. Special pleas in bar; which go to the merits of the indictment, and give a reason why the prisoner ought not to answer it at all, nor put himself upon his trial for the crime alleged. These are of four kinds : a former acquittal, a former conviction, a former attainder, or a pardon. There are many other pleas wbich may be pleaded in bar of an appeal;() but these are applicable to both appeals and indictments.

1. First, the plea of autrefoits acquit, or a former acquittal, is grounded on this universal maxim of the common law of England, that no man is to be brought into jeopardy of his life more than once for the same offence. And hence it is allowed as a consequence, that when a man is once fairly found not guilty upon any indictment or other prosecution, before any court having competent jurisdiction of the offence,(j) he may plead such acquittal in bar of any subsequent accusation for the same crime. Therefore an acquittal on an appeal is a good bar to an indictment on the same offence. And so also was an acquittal on an

a

[blocks in formation]

* This rule holds good in indictments for felonies, but not for misdemeanours. 8 East, 112.-Chitty.

* An affidavit of the truth of the plea must be filed. 4 & 5 Anne, c. 16, s. 11.-Chitty.

• But such a plea must be strictly regular both in form and substance; for, in cases of misdemeanour, if it is held bad on demurrer, final judgment may be entered up against the defendant. Rex vs. Taylor, 5 D. & R. 422. 3 B. & C. 502. And if it is irregularly pleaded, and the acquittal which it sets forth appears to have been obtained by collusion, the court will strike the plea off the file. Rex vs. Taylor, 5 D. & R. 521. 3 B. & C. 612. A plea of autrefois acquit cannot be pleaded unless the facts charged in the second indictment would, if true, have sustained the first. Rex vs. Vandercomb, 2 East, P. C. 519. If in a plea of autrefois acquit the prisoner were to insist on two distinct records of acquittal, his plea would be bad for duplicity. But semble that if he insisted upon the wrong, the court would, in a capital case, take care that he did not suffer by it. Rex vs. Sheen, 2 C. & P. 635. And if the prisoner could have been legally convicted on the first indict ment upon any evidence that might have been adduced, his acquittal on that indictment may be successfully pleaded to a second indictment: and it is immaterial whether the proper evidence was adduced at the trial of the first indictment or not. Id. ibid. A prisoner indicted for felony may plead not guilty after his special plea of autrefois acquil has been found against him. Rex vs. Welch, Car. C. L. 56.-Cutty.

[*336

indictment a good bar to an appeal, by the common law;(k) and therefore, in favour of appeals, a general practice was introduced not to try any person on an indictment of bomicide till after the year and day, within which appeals may be brought, were past; by which time it often happened that the witnesses died, or the whole was forgotten. To remedy which inconvenience, the statute 3 Hen. VII. c. 1 enacts, that *indictments shall be proceeded on immediately at the king's suit, for the death of a man, without waiting for bringing an appeal; and that the plea of autrefoits acquit on an indictment shall be no bar to the prosecuting of any appeal.

2. Secondly, the plea of autrefoits convict, or a former conviction for the same identical crime, though no judgment was ever given, or perhaps will be, íbeing suspended by the benefit of clergy or other causes,) is a good plea in bar to an indictment. And this depends upon the same principle as the former, that no man ought to be twice brought in danger of his life for one and the same crime.(1) Hereupon it has been held that a conviction of manslaughter, on an appeal or an indictment, is a bar even in another appeal, and much more in an indictment of murder; for the fact prosecuted is the same in both, though the offences differ in colouring and in degree. It is to be observed that the pleas of autrefoits acquit and autrefoits convict, or a former acquittal and former conviction, must be upon a prosecution for the same identical act and crime But the case is otherwise, in

3. Thirdly, the plea of autrefoits attaint, or a former attainder, which is a good plea in bar, whether it be for the same or any other felony. For wherever a man is attainted of felony by judgment of death, either upon a verdict or confession, by outlawry, or heretofore by abjuration, and whether upon an appeal or an indictment, he may plead such attainder in bar to any subsequent indictment or appeal for the same or for any other felony.(m) And this because, generally, such proceeding on a second prosecution cannot be to any purpose; for the prisoner is dead in law by the first attainder, his blood is already corrupted, and he hath forfeited all that he had; so that it is absurd and superfluous to endeavour to attaint him a second time. But to this general rule, however, as to all others, there are some exceptions; wherein, cessante ratione, cessat et ipsa lex. As, 1. Where the former attainder is reversed for error, for then it *is the same as if it had never been. And the same reason holds where the

