« EelmineJätka »
every such offender, being convicted thereof, shall suffer death Robbery.
7&8G.4, c. 29.
Assaults with steal the same, every such offender shall be guilty of felony,
intent to commit and, being convicted thereof, shall be liable, at the discretion
robbery, of the court, to be transported beyond the seas for life, or for and demands any term not less than seven years, or to be imprisoned accompanied
with menaces for any term not exceeding four years; and, if a male, to be
Sect. VII. And be it declared and enacted, That if any Obtaining person shall accuse or threaten to accuse any other person of money, &c. by any infamous crime, as hereinafter defined, with a view or in- threatening to tent to extort or gain from him, and shall by intimidating him accuse a party
of an infamous by such accusation or threat, extort or gain from him any crime. chattel, money or valuable security, every such offender shall be deemed guilty of robbery, and shall be indicted and pu. nished accordingly.
Indictment for Robbery.
to wit. Joath present, that A., late of the parish of -
Evidence. The assault upon B. by the prisoner, the putting him in fear, and the violent taking away of some part of the property
Robbery. mentioned in the indictment, must be proved. The patting in
fear need not be such as would alarm a man for the safety of 7 & 8G. 4,c. 29.
his life, although it be so laid in the indictment. Such violence as may create an ordinary degree of terror is sufficient to constitute the offence.
The violence also need not be of an outrageous nature; any act of force which disengages the property of the prosecutor from his person will satisfy the indictment, provided the taking be against the will of the prosecutor.
Note. It does not seem to be necessary to lay the robbery as having been committed in the highway, or in any house ; nevertheless, a variance upon such occasions will not be fatal. Thus, where the prisoner was indicted for robbing R. F. in the dwelling house of A. W., it did not appear who occupied the house, although the robbery was proved to have been committed in a house, and the variance was holden immaterial. Russ. & Ry.C.C. R. 9, note, Per v. Pye.
So where the indictment described a robbery as having been committed in a field near the King's highway, and the robbery was proved, but not near the highway, the allegation was holden to be immaterial. Russ. & Ry. C.C. R. 9, Rer v. Wardle.
Indictment for Stealing from the Person. Hertfordshire, 1 The jurors for our lord the King upon their
to wit. joath present, that A., late of the parish of in the county of labourer, on, &c. with force and arms, at the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, one silver watch of the value of five pounds, of the goods and chattels of one B., from the person of the said B., then and there feloniously did steal, take and carry away, against the form of the statute in that case made and provided, and against the peace of our said lord the King, his crown and dignity.
Evidence. It is customary upon this occasion to prove the taking of the property mentioned in the indictment, or some part of it, from the prosecutor's person by stealth, and so, of course, against his will, and that the prisoner was the guilty agent.
It has been held, that to constitute a stealing from the person, the property must be entirely severed from the person.
Indictment for an Assault with intent to rob the Prosecutor.
Robbery. Middlesex,] The jurors for our lord the King upon their
7 & 86.4,6,29. to wit. Joath present, that A., late of the parish of in the county of on, &c. with force and arms, at the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, in and upon one B. feloniously did make an assault, with a felonious intent then and there the monies of the said B. from the person and against the will of the said B. feloniously and violently to steal take and carry away, against the form of the statute in that case made and provided, and against the peace of our said lord the King, his crown and dignity.
Evidence. You must prove in this case that the prisoner assaulted the prosecutor, and then show circumstances to satisfy the jury that the intention of the prisoner was to commit the robbery, as alleged in the indictment.
See 2 Leach, C.C. 702, Rex v. Monteth.
Indictment for a felonious Demand of Money, with intent
to steal it. Middlesex,] The jurors for our lord the King upon their
to wit. Joath present, that A., late of the parish of — in the county of labourer, on, &c. with force and arms, at the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, certain monies, to wit, the sum of five pounds of lawful money, of and belonging to one B., feloniously and with menaces did then and there demand, with intent the same feloniously to steal, take and carry away, against the form of the statute, &c, and against the peace of our said lord the King, his crown and dignity.
Note. The statute has the words," with menaces or by force.” If the latter be the case, state it so in the indictment, and say, that the intent was feloniously and violently to steal, &c.
Evidence. You must show, in this case, that the prisoner demanded money from the prosecutor with threats, either of indecent accusations or otherwise, and the jury would presume from thence that his intent was to steal the money so demanded.
SACRILEGE. The 23 Hen. 8, c. 1 ; 1 Edw. 6, c. 12, s. 10, as to robbing churches and chapels, repealed by 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 27.
LARCENY Act. 7 & 8 G.4, c. 29.
7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29. Sacrilege, when Sect. X. And be it enacted, That if any person shall break capital.
and enter any church or chapel, and steal therein any chattel, or having stolen any chattel in any church or chapel, shall break out of the same, every such offender, being convicted thereof, shall suffer death as a felon.
Note. As the object of this severe enactment is to prevent the sanctity of the place from being violated, the taking of goods, although not used for divine service, is within the statute. Russ. & Ry. 386 ; Rex v. Rourke. See also Russ. & Ry. 412.
The stealing lead from churches, will, it seems, be punishable under the 44th section of the Larceny Act.
See 2 East, P. C. 592; Rex v. Palmer and Easy, 1 Leach, 318; Rex v. Hickman and Dyer.
Indictment for Sacrilege.
to wit. joath present, that A. late of the parish of
+ Sometimes you may add, “ in the custody of C. and D. then churchwardens of the same parish.”
Sacrilege. Here it must be proved, that the prisoner broke open the
7 & 8 G.4, c. 29. church, and that he committed the larceny charged in the indictment.
It must also appear that the church was situate in the parish mentioned in the indictment, and that the property stolen belonged to the parishioners.
Indictment for Larceny in a Church, and breaking out of it.
to wit. Joath present, that A., late of the parish of
Evidence. The felony and breaking out of the church must be proved against the prisoner, and the local situation of the building must be shown as described in the indictment.
SCOTLAND AND IRELAND..
Ireland. SENTENCE OF DEATH ACT. 4 Geo. 4, c. 48.
4 Geo. 4, c. 48. Sect. III. And be it further enacted, That nothing herein Act not to ex, contained shall extend to that part of the united kingdom called tend to Scotland. Scotland.