(a) The general groundwork of Justices' proceedings is by summons or warrant. There are but few cases where a complaint in writing is required before issuing summons. Where there is not some such preliminary proceedings as a summons, the Justice should be cautious and see that the Act of Parliament authorizes what he does before he proceeds to a conviction.-See notes on Jurisdiction, first page of Index, and on sec. 20, Petty Sessions Act, Appendix. Where a special time or mode of service is in any case required, it will be stated under the particular head in the Index. As to defects in summons, under sec. 39 above, unless where such is calculated to mislead, such objections are not to be allowed. The power given to the Chairman of Quarter Sessions under Civil Bill Act, 27 & 28 Vic. c. 99, s. 48, is somewhat different; it is to amend all errors and defects in the process or proceedings, so as that the real question between the parties shall be determined; the Justices do not get a similar power under this section to alter or amend the original proceeding, but they may disallow the objection, and their order and subsequent proceedings may be drawn up according to the facts proved. It is held that, if defendant appears, any irregularity in the summons, or even the want of it becomes immaterial.-R. v. Johnson, 1 Str. 261; R. v. Barrett, 1 Saik. 383; R. v. Stone, 1 East., 649. But see now 40 & 41 Vic. c. 56, s. 74, where Justices can amend summons, &c. &c. See notes on sec. 24, Petty Sessions Act, Appendix. In describing offences several terms or allegations may be used, although the proof of any one may be sufficient.

"Cumulative allegations, or such as merely operate in aggravation, are immaterial, provided that sufficient is proved to establish some offence included in the charge on the record." This rule, as applicable to criminal proceedings, is defined by Lord Ellenborough in the case of R. v. Hunt, 2 Camp., 583; Taylor on Evidence. The conjunctive had better be used, although the words of the statute be in the disjunctive; thus where, under the 17 & 18 Vic. c. 89, sec. 3, any person not duly licensed who shall sell, or keep for sale, or expose for sale, any beer, or spirits, &c.the best way to state the offence in the summons will be that the defendant did sell and keep for sale, and expose for sale, &c. For where the nature of the offence is such that it may in part be committed by two or more several methods or means, it is as positive to say it was committed by each of these particular methods as to alledge it to be committed by any one of them. This mode of stating the offence has been objected to as duplicate pleading, that is, charging more than one offence for one penalty, upon the authority of Newman v. Bendyshe, 10 B. & Ad., 11; but this objection has been overruled in Lockwood v. Attorney General in error, T.T., 1842, M.S.; and it is a rule that nothing which may be rejected as surplusage shall vitiate.-Wilson v. Law, 1 Ld. Ray., 20. The same summons may contain

In Constabulary prosecutions, summons to be served by one of the Constabulary.

Summons to be served by delivering a copy; and where defendant cannot be conveniently met with, copy to be left at his last or most usual place of abode, or at office, warehouse, counting-house, &c., or place of business, with some inmate, not being under 16 years of age, a reasonable time before hearing. This to be sufficient service, unless where personal service specially required by this Act. Not to affect provisions of any Act authorizing substitution of service.

14 & 15 Vic.

c. 93, s. 12.

several distinct offences.-Where there are separate charges or counts in one summons, and the Justices convict as to one charge, but come to no decision on the othermarked as to it "no rule," this does not invalidate the conviction, Exch. Div. (Ir.), Aug., 1889, on motion for Writ of Habeas Corpus in the case of Mr. Conybeare, M.P. The arguments and the decisions in this case go to show that, had the Justices found the second charge proved, they might have convicted of that also. The Lord Chief Baron dissenting. Where the defendant confesses the truth of the charge or complaint in the summons, the Justices may convict, &c. (14 & 15 Vic. c. 93, s. 20); but even where there is a full confession-as the summons is not supposed always to disclose sufficient to enable the Justices to fully estimate and judge of the offence-it is satisfactory, in the administration of these summary powers, if the Justices were to inform their own consciences by investigating the merits before they pronounce judgment; and to this agree the best authorities.

(a) Sunday. This clause extends only to work done in the ordinary calling of the offender, and includes only persons who have an ordinary calling; but it seems every species of labour, public or private, in their ordinary calling, is within the prohibition. Drury v. Defontaine, 1 Taunt, 131; Fennell v. Ridler, 5 B. & C., 408; 8 D. & R., 206. And the words other person, means other person of the kind or class stated, and have been held not to include the driver of a stage-coach.—Sandiman v. Breach, 9 D. & R., 796; 7 B. & C., 96.

