RULE 55.-A prosecution is deemed to commence when an information is laid or an indictment is preferred.

R. v. Brooke, 1 Den. C. C. 217; 2 Cox, 436; 2 Car. & K. 402; R. v. Austin, 1 Car. & K. 621; R. v. Kelmster, 2 C. & P. 228; R. v. Parker, L. & C. 459; 31 L. J. M. C. 135; 10 Jur. N. S. 596; 10 L. T. 463; 12 W. R. 765; 9 Cox, 475.

The

The computation of time is the same as in civil cases. day on which the offence was committed is excluded, and the last day of the period in question included, including Sundays, unless expressly excluded (Radcliffe v. Bartholomew, (1892) 1 Q. B. 161).

RULE 55A.-In every Act passed after the year 1850, unless the contrary intention appears, the expression "month" shall mean calendar month.

52 & 53 Vict. c. 63, s. 3.

CHAPTER II.

PLACE AND MODE OF TRIAL, AND COUNSEL.

RULE 56.-The trial of an accused may take place(1.)—(a) In the High Court of Justice (K. B. D.), which is a Court of Oyer and Terminer for Middlesex (including the County of London, 51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 89, sub-ss. 2, 3), in respect of offences committed therein (or deemed for the purposes of trial to have been committed therein).

See 11 Will. 3, c. 12; 10 Geo. 3, c. 47, s. 4; 13 Geo. 3, c. 63, s. 39; 21 Geo. 3, c. 70, s. 7; 42 Geo. 3, c. 85; 53 Geo. 3, c. 89, 8. 6.

(b) In the High Court of Justice (K. B. D.) when an indictment has been removed into it by certiorari or Order before a jury of Middlesex or a jury of the county from which it was removed.

(c) In the High Court of Justice (K. B. D.) when the proceedings are by information.

The High Court has jurisdiction to try anyone charged with any offence in any part of England, but, except in the cases given above, such power is not exercised by it.

As to certiorari, see supra, pp. 27-29. The procedure as to indictments presented in the King's Bench Division is shortly as follows:

The prosecutor must before the fourth day of any particular term give notice to the Master of the Crown Office that there is business to be brought before a grand jury.

The master then gives notice to the sheriff (there is some doubt as to whether the Sheriff of Middlesex or the Sheriff of London should be notified, but it is probable that either may be. See 35 & 36 Vict. c. 52; 51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 89, and Short & Mellor's C. O. Pr., p. 181).

The jury is then summoned by the sheriff, and the procedure usual in a Crown Court at Assizes is followed (see R. v. Lynch,

(1903) 1 K. B. 444; 72 L. J. K. B. 107; 88 L. T. 26; 51 W. R. 619; 67 J. P. 41; 20 Cox, 468).

After bill found, the proceedings are the same as those in the case of a removed indictment, and are governed, as to appearance by C. O. R. 83-98; as to pleading by C. O. R. 128—133 ; and as to notice of trial and trial by C. O. R. 148-165, 170— 182, 252 (see Short & Mellor's C. O. Pr., Chap. 6).

The proceedings on the trial of an information are identical with those on indictment, but C. O. R. 172 does not apply to informations.

(2.)-(a) In the Central Criminal Court (as established by 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 36, and extended by 7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. c. 77, ss. 1, 3, 7; 19 & 20 Vict. c. 16; 25 & 26 Vict. c. 65; 38 & 39 Vict. c. 77, s. 23; 44 & 45 Vict. c. 64, s. 2 (2); and 51 & 52 Vict. c. 41).

(b) At assizes (which are part of the High Court of Justice, 36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, ss. 16, 29) in the Crown (ie., Criminal) Court, or in the civil Court, on a nisi prius record sent down by the King's Bench Division to be tried therein (see supra, pp. 29-31, Chap. I., and C. O. R. 148–154).

The word "assize" has, in various connections, been used to signify (1) a law, (2) a jury, (3) a form of action; but the meaning of "assize" is now well established. It means a sitting in a criminal or civil Court by commissioners (who are generally judges of the High Court) on circuit, acting under one or more of the commissions of (1) assize and nisi prius, (2) oyer and terminer, (3) gaol delivery. Both the Central Criminal Court and the Assize Crown Court have practically unlimited jurisdiction over all crimes committed within their appropriate districts.