[*337 attainder is reversed by parliament, or the judgment vacated by the king's pardon, with regard to felonies committed afterwards. 2. Where the attainder was upon indictment, such attainder is no bar to an appeal, for the prior sen. tence is pardonable by the king; and if that might be pleaded in bar of the appeal, the king might in the end defeat the suit of the subject by suffering the prior sentence to stop the prosecution of a second, and then, when the time of appealing is elapsed, granting the delinquent a pardon. 3. An attainder in feliny is no bar to an indictment of treason; because not only the judgment and ma iner of death are different, but the forfeiture is more extensive and the land goes to different persons. 4. Where a person attainted of one felony is afterwards indicted as principal in another, to which there are also accessories, prosecuted at the same time; in this case it is held that the plea of autrefoits attaint is no bar, but he shall be compelled to take his trial for the sake of public justice; because the accessories to such second felony cannot be convicted till after the conviction of the principal.(n) And from these instances we may collect that a plea of autrefoits attaint is never good but when a second trial would be quite superfluous.(o)

4. Lastly, a pardon may be pleaded in bar; as at once destroying the end and purpose of the indictment by remitting that punishment which the prose

[blocks in formation]

6 By the 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 28, s. 4, it is enacted that no plea setting forth any attainder shall be pleaded in bar of any indictment, unless the attainder be for the same offence as that charged in the indictment, by which enactment the plea of autrefois attaint seems to be at an end.-Cutty.

*338]

cution is calculated to inflict. There is one advantage that attends pleading a pardon in bar, or in arrest of judgment, before sentence is passed, which gives it by much the preference to pleading it after sentence or attainder. This is, that by stopping the judgment it stops the attainder and prevents the corruption of the blood, which when once corrupted by attainder cannot afterwards be restored otherwise than by act of parliament. But, as the title of pardons is applicable to other stages of prosecution, and they have their respective forco

and efficacy as well after as before conviction, outlawry, or *attainder,

I shall therefore reserve the more minute consideration of them till I have gone through every other title except only that of execution,

Before I conclude this head of special pleas in bar, it will be necessary once more to observe that though in civil actions, when a man has his election what plea in bar to make, he is concluded by that plea, and cannot resort to another if that be determined against him ; (as if, on an action of debt, the defendant pleads a general release, and no such release can be proved, he cannot afterwards plead the general issue nil debet, as he might at first : for he has made his election what plea to abide by, and it was his own folly to choose a rotten defence;) though, I say, this strictness is observed in civil actions, quia interest reipublicæ ut sit finis litium; yet in criminal prosecutions in favorem vitæ, as well upon appeal as indictment, when a prisoner's plea in bar is found against him upon issue tried by a jury, or adjudged against him in point of law by the court, still he shall not be concluded or convicted thereon, but shall have judg. ment of respondeat ouster, and may plead over to the felony the general issue, not guilty. (p) For the law allows many pleas by which a prisoner may escape death; but only one plea in consequence whereof it can be inflicted, viz., on the general issue, after an impartial examination and decision of the fact by the unanimous verdict of a jury.' It remains, therefore, that I consider,

V. The general issue, or plea of not guilty,(9) upon which plea alone the prisoner can receive his final judgment of death. In case of an indictment of felony or treason, there can be no special justification put in by way of plea. As, on an indictment for murder, a man cannot plead that it was in his own defence against a robber on the highway, or a burglar; but he must plead the general issue, not guilty, and give this special matter in evidence. For (besides that these pleas do in effect amount to the general issue, since, if true, the *339

prisoner is most clearly not guilty) as the facts in treason are *laid to

be done proditorie et contra ligeantiæ suæ debitum, and, in felony, that the killing was done felonice; these charges of a traitorous or felonious intent are the points and very gist of the indictment, and must be answered, directly, by the general negative, not guilty; and the jury upon the evidence will take notice of any defensive matter and give their verdict accordingly, as effectually as if it were, or could be, specially pleaded. So that this is, upon all accounts, the most advantageous plea for the prisoner.(r)

When the prisoner bath thus pleaded not guilty, non culpabilis, or nient culpable, which was formerly used to be abbreviated upon the minutes thus," non

(9) See Appendix, & 1.

(P) 2 Hal. P. C. 239.

(") 2 Hal. P. C. 258.

? But this is confined to cases of felony; a defendant having pleaded in bar in all cases of misdemeanour is precluded from the benefit of the plea of not guilty if the plea of bar should be found insufficient. 8 East, 107.-Christian.

