Page images
PDF
EPUB

in the statute was a generic term, including ram, ewe, and wether, and that the two former words might be rejected; except Parke, B., Vaughan, J., and Coleridge, J., who were of a contrary opinion.(a)

*A count for killing a sheep with intent to steal the carcase can only be [*366 tried in the county where the sheep was killed. A count, found in Essex, charged the prisoner with killing the sheep with intent to steal the carcase; the sheep was last seen alive in a field in the county of Hertford, and there were marks of blood in that field, as if the sheep had been killed there, but part of the carcase was found in the prisoner's possession in Essex; and Wilde, C. J., held that the count could not be supported.(b)

Upon an indictment which charged the prisoner with stealing one mare, one saddle, and one bridle, without any allegation that the offence was against the form of the statute, the prisoner was convicted, and sentenced to be transported beyond the seas for fifteen years; and upon error it was objected that no part of the charge warranted the sentence, which was entirely statutable; but the Court of Queen's Bench held, that as the stealing the mare, as well as stealing the saddle and bridle, was a felony at common law, and not created or altered in its nature by the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 25, the 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 62, s. 1, and the 1 Vict. c. 90, s. 1, the offence was correctly described in the indictment, and the sentence of fifteen years' transportation right. (c)

As the 26 Geo. 3, c. 71, was passed in order to remedy the facilities afforded to the stealing of cattle by persons of low condition, who kept houses or places for the purpose of slaughtering horses and other cattle, its provisions may be shortly mentioned in this place. It contains many enactments for the regulation of slaughterhouses; requires persons keeping them to take out a license, and to give notice, previous to the slaughtering and flaying of any cattle, to an inspector appointed as mentioned in the Act, and to kill and flay the cattle only within certain hours. The eighth section enacts, that if any person keeping or using any slaughteringhouse or place mentioned in the Act, shall slaughter any cattle for any other purpose than for butcher's meat, or shall flay any cattle brought dead to such slaughter

(a) Reg. v M'Culley, 2 Moo. C. C. R. 34; 2 Lew. 272. With the greatest possible respect for the learned judges who decided this case, it is submitted that it may admit of some doubt whether this decision be not at variance with several well-established rules in the construction of statutes. First, it is a general rule that effect is to be given to every word in a statute if that can be done by any reasonable construction. Now here the words "ram" and "ewe" are rejected, although by construing the word sheep as wether," every word has a fitting and full effect. Secondly, the words of a statute are to be construed in their grammatical and natural sense: Rex v. Ditcheat, 9 B. & C. 176 (17 E. C. L. R.); Rex v. Great Bentley, 10 B. & C. 520 (21 E. C. L. R.); Williams v. Roberts, 5 Tyrw. 421; and it may be asked how a construction, which renders two out of four words entirely inoperative, can be construing the clause in its grammatical and natural sense. Thirdly, an expression which has precedence in the order of the words must be taken to have been used with reference to things and persons of a higher order or rank: Dwarr. on Stat. 704, citing the Warden of St. Paul's v. The Dean, 4 Price 65. According to this rule, the word ram is of a higher order than sheep; and this is strengthened by the fact that the two clauses immediately preceding, viz., horse, mare," &c., "bull, cow," &c., clearly place the animal of the higher order first. It may be observed, also, that in this section in every other instance the terms used are the names of the species and not of the genus; and particularly that in each of the two preceding classes the order is first, masculine; second, feminine; third, emasculated, and fourth, young animals; and the same order is evidently followed in the last class in the first, second, and last instance; which affords a very strong argument that it was intended to be followed in the third also. The only ground on which the decision seems to rest, is that the term "sheep" was one of known signification, as including ram, ewe, and wether, and that it must therefore be taken to have been used in that sense in the statute; the answer is that the rule is that where a word has a known signification, and such word is used generally in a statute, it shall be taken to be used in such sense: Smith v. Harman, 6 Mod. 142. Here the word is used not generally, but in connection with other words, which show that it was not intended to be used generally. C. S. G.

(b) Reg. e. Newland, 2 Cox C. C. 283. See this case, ante, p. 330, as to the trial in Essex for stealing the sheep.