(3.) In a Court of county or borough quarter

sessions.

The history of these Courts is set out in Steph. Hist. Cr. L., Vol. I., pp. 111–121.

RULE 57.-A trial may take place either before one or more of the judges of the King's Bench Division (acting as judges of the King's Bench

Division or as commissioners of assize, or as judges of the Central Criminal Court), or before specially appointed commissioners of assize, or before the judges of the Central Criminal Court (4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 36), or "at Bar."

In ordinary cases, the trial takes place before one judge (or at assizes one judge and another person named in the commission, and at the Central Criminal Court before two of the judges of the Court), but it may be before more than one.

In R. v. Gallagher (15 Cox, 291; Sessions Papers C. C. C., Vol. 98, p. 279), which was a case of treason felony, three judges sat at the Central Criminal Court to try the case; but in that instance they sat as judges of the particular Court, under the provisions of 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 36, ss. 1 and 2.

In this connection, it is interesting to note that by the terms of the above statute the Lord Mayor and aldermen-provided the tribunal is not composed of less than two persons-are empowered to discharge all the judicial duties of this, the chief criminal Court of the country.

However, notwithstanding such rights, the good sense of the civic authorities of the City of London restrains them from interfering actively in the trials, and they content themselves with assisting the legal members of the Court by their presence. Occasionally, however, two aldermen form a Court for the purpose of taking pleas, settling the jury lists, and hearing the excuses of jurors who have been summoned. This Court is, like an ordinary assize Court, a Court of oyer and terminer and gaol delivery; but it differs from such a Court in that its commission is permanent, that in its case there is no commission of association which makes the officials members of the Court itself, and that it is not part of the High Court (?) (see p. 225). During the reign of Queen Victoria the Court sat under a commission signed by her; and on the accession of King Edward VII. a fresh commission was issued by him. This will probably endure as long as his Majesty's tenure of the throne, as there would scarcely be any object in issuing a new commission, since the Lord Mayor, the Lord Chancellor, the judges, the aldermen, the Recorder and Common Serjeant, for the time being, with others who have filled the office of Lord Chancellor or judge of the High Court, are, irrespective of their personality, the judges of the Court.

In contradistinction to this Court, the commissions of assize Courts are granted afresh at each assize, and contain the names of those to whom the powers of the commission are delegated. Again, in an ordinary commission of assize, criminals may be tried only by two of the commissioners named in the commission, one of whom must be of the quorum, i.e., one of the judges or King's counsel nominated, and the other an associate, i.e., one of the officials named in the commission in the part which is termed "the commission of association." This is provided by the terms of the commission, but, as has been stated supra, at the Central Criminal Court any two of these named in the commission founded on the statute may be the judges.

Another notable point is that a commission issued by a deceased sovereign does not become inoperative until six months after that sovereign's death; this is by virtue of 1 Anne, c. 2, s. 5.

At the Ipswich assizes in 1902, after the accession of King Edward VII., the presiding judge questioned whether he had power to act under the commission of assize issued by Queen Victoria. It was pointed out by the Clerk of Indictments (Mr. Henry A. Read) that under the above statute he had such power.

It is to be hoped that it will be long before such a question can again arise, but it is certainly noteworthy.

RULE 58.-A trial at bar is a trial before the full Court of King's Bench.

The history of trial at bar is given in the judgment in Reg. v. Castro, 9 Q. B. 350; 43 L. J. Q. B. 105; 30 L. T. 320; 22 W. R. 187; 12 Cox, 454.

Shortly, it is that, prior to 13 Edw. 1, A.D. 1285, all trials in the superior Courts by a judge and jury took place at Westminster, during term time, in the Courts of Common Law, and before a jury of the county from which the case came.

This system caused great inconvenience, and, in order to obviate such, it was provided by the statute above named that power should be given to the Courts at Westminster to award a writ of nisi prius, ordering the sheriff to bring a jury to Westminster in the next term, "unless the justices of assize should first come to his county." And in case such a writ was awarded, the justices of assize were to take the inquisition and return the same to the Court at Westminster, where judgment should be