publish in a certain other number of a certain other public newspaper called The Nation, a certain other printing of and concerning a certain other treasonable revolution by him the said C. G. D. then and there feloniously devised and intended to be carried into effect by force of arms, and by traitorously levy- ing war against our said Lady the Queen, and to deprive and depose our said Lady the Queen, &c., and of and concerning the said war intended to be levied as aforesaid, which said last-mentioned printing is en- titled "The Business of To-day," and con- tains among other things according to the tenor and effect following, that is to say (selecting a portion of the article as in the 1st count) and further to fulfil, perfect, and bring into effect his said last-mentioned most evil and wicked felony and felonious compassing, &c., he the said C. G. D., after- wards, &c., and on the 17th day of June, in the year, &c., "did feloniously publish in one other number of the said public news- paper called The Nation, a certain other printing," &c., setting out a portion of the article entitled "The Uses of the Union," and then proceeding as in the 1st count.
which was similar in form, charged the in- tent to be to levy war:
Held, that the felonious publishings averred in the first four counts were suffi- ciently charged, and that it was not neces- sary to set out verbatim the entire of the printings or writings therein referred to :
Held also, that the counts were not double, by reason of several distinct publications being charged in each count:
And that publications were well laid as "overt acts" of the felony charged:
Held also, that as the intention charged against the prisoner was plainly expressed by the printings themselves, as set out in the indictment, no colloquium or inuendo was necessary:
And also, that those portions of the counts which charged the expression of a felonious compassing on the 3rd of June, by publica- tions on days subsequent to that date were insensible and repugnant. But that those overt acts which were ill laid might be re- jected without vitiating the remaining por- tions of the counts. Reg. v. Duffy, 294 Plea of infancy, in false pretences, 277 Laying property of partnership, 280
The 3rd and 4th counts were similar, respectively, to the 1st and 2nd, but setting out the publications as overt acts. The 5th count charged that the prisoner, on the 3rd of June, in the 11th year of the Queen, feloniously did further compass, &c., to de- prive and depose the Queen, and the said last-mentioned compassing, &c., did then and there feloniously express, &c., by divers overt acts and deeds hereinafter mentioned, that is to say, in order to fulfil, &c., his most evil and wicked felony, &c., he, the said C. G. D., on the said 3rd day of June, in the said 11th year of the reign aforesaid, and on divers other days and times after the said 3rd day of June, to wit, &c. (setting out the dates of the publications), feloniously did publish divers other printings in divers num- bers of a certain public newspaper, called The Nation, of which he the said C. G. D. was the proprietor and publisher; and also divers other writings of him the said C. G. D., &c., the said last-mentioned printings Embezzlement by collector of, 208 and writings containing, amongst other things, incitements, encouragements, &c., to the liege subjects, &c., in that part of the
A person who administers poison with intent to kill, is guilty of felony under section 2 of 7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. c. 85, although, through ignorance or mistake, he adminis- ters it in a form which renders it innocuous.
The prisoner, with intent to kill, adminis- tered to a child nine weeks old, two cocculus indicus berries.
That berry is classed with narcotic poisons; but the poisonous property resides in the kernel, which is inclosed in a pod so hard, that it could not be digested by a child of that age. Therefore the pod rendered the poison innocuous.
Held, nevertheless, that he was properly convicted under the above section. Reg. v. Cluderay, 84
POST-OFFICE.
LARCENY BY SERVANT OF.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire- By child in parent's house, 272 land called Ireland, against our said Sove- reign Lady the Queen to rise and rebel, and treasonably to depose our said Sovereign Lady the Queen from the style, &c., of the imperial crown of the United Kingdom, against the form of the statute, &c., and against the peace, &c. The 6th count,
Quære, Whether a person in the employ of a tradesman, being a district postmaster, receiving wages for his trade services, but
neither being employed by, nor receiving any remuneration from, the Post-office. becomes, by assisting his master occasion- ally in sending the letters and making up the letter bags, a person employed by the Post-office, within the 7 Will. 4, & 1 Vict, c. 36.
But evidence that his master gave him a paper, and told him to go before the magis- trate to take the oath usually taken by persons in the employ of the Post-office, and get the paper properly filled up-that he went away, and returned shortly after, exhibited the paper, and said that he had taken the oath, was
Held sufficient to show that he was in such employ. Reg. v. Simpson, 275.
BAIL-JUDGE OF ASSIZE.