1 M. & S. 184. 3 B. & C. 502. 2 B. & C. 512, (unless on demurrer.) Term, P. C. 189. 6 East, 583, 602.-Chitty.

8 In cases of indictments or informations for misdemeanours, the above rule, as to pleading the general issue, does not apply with the same degree of strictness; for there are some cases where a special plea is not only allowable, but even requisite. Thus, if the defendant fall within any exception or proviso which is not contained in the purview of the statute creating the offence, he may, by pleading, show that he is entitled to the benefit of that exception or proviso; and there are many pleas of this description in the ancient entries. 2 Leach, 600. But the principal, and indeed almost the only, cases in which special pleas to the merits are necessary, are in the case of indictments for nego

; lecting to repair highways and bridges. As to these, see; in general, 1 Chitt. C. L. 473 to 477.-Chitty.

him so.

(or nient) cul.," the clerk of the assize, or clerk of the arraigns, on behalf of the crown, replies that the prisoner is guilty, and that he is ready to prove

This is done by two monosyllables, in the same spirit of abbreviation, cul. prit.” which signities, first, that the prisoner is guilty, (cul. culpable, or culpabilis,) and then, that the king is ready to prove him so, prit

, præsto sum, or paratus verificare. This is therefore a replication on behalf of the king viva voce at the bar; which was formerly the course in all pleadings, as well in civil as in criminal causes. And that was done in the concisest manner; for when the pleader intended to demur he expressed his demurrer in a single word, judgment;" signifying that he demanded judgment whether the writ, declaration, plea, &c., either in form or matter, were sufficiently good in law: and if he meant to rest on the truth of the facts pleaded, he expressed that also in a single syllable, “prit ;" signifying that he was ready to prove his assertions: as may be observed from the year-books and other antient repositories of law.(s) By this replication the king and the prisoner are therefore at issue; for we may remember, in our strictures upon pleadings in the preceding book,(t) it was observed that when the parties come to a fact which is affirmed on one side and denied on the other, then they are said to be at issue in point *of fact: which is evidently the case here in the plea of non cul. by the

[*340 prisoner and the replication of cul. by the clerk. And we may also remember that the usual conclusion of all affirmative pleadings, as this of cul. or guilty is, was by an averment in these words, “and this he is ready to verify, et hoc paratus est verificare;" which same thing is here expressed by the single word "prît."

How our courts came to express a matter of this importance in so odd and obscure a manner, “rem tantam tam negligenter,can hardly be pronounced with certainty. It may perhaps, however, be accounted for by supposing that these were at first short notes to help the memory of the clerk and remind him whai. he was to reply; or else it was the short method of taking down in court, upon the minutes, the replication and averment, "cul. prît;" which afterwards the ignorance of succeeding clerks adopted for the very words to be by them spoken.(u)

But, however it may have arisen, 'the joining of issue (which, though now usually entered on the record,(w) is no otherwise joined(x) in any part of the proceedings) seems to be clearly the meaning of this obscure expression;(y) which has puzzled our most ingenious etymologists, and is commonly understood as if the clerk of the arraigns, immediately on plea pleaded, had fixed an opprobrious name on the prisoner by asking him, culprit

, how wilt thou be tried ?" for immediately upon issue joined it is inquired of the prisoner by what trial he will make his innocence appear. This form has at present reference () North's Life of Lord Guildford, 98.

sworn, the officer bids the crier number them, for which the See book ini. page 312.

word in law-French is “cmunler ;” but we now hear it pro (*) of th is ignorance we may see daily instances in the nounced in very good English, "count these." abuse of two legal terms of ancient French; one, the pro- * See Appendix, 1. logue to all proclamations, “myrz," or hear ye, which is gene- (*) 2 Hawk. P. C. 399. rally pronounced, most unmeaningly, “0) yes;”” the otber, (v) 2 Hal. P. C. 258. a more pardonable mistake, ---viz., when a jury are all

* The learned judge's explanation of prît, from præsto sum, or paratus verificare, however ingenious, is certainly inconsistent both with the principles and practice of special pleading. After the general issue, or the plea of not guilty, there could be no repli cation, or the words paratus veri ficure could not possibly have been used. This plea in Latin was entered thus upon the record :-Non inde est culpabilis, et pro bono et malo ponit se super patriam : after this the attorney-general, the king's coroner, or clerk of assize could only join

issue by facit similiter, or he doth the like. See App. p. 3, at the end of this book. If, then, I might be allowed to indulge a conjecture of my own, I should think that prit was an easy corruption of pnt. written for ponit by the clerk, as a minute that issue was joined, or ponit se super patriam; or pnt se might be converted into prist or prest, as it is sometimes written. Cul was probably intended to denote the plea, and prit the issue; and these , ziables being pronounced aloud by the clerk to give the court and prisoner an opportunity of hearing the accuracy of the minute, and being immediately followed by the question, How wilt thou be tried ? naturally induced the ignorant part of the audience to suppose that culprit was an appellation given to the prisoner. As a cou

« ForrigeFortsett »