Page images
PDF
EPUB

A country bank note was stolen during its transit, through the post, from Swindon, a town in Wiltshire, to the City of Bristol, which lies between the counties of Somerset and Gloucester, and the same note was afterwards enclosed by the defendant in a letter posted by him in Somersetshire and addressed to the bankers at Swindon, requesting payment of it, which letter, with the bank note in it, arrived in due course at Swindon. The defendant was held triable in Wiltshire, the possession of the post office servants or of the bankers at Swindon, in Wiltshire, being held, for this purpose, the defendant's possession, (1)

A charge of sending a threatening letter may be prosecuted either in the Magisterial jurisdiction where the prosecutor received it, or in the place from which the offender sent it; because the offence, in such a case, is begun in the one and completed in the other. (2)

Where money obtained by a false pretence was transmitted in a letter posted, in accordance with the defendant's request. in County A., but which reached him in County B., it was held that this was an obtaining of the money in County A. (3)

If two persons steal a thing in one county, though one of them alone carry the property into another county, yet if both afterwards co-operate to secure the thing in the latter county, both may be indicted there; for the subsequent concurrence may be connected with the previous taking. (4)

Where two jointly committed a theft in one county, and one of them carried the stolen goods into another county, the other still accompanying him, without their ever being separated, they were held both indictable in either county; the possession of one being the possession of both, in each of the counties, as long as they continued in company. 5)

(1) R. v. Cryer, Dears & B. 324: 36 L. J. (M. C.) 192.

(2) R. v. Girdwood, 1 Leach, 142; R. v. Esser, 2 East. P. C. 1125; R. v. Burdett, 4 B. & Ald. 95.

(3) R. v. Jones, 1 Den. 551; 19 L. J. (M.C.) 162; R. v. Buttery, 4 B. & Ald. 179.

(4) R. v. County & Donovan, East. T. 1816, M. S. Bailey, J., 2 Russ. 175. (5) R. v. McDonagh, Carr. Supp., 2d. Ed., 23.

The taking into the other county or jurisdiction must be animo furandi. For instance, a constable apprehended a prisoner with two stolen horses at Croydon in Surrey. On being so arrested, the prisoner said he had been at Dorking to fetch the horses, and that they belonged to his brother, who lived at Bromley. The police constable offered to go with him to Bromley; and they took the horses and rode together as far as Beckenham Church, when the prisoner said he had left a parcel at the Black Horse, in some place in Kent. The constable, accordingly, went there with him each riding one of the horses. When they got there, the constable gave the horses to the ostler. The prisoner did not enquire for any parcel, but made his escape, and was, afterwards, again apprehended in Surrey, and indicted in Kent for stealing the two horses. Upon a case reserved, the judges were unanimously of opinion that there was no evidence to be left to the jury of stealing in Kent. (1)

Where a theft was committed in County A., and the receiving of the property took place in County B., it was held that both were triable in A., and that the stealing and receiving could both be alleged to have been in A. (2)

Where an offence has been committed within 500 yards of the boundary between two magisterial jurisdictions, it seems that Clause (b) of Article 553 will not enable the prosecutor to lay it in one jurisdiction and try it in another, but it merely gives him the option of both laying and trying the offence in either jurisdiction. (3)

With regard to Clause (c) of Article 553, it seems that, in order to maintain an indictment in a magisterial jurisdiction other than that in which an offence has been committed, in respect of property in or upon a vehicle or vessel employed in a journey, etc., it would be necessary to prove that the offence was committed in or upon the vehicle or vessel itself. For instance, a defendant was held to bail to appear at the Cumberland Assizes to answer a charge of stealing committed on a journey. He had acted as guard of a coach

(1) R. v. Simmonds, 1 Mood. C. C. 408.

(2) R. v. Hinley, 2 M. & Rob. 5 24.

(3) R. v. Mitchell, 2 G. & Dav. 274; 2 Q. B. 638.

from Penrith in the county of Cumberland to Kendal in Westmoreland, and was entrusted with a banker's parcel, containing bank notes and two sovereigns. On changing horses at some distance from Penrith, he carried the parcel to a privy, and while there took out of it the sovereigns; and Parke, B., held that, as the act of stealing was not "in or upon the coach," the case was not within the statute, and the felony having been committed in Westmoreland, the indictment ought to be preferred in that county. (1)

Clause (c) is not eonfined to the carriages of common carriers or to public conveyances, but extends to any vehicle employed in any journey. (2)

Clause (c) applies to an offence committed in a carriage of a train running through several jurisdictions. (3)

A prisoner was tried at Quebec and convicted there of manslaughter. He and the deceased had been serving on board a British ship and the latter had died, in the district of Kamouraska, where the ship was loading, from injuries inflicted by the prisoner on board the ship while on the high seas.