(e) Williams v. The Queen, 7 Q. B. 250 (53 E. C. L. R.), A.D. 1845. In Reg. v. Newland, 2 Cox 283, A.D. 1847, Wilde, C. J., expressed a contrary opinion, but no authority was cited.

ing-house or other place without a license, or without giving notice, or shall slaughter or flay at any time except within the hours limited by the Act, or shall not delay slaughtering or killing according to the direction of the inspector properly authorized, such person so offending in either of these cases and being convicted shall be adjudged and taken to be guilty of felony, and shall be punished by fine and *imprisonment, and such corporal punishment by public or private whipping, *367] or shall be transported for any term not exceeding seven years, (c) as the Court before whom the offender shall be tried and convicted, shall direct.(d) The ninth section enacts, that persons keeping or using such slaughtering-house or place, and throwing into lime, and rubbing therewith or with any other corrosive matter, or destroying, or burying hides of cattle slaughtered or flayed by them, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by fine, imprisonment, and whipping. The statute also creates other offences of a smaller degree, and imposes penalties recoverable by summary proceedings before justices of the peace. The fourteenth section provides that the Act shall not extend to any currier, felt-maker, tanner, or dealer in hides, who shall kill any distempered or aged cattle, or purchase any dead cattle for the bona fide purpose of selling, using or curing the hides thereof, in the course of their respective trades; nor to any farrier employed to kill aged and distempered cattle; nor to any person who shall kill any of their own or other cattle, or purchasing any dead horse or other cattle, to feed their own hounds or dogs, or giving away the flesh for the like purpose. But it is further enacted, that if any collarmaker, currier, &c., or other person shall, under color of their trades, knowingly or willingly kill any sound or useful horse, gelding, mare, foal or filly, or boil or otherwise cure the flesh thereof for the purpose of selling it, such person shall be deemed an offender within the meaning of the Act, and for every offence, forfeit any sum not exceeding twenty, nor less than ten pounds. (e)

Upon the trial of any felony mentioned in this chapter the jury may, under the 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 9(ƒ), convict the prisoner of an attempt to commit the same, and thereupon he may be punished in the same manner as if he had been convicted upon an indictment for such attempt.

*368]

*CHAPTER THE THIRTEENTH.

OF STEALING DOGS, BIRDS, ETC.

By the 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 18, "whosoever shall steal any dog shall, on con viction thereof before two justices of the peace, either be committed to the common gaol or house of correction, there to be imprisoned, or to be imprisoned and kept to hard labor, for any term not exceeding six months, or shall forfeit and pay, over and above the value of the said dog, such sum of money, not exceeding twenty pounds, as to the said justices shall seem meet; and whosoever, having been convicted of any such offence, either against this or any former Act of Parliament, shall afterwards steal any dog, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding eighteen months, with or without hard labor."(a)

(c) Penal servitude for any term not exceeding seven and not less than three years, by the 20 & 21 Vict. c. 3, ante, vol. 1, p. 4.

(d) See a precedent of an indictment against the keeper of a slaughter-house, for slaughtering a horse without giving the proper notice: 3 Chit. Crim. L. 721.

(e) 26 Geo. 3, c. 71, s. 15. The 7 & 8 Vict. c. 87, which recites the preceding Act, con tains many additional provisions for regulating places kept for slaughtering horses; and the 12 & 13 Vict. c. 92, repeals the 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 59, which related to the same subject, and contains many regulations on the same subjects; but none of them falls within the scope of this work.

(f) Ante, vol. 1, p. 1.

(a) This clause is taken from the 8 & 9 Vict. c. 47, s. 2. There was a similar provision in the 14 & 15 Vict. c. 92, s. 5 (I.). As to hard labor, &c., see ante, p. 67; as to aiders and abettors, see ante, p. 67.

Sec. 19. "Whosoever shall unlawfully have in his possession or on his premises any stolen dog, or the skin of any stolen dog, knowing such dog to have been stolen or such skin to be the skin of a stolen dog, shall, on conviction thereof before two justices of the peace, be liable to pay such sum of money, not exceeding twenty pounds, as to such justices shall seem meet; and whosoever, having been convicted of any such offence, either against this or any former Act of Parliament, shall afterwards be guilty of any such offence as in this section before mentioned, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding eighteen months, with or without hard labor."(b)

Sec. 20. "Whosoever shall corruptly take any money or reward, directly or indirectly, under pretence or upon account of aiding any person to recover any dog which shall have been stolen, or which shall be in the possession of any person not being the owner thereof, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding eighteen months, with or without hard labor."(c)

Sec. 21. "Whosoever shall steal any bird, beast, or other animal ordinarily kept in a state of confinement or for any domestic purpose, not being the subject of larceny at common law, or shall *wilfully kill any such bird, beast, or animal, [*369 with intent to steal the same or any part thereof, shall, on conviction thereof before a justice of the peace, at the discretion of the justice, either be committed to the common gaol or house of correction, there to be imprisoned only, or to be imprisoned and kept to hard labor for any term not exceeding six months, or else shall forfeit and pay, over and above the value of the bird, beast, or other animal, such sum of money, not exceeding twenty pounds, as to the justice shall seem meet; and whosoever, having been convicted of any such offence, either against this or any former Act of Parliament, shall afterwards commit any offence in this section before mentioned, and shall be convicted thereof in like manner, shall be committed to the common gaol or house of correction, there to be kept to hard labor for such term not exceeding twelve months as the convicting justice shall think fit."(d) Sec. 22. "If any such bird, or any of the plumage thereof, or any dog, or any such beast, or the skin thereof, or any such animal, or any part thereof, shall be found in the possession or on the premises of any person, any justice may restore the same respectively to the owner thereof; and any person in whose possession or on whose premises such bird or the plumage thereof, or such beast or the skin thereof, or such animal or any part thereof, shall be so found (such person knowing that the bird, beast, or animal has been stolen, or that the plumage is the plumage of a stolen bird, or that the skin is the skin of a stolen beast, or that the part is a part of a stolen animal), shall, on conviction before a justice of the peace, be liable for the first offence to such forfeiture, and for every subsequent offence to such punishment, as any person convicted of stealing any beast or bird is made liable to by the last preceding section." (e)

