Page images
PDF
EPUB

INDEX

TO THE REPORTS OF CASES

CONNECTED WITH

THE DUTIES AND OFFICE OF MAGISTRATES:

TRINITY TERM 1857, TO MICHAELMAS TERM 1858.

ACCOUNTING OFFICER. See Highway.

ACTION-against Justices for malicious conviction.
See Justice of the Peace.

ALEHOUSE. See Beerhouse.

AMENDMENT-case stated by Justices]--Justices
having stated a case for the opinion of the
Court, under 20 & 21 Vict. c. 43. s. 2, this
Court will not, before the case comes on for
argument, entertain a motion to send it back to
be amended. Christie v. the Guardians of St.
Luke, Chelsea, 153

of convictions under 12 & 13 Vict. c. 45. s. 7.
See Game.

ANATOMY ACT. See Indictment.

APPEAL TO QUARTER SESSIONS when it lies:
order of Justices for payment of rate under Pub-
lic Health Act.]-Quere-Whether an appeal
lies against an order of Justices adjudging a
person rated and summoned under section 103.
of the Public Health Act, to pay the amount
with costs, and ordering the same, if not paid,
to be levied by distress. Ricardo v. Maidenhead
Local Board of Health, 73

when it lies: against decision of Special
Sessions as to utility of proposed Highway]-
There is an appeal under section 105. of 5 & 6
Will. 4. c. 50, to the Quarter Sessions from the
decision of Special Sessions, determining, under
the proviso in section 23, as to the utility of a
highway proposed to be dedicated to the public.
R. v. the Justices of Derbyshire, 189

against order of removal: at what sessions to
be tried or entered and respited]-On appeal
against an order of removal the appellants are
entitled to take the twenty-one days and the

fourteen days mentioned in the 11 & 12 Vict.
c. 31. s. 9; and if at the expiration of the last
of those days there is time to give effective
notice of trial at next sessions, such notice ought
to be given; but if there is not time to give such
notice, the appeal ought to be entered and re-
spited at those sessions. R. v. the Justices of
the West Riding of Yorkshire (Broomsgrove v.
Halifax), 269.

TO SUPERIOR COURT-on case stated by Justices,
practice where respondent does not appear:
service of notice of appeal]-On the hearing of
an appeal, under 20 & 21 Vict. c. 43. s. 2, the
respondent not appearing, the appellant, in
order to entitle him to the judgment of the
Court, must shew that the decision of the Jus-
tices was wrong. Where, the respondent not
being to be found, notice of appeal and copy of
the case were served on her attorney within
three days after the appellant received the case,
and they afterwards and before the hearing came
to her hand, it was held there had been a suffi-
cient compliance with the above section. Syred
v. Carruthers, 273

When it lies against Justices' order under
the Nuisances Removal Act. See Nuisance.

Allowance of Costs. See Costs.

Before Recorder interested in the matter of
appeal. See Interested Judge.

See Notice of Appeal.

APPRENTICE presumptive proof of indenture after
search]-After due but fruitless search for an
indenture, proof that a deceased person more
than sixty years ago served A. in the apparent
position of an apprentice, raises the presumption
that he was bound apprentice by indenture, and
is sufficient to sustain a settlement by apprentice-

ship. The King v. St. Marylebone approved.
The statement of a deceased person respecting
his indenture of apprenticeship is not admissible
to prove that the deed ever existed. R. v.
Fordingbridge (Inhabitants), 290

ARREST by policeman for an assault]-A man in
presence of a policeman raised a shovel as if to
strike his wife, saying he would have murdered
her were it not for the policeman. For twenty
minutes afterwards he continued to use vio-
lent language towards his wife, and then left
the house, professing an intention of going to his
father's house to sleep. The policeman arrested
him a few yards from his home as he was going
from home; and it was held, the policeman was
justified in so doing. R. v. Light, 1