Where a judge of assize, who has the facts before him, orders a prisoner, against whom an indictment for murder is pending, to be detained in custody; it is against the practice of this court to reverse that order. Reg. v. McAtavy and another, 444 Where, on the trial of an indictment for felony, the counsel for the prisoner suggests that the interpretation of a written document is for the court, and their interpretation of it being against him, he asks to have the point reserved, and his request is acceded to, the jury being asked to decide upon the other facts of the case without reference to the construction of the document:
Quære, whether, after conviction, the ver- dict can be disturbed on the ground that the construction of the paper was for the jury, and that they have expressed no opinion upon a material point which was peculiarly for their decision? Reg. v. Smith, 43
Where the written case reserved does not, in the opinion of the counsel who were in it in the court below, fairly raise all the points that were in issue, the proper course is to apply to the judge reserving to amend it. Reg. v. Smith, 43
APPEAL-ADMISSION TO BAIL. Where, after conviction by a jury at an assizes, questions of law have been reserved for the Court of Criminal Appeal, the prisoner will not be admitted to bail without the assent of the judge before whom he was tried. Reg. v. Harris, 21
Where a bill for rape on a child under the age of ten years had been ignored by the grand jury, in consequence of the judge refusing to allow the child to be sworn as a witness, on the ground of its want of know- ledge of the obligation of an oath, the pri- soner was ordered to be detained in custody until the child could be properly instructed. Reg. v. Baylis, 23
Where the application is opposed by the Attorney-General, the court will not order a party indicted for embezzlement to be furnished with a copy of the indictments found against him, though they are very voluminous, and contain a great many counts, but
Semble, that in such case the court will order the accused to be furnished with a full bill of particulars. Reg. v. Hughes, 448
COSTS OF CRIMINAL APPEAL.
The court, which has been directed to pass sentence on a prisoner, after a point reserved for the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal, has power to allow the costs in- curred in the latter court, and upon taxation under an order to that effect, the briefs and fees of two connsel will be allowed. Woolley, 452
COSTS OF PROSECUTION.
Statute 5 Will. & M. c. 11, s. 3, is not confined to cases in which there is a legal obligation upon public officers to prosecute, but entitles them to costs if they institute a prosecution in obedience to a duty of imperfect obliga- tion only.
An illegitimate child found straying in the streets, with marks of serious injury upon its person, was taken before a magistrate, who received evidence of acts of violence committed upon the child by its father, and recommended a prosecution. One of the relieving officers took the child to the work- house, and the guardians of the union pro- secuted the father for ill-treating the child; and although the father applied to them for the child, and offered to pay any expense which they had incurred, they refused to give it up to him. It turned out, upon the trial of the indictment, removed by the de- fendant into this court, that, in fact, the father had behaved generally with kindness to the child, though on one occasion he had punished it excessively, and the father was convicted of an assault:
Held, that the guardians were entitled to costs of prosecution, under 5 Will. & M. c. 11, s. 3, they being civil officers, who, as such, were concerned to prosecute. Reg. v. Kenealey, 345
There is no distinction between depositions be- fore a coroner and before a magistrate with reference to the modes of cross-examination upon them. A witness cannot, therefore, be asked on cross-examination as to what he said before the coroner. But the deposition may be put into the witness's hands to read over to himself and refresh his memory. Reg. v. Barnet, 269
TAKING DEPOSITIONS BEFORE MAGIS-
Upon the trial of an indictment for felony, a witness for the prosecution was asked by the prisoner's counsel whether he did not make a certain statement to the magistrates' clerk in answer to a question put by him in the absence of the magistrate and of the pri- soner, whilst he (the clerk) was writing out the depositions from the minutes of the examination and cross-examination which had been previously taken before the magis- trate, and put for the purpose of making the depositions more complete. The depo- sitions, when written, were afterwards read over to the witnesses, and in the presence of the magistrate and the prisoner, to whom opportunity of cross-examining them was again afforded, the witnesses swore that they were true, and signed them.
Held, that even if the depositions so taken had, when re-sworn, the legal character of depositions, the prisoner's counsel was en- titled to ask the above questions without putting them in, and the witness was bound to answer it; but-
Semble, that the documents prepared by the magistrate's clerk in the manner above described had not the legal character of depositions. Reg. v. Christopher, 76
The deposition of a witness absent from illness, to be admissible under stat. 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 17, must be regular, and appear to have been regularly taken upon the face thereof, and cannot be proved by extraneous evidence to have been properly taken in fact. Reg. v. Miller, 166
The deposition of a witness before a magis- trate cannot be put into his hands at the trial to refresh his memory on cross-exami- nation. Reg. v. Stokes, 451
DEMURRER-RESPONDEAT OUSTER. In an indictment for felony, the judgment on demurrer is final, and the prisoner is not allowed to plead over. Reg. v. Hendy, 243
Where one of several prisoners included in an indictment upon being arraigned has de- murred to the indictment, the court will not allow the demurrer to be argued until the rest of the prisoners have pleaded or demurred.