Held, that as the injuries were inflicted at sea, that is, within the Admiralty jurisdiction and the death happened in the district. of Kamouraska, he should have been tried in the latter district, and not in the district of Quebec. (4)

If any offence against the Fisheries Act be committed in upon or near any waters forming the boundary between different counties or districts, or fishery districts, such offence may be prosecuted before any justice of the peace in either of such counties or districts, or before the fishery officer for either of such districts. (5)

Every offence against the Animal Contagious Diseases Act is, for the purposes of proceedings under the Act, deemed to have been committed and every cause of complaint under the Act is deemed to have arisen either in the place where the same actually was

(1) Sharpe's Case, 2 Lew. 233.

(2) R. v. Sharpe, Dears. 415; 24 L. J. M. C. 40.

(3) R. v. French, 8 Cox C. C. 252.

(4) R. v. Moore, 8 Q. L. R. 9.

(5) R. S. C. c. 95, sec. 17, sub sec. 3.

committed or arose, or in any place in which the person charged or complained against happens to be. (1)

Under the Canadian Government Vessels Discipline Act, any justice of the peace for the county or district in which is situated the port where the vessel, on board of which an offence against the provisions of the Act has been committed, touches next after the time of its commission, is given jurisdiction over the offence. (2) And with regard to offences against sections 10 & 11 of the Act respecting the Safety of Ships, jurisdiction is given to any justice of the peace either in the place where the offence is committed, or, if committed while the steamer is under way, then, in the place where it next stops. (3)

In any complaint, information or conviction under the Dairy Products Act 1893, the matter complained of may be declared and shall be held to have arisen at the place where the cheese or butter complained of was manufactured, sold, offered, exposed, or had in possession for sale. (4).

In any complaint, information or conviction under the Act against frauds in supplying milk to cheese and butter manufacturers, the matter complained of may be declared and will be held to have arisen at the place where the milk complained of was to be manufactured, notwithstanding that the deterioration thereof was effected elsewhere. (5)

Summary Arrest. The first paragraph of Article 552 of the criminal code provides that any one found committing any of the offences therein enumerated may be arrested, WITHOUT WARRANT, by ANYONE; and the following is an alphabetical list of such offences :

Abduction, (Article 281).

Administering, taking, or procuring unlawful oaths, (Articles 120, 121).

(1) R. S. C. c. 69, sec. 45.
(2) R. S. C., c. 71, sec. 14.
(3) R. S. C., c. 77, sec. 20.
(4) 56 Vict. c. 37, sec. 7.
(5) 52 Vict. c. 43, sec. 8.

Arson, setting fires, etc. (Articles 482, 483, 484, 485).

Assaults on the Queen, (Article 71).

Attempt to damage by explosives, (Article 488).

Being at large while under sentence of imprisonment, (Article 159).

Breaking prison, (Article 161).

Bringing stolen property into Canada, (Article 355).

Breaking place of worship, (Articles 408, 409).

Burglary, housebreaking, shopbreaking, etc. (Articles 410, 411, 412, 413, 414).

Being found in a dwelling by night, (Article 415).

Being found armed with intent to break a dwellinghouse.(Article 416).

Being disguised or in possession of housebreaking instruments; (Article 417).

Clipping Current coin; Possessing clippings; (Articles 468, 470). Counterfeiting seals; Counterfeiting stamps, (Articles 425, 435). Counterfeiting gold and silver coin; Making coining instruments; and Uttering counterfeit current coin. (Articles 462, 466, 477).

Counterfeiting copper coin, (Article 472).

Counterfeiting foreign gold and silver coin. (Article 473).

Defiling children, (Article 269).

Demanding by threatening letters, (Article 403).

Demanding with intent to steal, (Article 404).

Endangering persons on railways, (Articles 250, 251).

Escapes, (Articles 163, 164).

Extortion by threats, (Article 405).

Falsifying Registers, (Article 436).

Forcibly compelling execution of documents, (Article 402).

Forgery; Uttering forged documents; Possessing forged bank

« EelmineJätka »