The section (7 Wm. iii. c. 17) with pompous piety begins-"All and every person and persons whatsoever shall, on every Lord's day, apply themselves to the observation of the same by exercising themselves thereon in the duties of piety and true religion, publicly and privately; and no tradesman, artificer, workman, labourer, or other person whatsoever, shall do or exercise any worldly labour, business, or work of their ordinary callings, upon the Lord's day or any part thereof, works of necessity and charity only excepted; and every person being of the age of 14 years and upwards offending shall, for every such offence, forfeit, &c."

Dressing meat in families and in cookshops, and crying of milk or fish before 10 A. M., and after 4 P. M., excepted. Prosecutions shall commence within 10 days. Some portions of the Act could not now be enforced, they have fallen into desuetude.

In indictable offences the Justice may issue his warrant on a Sunday.-14 & 15 Vic. c. 93, s. 11. But warrants to enforce a penalty should not be executed on a Sunday. Hurling, &c.-This section says, that its object is to prevent disorderly meetings, under pretence of hurling and other sports. It is not now enforced.

SURETIES OF THE PEACE AND
GOOD BEHAVIOUR.

Of the Peace. (a)—Wherever a per-
son has just cause to fear that
another will do him a corporal hurt,
as by killing or beating him, or will
procure others to do so, or to burn
his house, or threatening to hurt
his wife or child; upon satisfying
the Justice, by one or more infor-
mations on oath, that he is actually
under such fear, and that he has
just cause to be so, and that he
does not require such sureties out
of malice or vexation-

(a) Surety of the Peace-so called because the party that was in fear is thereby secured is a recognizance entered into to the King for the keeping of the peace.Bac. Abr.

In Flower v. Dillon, Q. B. (Ir.), Dec. 1886, the Court refused to receive oral evidence to contradict the affidavits of witnesses for the prosecution, or in any way than by writing on affidavit. The ruling in this case, and the exhaustive judgment of Mr. Justice O'Brien, pointing out the law and the practice of the Superior Courts from the earliest date, is a valuable synopsis for reference.

The English Amended Petty Sessions Act of 1879 (42 & 43 Vic. c. 49, s. 25) expressly gives Justices in Petty Sessions power to examine witnesses for the defence, including the defendant, and subjects the parties to costs as in other comThis Act is not applicable to Ireland.

ty of the peace every Justice may take and command by a twofold st, as a minister commanded thereto by a higher authority, as when

a writ directed out of the Chancery or Queen's Bench is delivered to him; secondly, as a Judge, and by virtue of his office, derived from his commission.

The clause of the commission of the peace referred to runs thus:-"And to cause to come before you, or any of you, all these persons who shall threaten any of our people in their person, or with burning their houses, to find sufficient security for the peace, or for their good behaviour towards us and our people; and if they shall refuse to find such security, then to cause them to be safely kept in our prison until they shall have found security." (But a definite reasonable time should be stated.)-Q. B. (Ir.), Hil. Term, 1883, Attorney-General v. Davitt, Healy, and Quinn, decided that the Court of Queen's Bench possessed an original and inherent jurisdiction to issue process to bind to the peace and good behaviour, independent of the statute 34 Edw. iii.

The best authorities say that there should be a certain stated time for which the security is required, and in default of finding the sureties, to be committed for that period.-Prickett v. Greatrix, 8 Q. B. Reports, 1021. It is also laid down that the party ought not to be allowed by witnesses to contradict the fact stated in the affidavits on which the application is grounded, that these can only be negatived through the medium of an appropriate prosecution.-R. v. Stanhope, 12 A. & E. 620; Ex parte Mallinson (15 Jur., 746, per Coleridge, J., Lord Vane's Case), 13 East., 121. But the constant practice before Magistrates is to allow the defendant to crossexamine the complainant, state his defence, and examine witnesses, dispute the facts and the inferences, and not unfrequently does so successfully. Indeed if it can be considered a summary order, and seeing that it is a judicial proceeding, the rule in the Petty Sessions Act as to hearing the defence would seem to regulate this proceeding also. In an application under the statute 34 Edw. iii., c. 1, to bind a party over to be of good behaviour, several distinct instances of misconduct may be alleged and relied on.-R. v. Queen's County Justices, 10 Irish Law Reports, 294.

A warrant to commit in default of bail, issued by a Magistrate on a Sunday, held to be a "judicial act," and will be void.-Queen v. Ramsay and Justices County Cork, Q. B. (Ir.), Trin. Term, 1867. "Dies dominicus non est juridicus."

As the imprisonment is in the nature of restraint rather than punishment, it ought not to be accompanied with hard labour.

No one ought to be bound to be of good behaviour for any rash, quarrelsome, or unmannerly words, unless they directly tend to a breach of the peace, or to scandalize the government, by abusing those intrusted with the administration of justice, or to deter an officer from doing his duty; and that therefore it seems that he who