« EelmineJätka »
intention found of using the tool or instrument in question for the purpose stated did not amount to a sufficient excuse; and
upon the fullest consideration afterwards Mr. Justice Foster was of opinion that the case did fall within the act; in which opinion it appears
that Lord Hardwicke fully concurred. (h) Proof of a die On an indictment for having in possession a die made of iron made either of and steel, proof of a die made of either material will be sufficient : iron or steel.
and it seems that if the indictment should state that the die were made of iron, steel, and other materials, proof that it was made of any material would be sufficient; and that it would not be necessary even to prove the exact material. In a case where the indictment was for having in possession a die made of iron and steel, a witness who saw the die said it was made of iron
another of the witnesses who had not seen it, said that dies were usually made of steel, and that iron dies would not stand : and upon the point being saved whether this evidence would support the indictment, the Judges held that it would, for it was immaterial to the offence of what the die was made, and proof of a die either of iron
or steel, or both, would satisfy this charge. (2) It is not neces- It was agreed by all the Judges, that in proceedings upon this sary to prove statute 8 and 9 W. 3. c. 26. it is not necessary
that money made with the instru- money was actually made with the instrument in question. (1)
The having tools for coining in possession, with intent to use Having tools them, has been held to be a misdemeanor at common law. An for coining in indictment, which was framed as for a misdemeanor at common possession, with intent to
law, charged that the defendant, without any lawful authority, use them, is a had in his custody and possession two iron stamps, each of which misdemeanor
would make and impress the figure, resemblance, and similitude of at common law.
one of the sceptres impressed upon the current gold coin of this kingdom, called half-guineas, with intent to make the impression of sceptres on divers pieces of silver coin of this realm, called sixpences, and to colour such pieces of the colour of gold, and fraudulently to utter them to his Majesty's subjects as lawful halfguineas, against the peace, &c. Lord Hardwicke, at the assizes, doubted whether the bare possession was unlawful, unless made use of, or unless made criminal by statute: but upon the indictment being removed into the Court of King's Bench by certiorari, (k) Page, Probyn, and Lee, Justices, held, that the bare having such instruments in possession, with the intent charged,
was a misdemeanor. (1) The tool or in- It seems that the degree of similitude to the real coin which the strument need tools or instruments must be capable of impressing in order to not bear an
bring the case within the statute 8 and 9 W.3. c. 26. must be blance to the governed by considerations similar to those which have been coin.
stated with respect to the counterfeit coin itself. (m) Whether the instrument in question be calculated to impress the figure,
(h) Bell's case, 1 East. P. C. c. 4. s. c. 4. s. 18. p. 172. 17. p. 169, 170. Fost. 430, and Pre- (k) The defendant was brought up face to the 3d edition of Fost. p. 8. by Habeas Corpus, and commiited to
(i) Rex v. Oxford, East. T. 1819. Newgale. MS. Bayley, J. and Russ. & Ry. 382. (2) Rex v. Sutton, Rep. temp. S.P. Řex v. Phillips, Russ. & Ry. Hardw. 370, But see the remarks on 369.
this case, ante, p. 46. (j) Ridgelay's case, 1 East. P. C. (m) Ante, p. 59. cl scqu.
stamp, resemblance, or similitude of the coin current is a question for the jury: and it is clear, that the offence is not confined to an exact imitation of the original and proper effigies of the coin. (n)
The 8 and 9 W. 3. c. 26. s. 5. enacts, that “ if any puncheon, Seizing tools, “ die, stamp, edger, cutting engine, press, flask, or other tool, &c. to pro“ instrument, or engine, used or designed for coining or coun- duce in evi“ terfeiting gold or silver money, or any part of such tool or “ engine, shall be hid or concealed in any place, or found in the “ house, custody, or possession of any person, not then employed “in the coining of money in some of his Majesty's mints, nor “having the same by some lawful authority, then any person “discovering the same may seize and carry them forthwith to “some justice of peace of the county or place, to be produced in “ evidence at the trial of the offender;" and further provides, that they shall afterwards be defaced and destroyed by order of the Court.
(n) i East. P. C. c. 4. s. 18. p. 171,
CHAPTER THE FOURTH.
OF RECEIVING, UTTERING, OR TENDERING COUNTERFEIT COIN.
