it was dead tent to steal the carcass or skin, or any part of the sheep, though cattle so killed, every such offender shall be guilty when it was of felony." Prisoner was indicted for receiving a sheep, knowing it to have been stolen. On the trial it appeared, that the sheep, at the time the prisoner received it, was dead. Upon this the prisoner's counsel contended, that the prisoner was entitled to an acquittal, inasmuch as the word sheep, unexplained, must be taken to mean a live sheep. Littledale, J., reserved the point, and, at the Spring Assizes following, Parke, J., having ordered the prisoner to be placed at the bar, addressed him as follows:-"The sheep, when traced to your hands, was dead: it was objected by your counsel that the indictment laid it to be a sheep, and that a sheep must be taken to be a live sheep; but the great majority of the Judges have held, that the word" sheep" does not necessarily import that the sheep was received alive, though it would have been more correct to have stated that you received the dead body or carcass*." In Rex v. Puddefoot, R. & M. C. C. 247, on an indictment under this statute, it was held that a charge of stealing a sheep was not supported by proof of stealing an ewe, because the statute specifies ewe and sheep, and therefore the one really meant should be stated. received by the party indicted. SHERIFF. APPLEBY Sp. Assizes, 1825. The assizes for Westmor The Earl of Thanet, hereditary High Sheriff of land postpon- Westmorland, having lately died, and his successor not having renewed the deputation to the Under ed, the Earl of Thanet, hereditary High Sheriff Sheriff, or appointed any other person to that office, of Westmor land, having Holroyd, J., dismissed the gentlemen who had as died suddenly there being no legal au abroad, and sembled as a grand jury, and adjourned the assizes, considering that there was no person in the county by whom they could be lawfully summoned. thority to summon a grand jury. SHOOTING-MALICIOUSLY. YORK Sp. Assizes, 1832. See ante, p. 123, Whitley's case, tit. "Evidence." -The gun must be proved to have been loaded with the destructive materials alleged in the indictment. STEALING FROM THE PERSON. See Thompson's case, ante, p. 250, n. tit: “Larceny."-Lifting a pocket-book an inch above the top of the pocket. 66 See ante, p. 301, Smith's and Dorran's Case, tit. SUNDAY. LANCASTER Sum. Assizes, 1822. On Sunday in law is a day of the rest. The law considers Sunday a day of rest. that day a man is not bound to send a letter to post, or to do any other act ejusdam generis. other words, the not doing such act cannot be accounted against him for laches.-Per Abbott, C. J. In TAXATION OF COSTS. Anonymous. Expenses charged as having been incurred by an attorney in criminal proceedings are not taxable by the Court.-Per Hullock, B. LANCASTER Sum. Assizes, 1827. THREATENING TO ACCUSE, &c. Joseph Gill's Case. CITY OF YORK Sum. Assizes, 1827. to procure support a different Prisoner was indicted for having feloniously and Threatening maliciously, with intent to extort money, charged witnesses to and accused A. B. with having committed the hor-charge is a rible and detestable crime, &c., and that he felo- thing from threatening to niously and maliciously did menace and threaten to accuse. prosecute the said A. B. The evidence was, that • Qu. if a threat to prosecute would amount to a threat to accuse within the act? The learned Judge seemed to think that it would. he had threatened to procure witnesses to support a charge already made. It was objected for the prisoner that the statute applied only to the threatening to accuse prospectively, and that this was at most a threat to support such a charge by evidence. Per Bayley, J.-"Threatening to procure witnesses to support a charge already made is not within the act of parliament which makes it felony to extort money by threatening to accuse of an indictable offence. It is one thing to accuse, but another to procure witnesses in support of an accusation already made." Prisoner was acquitted*. The indictment in the above case was framed upon the 4 Geo. 4, c. 54, s. 5, which is now repealed, but similar provisions have been introduced by 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 8, as follows:-"If any person shall knowingly send or deliver any letter or writing, demanding of any person with menaces, and without any reasonable or probable cause, any chattel, money, or valuable security; or if any person shall accuse or threaten to accuse, or shall knowingly send or deliver any letter or writing accusing or threatening to accuse, any person of any crime punishable by law with death, transportation, or pillory, or of any assault with intent to commit any rape, or of any attempt or endeavour to commit any rape, or of any infamous crime, as hereinafter defined, with a view or intent to extort or gain from such person any chattel, money, or valuable security; every such offender shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be transported beyond the seas for life, or for any term not less than seven years, or to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding four TRANSPORTATION-RETURNING FROM. Fitzpatrick's Case. LANCASTER 1823. condition to ed to some parts beyond the seas is not Prisoner was tried and convicted for being at Pardon on a large after an order for transportation. The in- be transportdictment charged that he was capitally convicted at &c., but that his Majesty was pleased to extend the same as a his mercy to him, upon condition of his being ported for life to some parts beyond the seas; he was thereupon ordered to be transported to &c.* condition to be transported trans- to New South and years; and, if a male, to be once, twice or thrice publicly or privately whipped, (if the court shall so think fit,) in addition to such imprisonment.” The indictment stated the previous conviction of the prisoner, along with Daniel Fitzpatrick, at Lancaster Assizes, 58 Geo. 3, for highway robbery, and the sentence of death passed upon them; and then proceeded thus:-" And the jurors aforesaid, now here sworn, do further present, that his said late Majesty, having been graciously pleased to extend his royal mercy to the said William Fitzpatrick and Daniel Fitzpatrick, on condition of their being transported to some parts beyond the seas, for and during the term of their natural lives; and such intention having been notified in writing by one of his said late Majesty's principal secretaries of state to the said Sir George Wood, Knight, the Judge before whom the said William Fitzpatrick and Daniel Fitzpatrick were convicted of the felony aforesaid, the said Judge was pleased to grant his fiat for the transportation of the said William Fitzpatrick and Daniel Fitz Wales, or some of the islands adja cent. |