A general demurrer to an indictment con- fesses the subject-matter of it, and judgment against a defendant on such a demurrer is final. Reg. v. Faderman, 359
DISABILITY OF CONVICTED FELON. The Bishop of Ossory having instituted pro- ceedings in the Ecclesiastical Court to re- move the registrar of the diocese from his office in consequence of his having been convicted of forgery, and sentenced to transportation, the registrar moved for a prohibition to restrain the bishop from pro- ceeding against him in the Ecclesiastical Court.
The court refused to grant the writ, hold- ing, first, that the registrar being a con- victed felon, was therefore disqualified from making the application; and, secondly, that even if it were not so, the bishop was justi- fied in proceeding by suit in the Ecclesias- tical Court to deprive him of his office. Grace v. Bishop of Ossory, 159
TRIAL OF A FOREIGNER. An alien female, married to a natural-born subject, becomes, by the 7 & 8 Vict. c. 66, herself a British subject, to all intents and purposes, and therefore, on an indictment for murder against her, she is not entitled to be tried by a jury de medietate linguæ. Reg. v. Manning, 31
GRAND JURY. Where the grand jury have ignored a bill, the court will not permit a second bill of a like nature to be presented to them at the same session. Reg. v. Austin, 385
An indictment having been found against the prisoner by the grand jury of the county of the city of Dublin, at the August session of the court, which bill was not further pro- ceeded on, the Attorney-General, under the provisions of the statute 6 Geo. 4, c. 51, preferred another bill against him for the same offence to the grand jury of the next
adjoining county, and the indictment found | Indictment for threatening to accuse of an in the city was quashed, but notice of the change of jurisdiction was not served as prescribed by the statute.
Held, that the Attorney-General was not prohibited, by having indicted the prisoner in the county, from again resorting to the city jurisdiction.
But semble, that in such case the court will not allow both bills to continue pending against the prisoner. Reg. v. Duffy, 123.
QUASHING INDICTMENT.
The court will not, on the application of the defendant, quash an indictment for perjury. An indictment cannot be quashed in part. Reg. v. Withers, 17
PRISONER'S STATEMENT.
Where a statement made by a prisoner before the committing magistrates appears on the face of it to have been duly taken under the statute 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 26, and is at the trial produced from the depositions of the witnesses taken at the same time, and appears to have been transmitted with them; it is receivable in evidence, without further proof. Reg. v. Harris, 147
A prisoner against whom a bill has been found for murder, and who has applied for, and obtained, a postponement of his trial, will not be admitted to bail. Reg. v. Langley, 157 As to search warrant, 1
Prisoner may plead over after demurrer, 24 In demurrer, 42
As to putting depositions in hands of witness, 93 Indictment for forgery, 94
Indictment for embezzlement, 101 Indictment of bankrupt for making away with goods, 108
Pleading over, 139
As to grand jury, 172
Taking prisoner's statement before magistrate,
As to depositions of absent witness, 243 As to reserving case, 248
One prisoner may be evidence for another,
In cross-examination, 263, 279 As to admitting depositions, 402 As to reading depositions of witness absent from illness, 440, 441, 442
Of grand jury on a bill for murder against two, 455
Indictment and plea to same for non-repair of a bridge, under the statute of bridges, 281
Indictment for conspiring to obtain money by false pretences, 390
Indictment for keeping a lunatic asylum without a licence, under 8 & 9 Vict. c. 100 (No. 1), App. i.
Indictment for obtaining money by falsely pretending that the defendant was the secretary to a society called "The Animal's Friend Society," and duly authorized to collect subscriptions on its behalf (No. 2), App. iii.
Indictment under 5 & 6 Vict. c. 31, s. 2, for shooting at the Queen with intent to injure her (No. 3), App. v. Indictment for perjury committed before the Commissioners of Bankruptcy, with counts under 5 & 6 Vict. c. 122, s. 81 (No. 4), App. vi.
Indictment for conspiracy to obtain money by falsely pretending that the defendants were in a large way of business, requiring clerks and servants to conduct it, and then de- manding, from those who offered them- selves, money to be deposited as security for their good behaviour (No. 5), App. xiii. Indictment for selling a diseased cow in a public market (No. 6), App. xiv. Indictment for perjury committed on the trial of a cause in the County Court (No. 7), App. xvi.