In some cases treason,
In some cases the putting off counterfeit money may amount to treason : as if A. counterfeit the gold or silver coin current, and by agreement before that counterfeiting B. is to take off and vent the counterfeit money, B. is an aider and abettor to such counterfeiting, and consequently a principal traitor within the law. (a) And in the case of the copper coin, B. acting a similar part will be an accessory before the fact to the felony, within the statute 11 Geo. 3. c. 40. (b) And if B., knowing that A. hath counterfeited money, put off this false money for him after the fact, without any such agreement precedent to the counterfeiting, he seems to be as a receiver of A. because he maintains him. And if B. know that A. counterfeited the money, and conceal his knowledge, though he neither receive, maintain, nor abet A., he will be guilty of mis
prision of treason. (c) Cheat and If A. counterfeit money, and B. knowing the money to be misdemeanor. counterfeit vent the same for his own benefit, B. is neither guilty
of treason, nor misprision of treason. But he may be proceeded against under the provisions of the 15 Geo. 2. c. 28. which will be presently noticed, before which statute he was only liable to be punished as for a cheat and misdemeanor. (d) And upon the principles which have been mentioned in a former part of this Work; (e) the unlawful procuring of counterfeit coin with intent to circulate it, though no act of uttering be proved, is a misdemeanor; and the possession of counterfeit coin unaccounted for was held to be evidence of an unlawful procurement with intent to circulate. (S) But the uttering and tendering in payment coun(a) i Hale 214.
tioned as a misdemeanor in the recital (6) 1 East. P. C. c. 4. s. 26. p. 178. to the 15 Geo. 2. c. 28. 8. 2. There (c) i Hale 214.
is also a precedent for a misdemea. (a) i East. P. C. c. 4. S. 26. p. 179. nor at common law, in uttering, and 1 Hale 214. See precedents of in- causing to be uttered, guineas filed dictments for a misdemeanor at com- and diminished as good guineas. Cro. mon law in uttering a counterfeit Circ. Comp. 317. (7th Ed.) and 2 Chit. half-guinea, Cro. Circ. Comp. 315. Crim. Law, 116, and also a precedent (7th Ed.) Starkie 466. 2 Chit. Crim. for a misdemeanor at common law in Law, 116. See also a precedent of an selling counterfeit Dutch guilders. indictment for a misdemeanor at com- Cro. Circ. Comp. 313.(7th Ed.) 2 Cbit. mon law, against a man for uttering a Crim. Law, 119, 120. counterfeit sixpence, and having ano- (e) Ante, Book I. Chap. iji. p. 46, ther found in his custody, Cro. Circ. 47. Comp. 315. (7th Ed.) 2 Chit. Crim. (f) Rex v. Fuller and Robinson, Law, 117. The uttering of false mo- ante, 47. The possession in this case ney, knowing it to be false, is men- was under particularly suspicious cir
terfeit copper money has been held not to be an indictable offence. (g)
But the receiving, uttering, or tendering in payment counterfeit Stalutes. money, have been made the subject of legislative provision by several statutes. I. By the 8 and 9 W. 3. c. 26. 11 Geo. 3. c. 40. and 15 Geo. 2. c. 28. relating to the coin of the realm; and, II. By the 37 Geo. 3. c. 126. relating to foreign coin.
Of receiving, paying, putting-off, &c. Counterfeit Coin of the
Realm. 1. The statute 8 and 9 W. 3. c. 26. s. 6. enacts, that “ if any 8 & 9 W. 3. "
person shall take, receive, pay, or put off, any counterfeit milled 6,26,8.6.
money, or any milled money whatsoever, unlawfully diminished tual by 7 Ann. " and not cut in pieces, at or for a lower rate or value than the c. 25. 8. 3.) as
same by its denomination doth or shall import, or was coined or paying, or put“counterfeited for, he shall be guilty of felony." The seventh ting off, &c. section saves the corruption of blood; and by section 9. no prosecution is to be made for any offence against this act, unless it be commenced within three months after the offence committed. (h) The act was at first only temporary, but was made perpetual by 7 Ann. c. 25. s. 3.
