Jenning's Case. By the 9 Geo. 4, c. 31, s. 18, it is enacted as follows:-"Whereas upon trials for the crimes of rape and of carnally abusing girls under the respective ages hereinbefore mentioned* (viz. 10 and 12), offenders frequently escape by reason of the difficulty of the proof which has been required of the completion of those several crimes: for remedy thereof, be it enacted, That it shall not be necessary in any of those cases to prove the actual emission of seed, in order to constitute a carnal knowledge, but that the carnal knowledge shall be deemed complete upon proof of penetration only." In reference to this provision, Hullock, B., expressed himself as follows: "By a recent act of parliament, the evidence necessary to convict of rape is very much narrowed, and many of the difficulties which before stood in the way of a conviction are obviated. If, therefore, you believe that the prisoner's parts were within her person, though there was no emission, and though they were not withdrawn merely because his lust was satisfied; yet he is equally guilty as though there had been emission, and he had been satisfied; for, as the law now is, penetration is all that is necessary to be proved." The prisoner was found guilty, and executed * Sect. 17. CARLISLE Sp. Assizes, 1832. Quare-If crime be com Coulthart's Case. On an indictment for a rape, the prosecutrix plete on proof proved penetration, and that her clothes were wet. of penetra tion, where emission is negatived or found uncer tain. WORCESTER 1832. Alderson, J., addressed the jury as follows:"You must be satisfied that the prisoner penetrated her private parts with his: if you are satisfied of that, I shall submit to your consideration another question, viz. according to law it is established, beyond all doubt, that, on proof of penetration, a jury may infer completion of the offence; the offence still consisting of penetration and emission. (Here the learned Judge recited the 9 Geo. 4, c. 31). But a doubt has arisen upon a late act of Parliament, whether, where no emission has taken place, the offence is complete by penetration only. I have no doubt, however, that it is for you, if you are of opinion that there has been penetration, to presume emission, unless the contrary is proved; and it lies on the prisoner to shew that emission did not take place. If you are satisfied of penetration, but that no emission did take place, I shall reserve the question for the Judges; but if you are convinced of the penetration, and in doubt or ignorance whether emission took place, I am clear you ought to find the prisoner guilty." The prisoner was acquitted. Note. At the Spring assizes, for Worcester, in Crime of rape the same year, John Cox, was convicted of rape upon the following finding of the jury: "We are opinion that penetration took place, and we are opinion that no emission took place." tration, though emission be ex Littledale, J., passed sentence of death on the pressly nega prisoner; but respited the execution, that the opinion of the Judges might in the mean time be taken. The Judges (except Taunton, J., and Gurney, B.,) met in Easter term, and, upon consideration of the case, were unanimously of opinion that the conviction was right*. * According to this decision of the Judges, the crime of rape, under the statute, is a distinct offence from rape at common law; for, at common law, emission was essential to the completion of the crime; whereas, the crime may now be complete, though emission is expressly negatived. It seems strange that the Legislature, if they really intended to make so important an alteration in the law, should not have been a little more precise, instead of casting upon the Judges of the land the ungracious task of putting a severe construction upon a doubtful act of Parliament. But did the Legislature, when they assented to the 16th section, in which the word "rape" is used as of an accepted meaning, contemplate that, from that time forward, it was to assume a new character? Or was it only when they came to section 18, that the thought first struck them? And did they then foresee that, by limiting the proof, the word " rape," as used in the 16th section, would receive a construction different from that which they intended when they put it there? N.B.-The case was not argued before the Judges by counsel. tived. YORK Sum. Assizes, 1823. Where the rules of a friendly society have Marshall v. Brooke. Action by a friendly society, to recover from the assignees money belonging to the society, in the been destroy hands of a bankrupt*. ed, a copy is evidence, without proof By the Friendly Society Act it is required, that that the ori- the rules of these societies should be approved at ginal were signed by the clerk of the peace. the quarter sessions, and signed by the clerk of the peace, who is directed to make out a copy and file among the records of the court. it In the present instance, the original copy of the rules had been destroyed by fire, and the question was, whether secondary evidence could be admitted, without a certificate of the clerk of the peace, that the original had been duly signed. Bayley, J., was of opinion, that, as the instru'ment produced was consequential to the due execution of the original, it must be presumed that the original was duly signed. CARLISLE Sp. Assizes, 1825. Hearsay is evidence, when? Elliott's Case. On an indictment for stopping up a way, Holroyd, J., held, that "what witness's father told him that his father had said, was admissible as evidence of reputation." The act gives the society the privilege to recover, notwithstanding bankruptcy, the whole amount, without regard to the other creditors. (33 Geo. 3, c. 54). Pearson's Case. It appeared that several depositions were taken before the magistrate, but one only was produced at the trial. only be produced, that one cannot be Hullock, B., refused to receive it, though it was received. the only one which was taken in writing. He gave for a reason, that those which were not produced might be in favour of the prisoner, and it would be unreasonable to allow the prosecutor to choose which he would produce*. Mary Ann Quinn's Case. APPLEBY Sum. Assizes, 1825. Prisoner was indicted for conspiring, with one It is a ques Telford, deceased, to defraud the king's subjects. tion for the jury, whether a woman, who passes for a really such. man's wife, is The fact of pleading to a different name from the man, and to the descrip passed as the wife of Telford; had frequently been Note. The woman pleaded to a different name from that of Telford, (the principal), and to the de • Vide ante, Doncaster Betting Room case, F tion of single woman, is not conclusive against her being a mar ried worn in. |