Sec. 23. "Whosoever shall unlawfully and wilfully kill, wound, or take any house dove or pigeon under such circumstances as shall not amount to larceny at common law, shall, on conviction before a justice of the peace, forfeit and pay, over and above the value of the bird, any sum not exceeding two pounds."(f)

(b) This clause is taken from the 8 & 9 Vict. c. 47, s. 3. There was a similar provision in the 14 & 15 Vict. c. 92, s. 5 (I.). As to hard labor, &c., see ante, p. 67; as to aiders and abettors, see ante, p. 67.

(e) This clause is taken from the 8 & 9 Vict. c. 47, s. 6, and extended to Ireland. As to hard labor, &c., sec ante, p. 7; as to aiders and abettors, see ante, p. 67.

(d) This clause is taken from the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 31. There was a similar clause in the 14 & 15 Viet c. 92, s. 5 (I.). Those enactments were confined to birds and beasts ordinarily kept in a state of confinement; the present clause embraces "other animals ordinarily kept for any domestic purpose," and will include cats. This clause also extends the former enactments to killing with intent to steal.

(e) This clause is taken from the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 32, and 8 & 9 Vict. c. 47, s. 3. There was a similar clause in the 14 & 15 Vict. c. 92, s. 5 (I.).

(f) This clause is taken from the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 33, and extended to Ireland. See Taylor v. Newman, 9 Cox C. C. 314, that this clause does not apply to killing pigeons under a claim of right; s. c., 4 B. & S. 89 (116 E. C. L. R.).

VOL. II.-19

Upon the trial of any misdemeanor mentioned in this chapter the jury may, under the 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 9,(g) convict the prisoner of an attempt to commit the same, and thereupon he may be punished in the same manner as if he had been convicted upon an indictment for such attempt.

*370]

*CHAPTER THE FOURTEENTH.

OF STEALING AND DESTROYING DEER.

THE former statutes upon this subject are repealed, but by the 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 12, "whosoever shall unlawfully and wilfully course, hunt, snare, or carry away, or kill or wound, or attempt to kill or wound, any deer kept or being in the uninclosed part of any forest, chase, or purlieu, shall for every such offence, on conviction thereof before a justice of the peace, forfeit and pay such sum, not exceeding fifty pounds, as to the justice shall seem meet;(a) and whosoever Having been previously convicted of any offence relating to deer, for which a pecuniary penalty shall have been imposed by this or by any former Act of Parliament, shall afterwards commit any of the offences herein-before enumerated, whether such second offence be of the same description as the first or not, shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, with or without hard labor, and with or without solitary confinement, and, if a male under the of sixteen years, with or without whipping."(b)

age

The word "deer," in the 7 & 8 Geo. 4. c. 29, s. 26, was held to be a general term, including all kinds, both sexes, and all ages. Upon an indictment for stealing "one deer," it appeared that the animal in question was a fawn, recently fawned, and that the young of deer are known by the name of fawn till a year old, and are not called deer before that time; but Maule, J., held that the stealing this animal was within the statute, as the term deer was the most general term, and included all kinds of deer, all ages, and both sexes.(c)

Where a prisoner was indicted under the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 26, for a second offence, and the previous conviction was made by two justices, it was held good. And where such a conviction, after stating the venue in the margin in the usual way, set forth that on a certain day at a certain place in the county of Oxford, the prisoner was convicted for that he did on a certain day unlawfully use an engine for the purpose of killing deer in the forest of Wychwood, but omitted to state where or in what county the offence was committed, but proceeded to direct the penalty to *371] be paid to the overseers of D. in the said county, "where the said *offence was committed," it was held that this sufficiently showed the offence to have been committed in the county of Oxford.(d)

Upon an indictment for a second offence against the 42 Geo. 3, c. 107, by killing deer, objections might be taken to the validity of the previous conviction. An indictment on that statute stated that the prisoner was convicted by a justice for the county of Essex for unlawfully carrying away a deer, and that afterwards he feloniously and unlawfully did offend a second time by feloniously aiding in killing a deer. The conviction was made by a magistrate of Essex at a place in Middlesex,

(g) Ante, vol. 1, p. 1.