Under this statute there must be an actual passing or getting What shall be rid of the money, and not merely an attempt to do so. In a case considered as at the Old Bailey, in the year 1784, a question was raised upon counterfeit this point. It appeared in evidence that the prisoner had carried money within a large quantity of counterfeit shillings to the house of a Mrs. 8 & 9 W.3. Levey, which she agreed to receive from him, and which he agreed to put off to her at the rate of twenty-nine shillings for every guinea. In pursuance of this bargain, the prisoner laid a heap of counterfeit shillings on a table, and Mrs. Levey proceeded to count them out at the rate beforementioned : and had counted out three cumstances; the coin being wrap- “counterfeit halfpence, knowing ped up in parcels with soft paper to
“ them to be counterfeit.” Upon prevent it from rubbing. The mar- reference to the Judges, this was held gina! note to Parker's case, 1 Leach not to be an indictable offence. 41. states, that “ having the posses- (h) But the proceedings before a “sion of counterfeit money, with in- magistrate, and not the preferring "tention to pay it away as and for the indictment, will be considered “ good money, is an indictable offence as the commencement of the pro" at common law.” But qu. if the secution, as in Willace's case, ante, 56, point stated in the marginal note was note (I). S. P. ruled by Le Blanc, J. actually decided in Parker's case ; Stafford Sum. Ass. 1812. in Barker's and sce anle, 47.
case, who was indicted under this () Cirwan's case, Oxford Sum. As- statute, for putting off counterfeit siz. 1794, Ms. Jud. I East. P. C. c. 4. milled money. The prisoner had been $. 28. p. 182. The defendant was in- in gaol upwards of three months bedicted for "
unlawfully uttering and fore the assizes. tendering in payment to J. . ten
parcels, containing eighty-seven counterfeit shillings, for which she was to pay the prisoner three guineas; but before she had paid him, and while the counterfeit money lay there exposed upon the table, the officers of justice entered the room and apprehended them. Mrs. Levey was admitted as a witness for the crown ; and swore that she had bought the three parcels of shillings, and was going to pay the prisoner three guineas for them at the moment they were detected. This was ruled not to be a completion of the
offence charged, and the prisoner was acquitted. (i) The meaning A case has also been decided upon the meaning of " milled of milled mo
money” in this statute. The prisoner was indicted for putting off this statute. to one J.P. nine pieces of false and counterfeit milled money and
coin, each counterfeited to the likeness of a piece of legal and current milled money and silver coin of the realm, called a shilling, at a lower rate and value than the same did by the denomination import, and were counterfeited for; i.e. at so much, &c. The fact of knowingly putting off the shillings at a lower value than according to their denomination was fully proved; but there was no appearance of milling on them: and it was proved by officers from the Mint, that this money never had been milled, nor any attempt made to counterfeit on them the milling which is always put on the shillings coined at the Tower. Upon this the prisoner's counsel contended, that the evidence did not prove the offence as described in the statute, or charged in the indictment, but directly the contrary, as it proved that the money illegally put off was not milled. The case was reserved for the opinion of the Judges; who thought that the expression “milled money” could not have any reference whatever to the edging which is put on real and lawful coin, and which is properly termed graining. That the money-coin at the Mint in the Tower is milled money before it is edged, that is, before those marks, which had been falsely imagined to constitute milled money, are put upon it; for that all current money is passed through a mill or press to make the plate out of which it is cut of a proper thickness; and that from this process it receives its denomination of milled money, and not, as generally but erroneously imagined, from the grainings on its edges. The Judges, therefore, thought it unnecessary that the counterfeit money should appear to have been milled : for considering milled money as one word, (as if written with a hyphen,) and descriptive of the money now current, if the counterfeit resemble the money
which, if genuine, would have been milled, it is enough. (k) The money
It is necessary, in order to bring a case within this statute, that must be vented the money be vented at a lower value than the coin imports, and at a lower va- that it should be so stated in the indictment. (1) And if the lue, &c. Names of per
names of the persons to whom the money was put off can be put off to be (1) Wooldridge's case, 1 Leach. 307. the like resolution. It seems that stated. 1 East. P. C. c. 4. s. 27. p. 179.
was so called to dis(k) Bunning's case, Old Bailey, 1794. tinguish it from hammered inoney, 2 Leach 624, 1 East. P. C. c. 4. s. 27. which was prohibited by 9 W. 3. c. 2. p. 180. The case of Hannah Dor- Mr. East says (p. 180. note (a)) that rington, and the case of Jacobs and he had been informed that there had Lazarus, were considered by the been no hammered money since the Judges at the same time, and being time of Car. 2. precisely similar, were disposed of by (?) 1 East. P.C. c. 4. s. 27. p. 180.
sons to whom