Indictment under the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 23, for stealing deeds evidencing the title to real estate; with counts for conspiracy (No. 8), App. xviii.
Indictment under the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 96, for threatening to publish a libel with intent to extort money (No. 9), App. xxii.
Indictment under the 59 Geo. 3, c. 69, for equipping a vessel to be employed in the service of a foreign state against another state with which this country is at peace; with counts for conspiracy (No. 10), App. xxvii.
Indictment against an inhabitant of a ward in the city of London, for refusing to execute the office of one of the wardmote inqnest (No. 11), App. xxix.
Indictment against a defendant for obtaining money by falsely pretending that he had then purchased certain property, which it was necessary he should immediately pay for (No. 12), App. xxxiii.
Indictment for a conspiracy to obtain posses- sion of goods by false pretences (No. 13), App. xxxv.
Indictment for a conspiracy to defraud a railway company by travelling without a ticket on some portion of the line-obtaining a ticket at an intermediate station, and then deliver-
ing it up at the terminus as if no greater dis-
tance had been travelled over by the passenger Cost of, for assault, 345 than from such intermediate station to the terminus (No. 13*), App. xxxviii.
Indictment against two defendants for obtain-
ing money under false pretences, the false Conspiracy to procure, 42 pretences being that one of the defendants having advanced money to the other on a deposit of certain title deeds, had himself de- posited the deeds with a friend, and that he required a sum of money to redeem them, What is, 220 with counts for conspiracy (No. 14), App. xli. Indictment for obtaining money, by falsely pretending that the defendant was the authorized agent of the Executive Com- mittee of the Exhibition of the Works of Industry of all Nations, and that he had power to allot space to private individuals for the exhibition of their merchandize (No. 15), App. xlv.
PREVENTION OF OUTRAGE ACT. In an indictment against a traverser, under 11 & 12 Vict. c. 2, for having in his possession, in a proclaimed district, fire-arms and am- munition, without licence, it was averred that the proclamation and notice required by the act had been duly published in The Dublin Gazette, and duly posted according to the provisions of the Act. No proof of posting throughout the entire district men- tioned in the proclamation having been given, and the traverser being convicted on case reserved, pursuant to 11 & 12 Vict. c. 78, for the Court of Criminal Appeal, the principal question was, whether it was necessary to prove the posting of the pro- clamation as directed by the 2nd section to sustain the conviction?
Held, that the 2nd count of the indict- ment, framed under the 9th section, was sufficiently sustained, as it was only necessary to prove the issuing of the proclamation to sustain a conviction for carrying arms con- trary to the provisions of the 9th section, and that the averment "and duly posted" was an immaterial and unnecessary aver- ment, which did not require to be proved, and might be struck out as mere surplusage, and that the conviction on the 2nd count was right. Reg. v. Otway, 59
Practice as to, when a witness is too young to take an oath, 23
PRISONER'S STATEMENT.
Practice as to, 147, 203
PROPERTY.
Description of, in indictment, 143 Of partnership, in whom to be laid, 280
JOINT, BY HUSBAND AND WIfe—Verdict. Husband and wife were jointly indicted for feloniously receiving stolen property. The evidence proved a separate act of receiving by the husband. The jury returned a general verdict of guilty against both.
Held, that the verdict was divisible, and the conviction might be reversed as to the wife, and affirmed as to the husband.
The stolen property was found at the house in which the prisoners lived, when the husband was not at home; but after- wards, when the property was shown to him, he stated that he had bought it of A. B., who was in custody on the charge of stealing it.
Held, sufficient evidence of a receipt by him. Reg. v. Matthews, 214
A. and B. having stolen two cocks and five hens, were seen, at four in the morning, to go into the house of C.'s father with a sack which contained the stolen property. C. lived with his father. A. and B. remained in the house about ten minutes, and were then seen to come out of the back door, pre- ceded by C. with a candle, A., as before, carrying the sack, and to go into a stable situate in an enclosed yard at the back of the house. The stable door was shut by one of them; and on the policemen going in they found the sack lying on the floor, tied at the mouth, and the three men standing round it, as if they were bargaining, but no words were heard. C., on being charged with receiving the poultry, knowing it to have been stolen, said he did not think he would have bought the hens. C. being indicted for receiving, the jury were told that the taking of A. and B. with the stolen goods, as above by C., into the stable over which he had control, for the purpose of negotiating about buying them, he well knowing the goods to have been stolen, was a receiving of the goods within the meaning of the statute.
« ForrigeFortsett » |