(a) See Reg. v. King, 1 D. & L. 721, as to the form of a commitment in these cases. (b) This clause is taken from the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 26, and though it is extended to Ireland, it will probably have no operation there, as it may be doubted whether there be in Ireland any place which is in point of law a "forest, chase, or purlieu." As to hard labor, &c., see ante, p. 67.

(c) Reg. v. Strange, Gloucester Sum. Ass. 1843, MSS., C. S. G.; 1 Cox C. C. 58. (d) Rex v. Weale, 5 C. & P. 135 (24 E. C. L. R.), Parke, J. A. J. The second point decided in this case is directly contrary to the decision in Rex v. Johnson, 1 Str. 261, and seems to have been wrongly decided. C. S. G.

and was a conviction of the prisoner and three other persons. The offence was committed in Essex. It was objected, 1st, that the indictment did not state that the prisoner was duly convicted; 2dly, that he was not duly convicted, as the conviction was in Middlesex; 3dly, that the conviction was of four, whereas it was stated in the indictment as of the prisoner only. And, on a case reserved, the judges held that the prisoner ought not to have been convicted of the felony.(e)

By the 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 13, "whosoever shall unlawfully and wilfully course, hunt, snare, or carry away, or kill or wound, or attempt to kill or wound, any deer kept or being in the inclosed part of any forest, chase, or purlieu, or in any inclosed land where deer shall be usually kept, shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, with or without hard labor, and with or without solitary confinement, and, if a male under the age of sixteen years, with or without whipping."(f)

An inclosure in the Forest of Dean, made under a statute of Chas. 2, for the protection of timber, and surrounded by a ditch and bank, which were sufficient to prevent cattle from getting into it, but over which the deer could pass in or out at their free will, was held by Erle, J., to be an inclosed part of a forest within the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 26; and the words "wherein deer shall be usually kept," were held to refer to "inclosed land" only.(g)

By sec. 14 of the new Act, "if any deer, or the head, skin, or other part thereof, or any snare or engine for the taking of deer, shall be found in the possession of any person or on the premises of any person with his knowledge, and such person, being taken, or summoned before a justice of the peace, shall not satisfy the justice that he came lawfully by such deer, or the head, skin, or other part thereof, or had a lawful occasion for such snare or engine, and did not keep the same for any unlawful purpose, he shall, on conviction by the justice, forfeit and pay any sum not exceeding twenty pounds; and if any such person shall not under the said provisions be liable to conviction, then, for the discovery of the party who actually killed or stole such deer, the justice, at *his discretion, as the evidence given [*372 and the circumstances of the case shall require, may summon before him every person through whose hands such deer, or the head, skin, or other part thereof, shall appear to have passed; and if the person from whom the same shall have been first received, or who shall have had possession thereof, shall not satisfy the justice that he came lawfully by the same, he shall, on conviction by the justice, be liable to the payment of such sum of money as is herein-before last mentioned."(h)

Sec. 15. "Whosoever shall unlawfully and wilfully set or use any snare or engine whatsoever, for the purpose of taking or killing deer, in any part of any forest, chase, or purlieu, whether such part be inclosed or not, or in any fence or bank dividing the same from any land adjoining, or in any inclosed land where deer shall be usually kept, or shall unlawfully and wilfully destroy any part of the fence of any land where any deer shall be then kept, shall, on conviction thereof before a justice of the peace, forfeit and pay such sum of money, not exceeding twenty pounds, as to the justice shall seem meet."(i)

Sec. 16. "If any person shall enter into any forest, chase, or purlieu, whether

(e) Rex v. Allen, Russ. & Ry. 513. The reporters add, the second objection was probably considered fatal. As to the third objection, see Reg. v. Page, vol. 1, p. 132.

(f) This clause is taken from the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 26. There was a similar clause in the 14 & 15 Vict. c. 92, s. 5 (I.), as to coursing, &c., deer in any park, paddock, or inclosed land, wherein deer shall be usually kept. As to hard labor, &c., see ante, p. 67. (g) Reg. v. Money, Gloucester Sum Ass. 1847., MSS., C. S. G.

(h) This clause is taken from the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 27. There was a similar clause in the 14 & 15 Vict. c. 92, s. 4 (I.). Under the former Act, the deer, &c., must have been found" by virtue of a search warrant;" but these words have been advisedly omitted, in order that the clause may apply to any one who may be proved to have been in possession of the deer, &c., at any time. As to what is a sufficient possession, see Reg. v. Sunley, Bell's C. C. 145; where it was held, that it was sufficient if possession of naval stores could be traced to the prisoner; and rightly so, notwithstanding the doubt of Martin B., in Reg. v. Sleep, L. & C. 44.

(i) This clause is taken from the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 28, and extended to Ireland.

« EelmineJätka »