AUDITOR-power of Poor Law Board to order
Guardians under Local Acts to appoint]-Section
3. of 19 & 20 Vict. c. 112. has not repealed the
proviso in the 197th section of the 18 & 19 Vict.
c. 120. (Metropolis Local Management Act),
which excepts from the operation of that act
accounts subject to the audit of an auditor
under the 4 & 5 Will. 4. c. 76. By a local act
a select vestry was appointed, and these vestry-
men elected annually forty of their own body to
be directors of the poor; the vestrymen had the
appointment and removal of all the parish
officers, amongst them visitors for inquiring into
the circumstances of the poor, granting casual
relief, &c. under the special directions of the
vestrymen and directors; the vestrymen had also
the making, assessing and levying of the poor-
rates. The funds when collected were vested in
the directors, and they had the distribution of
them, and, with the above exceptions, exercised
all the powers of overseers of the poor, and the
subordinate officers, including the visitors, were
under the direct controul of the directors in all
matters connected with the poor. It was held,
the directors were "guardians" within the
definition of section 109. of 4 & 5 Will. 4. c. 76,
and that an order of the Poor Law Board to
appoint an auditor under section 46. was pro-
perly addressed to them alone. R. v. Directors
of the Poor of St. Pancras (Stockton and others),

281

BASTARDY-time for application and summons]-
The application by the mother of a bastard child
for a summons against the alleged father, under
7 & 8 Vict. c. 101. s. 2, must be made within
the time mentioned in that section, but it is not
necessary that the summons should issue imme-
diately, if the Justice thinks it would be useless
in consequence of the mother not knowing the
residence of the father. Potts v. Cumbridge, 62

BEERHOUSE-hours of closing on Sundays]-The
18 & 19 Vict. c. 118, by which alehouses are re-
quired to be closed between the hours of three
and five on Sundays, operates as a repeal of so
much of the 9 Geo. 4. c. 66. (which imposes a
penalty on offences against the tenour of the
licence) as prohibits the opening of the house
during the usual hours of the afternoon divine

service in the church or chapel of the parish
or place in which the house is situate. It is,
therefore, no offence to keep such a house open
between half-past two and three, although that
may be during the usual time of afternoon ser.
vice in the parish. Whiteley v. Heaton, 217
BUILDING-Notice to Surveyor. See Metropolitan
Building Act.

CASE-stated by Justices. See Amendment.
CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRY OF A SHIP-conviction
of master for refusing to deliver up the certificate]
-By section 50. of the Merchant Shipping Act,
1854, any person who has possession of the cer
tificate of registry of a ship, is bound to deliver
it up, on request, to any person who shall be
entitled to the custody thereof for the time
being, under a penalty upon conviction before a
Justice of the Peace, unless it be proved that
there was reasonable ground for such refusal.
The respondent was ship's husband and managing
owner of, and was also the holder of the majority
of shares in the ship of which the appellant was
master and part owner. On the 29th of October,
while the ship was in harbour, and before she
had discharged, and while the appellant was
still master, the respondent demanded the certi-
ficate of registry, without giving any reason for
doing so, and without intimating his intention
of appointing another master. The appellant,
having refused to deliver it up, was summoned
before two Justices and convicted under section
50. This conviction was held to be improper,
as there was reasonable ground for refusing to
deliver up the certificate. Arkle v. Henzell, 110
CHEATING-Cheat at common law. See Forgery.
CHURCH RATE-effect of notice that validity of rate

disputed, on Justices' power to order payment]—
Upon the hearing of a summons against defen-
dant for non-payment of a church-rate, he gave
notice to the Justices that he disputed the
validity of the rate and his liability to pay it,
and stated his reasons for doing so. The Jus-
tices, were of opinion, though without any evi-
dence to justify that opinion, that the allegations
and notices of defendant were not made and
given in good faith, but were put forward as a
pretext for avoiding payment of the rate, and
therefore they made an order for payment. It
was held, they were wrong, as by the course
adopted by defendant, they were deprived of all
jurisdiction to make the order. R. v. Nunneley,
260

[blocks in formation]

it

aiding a handicraftsman in unlawfully absent-
ing himself from his service. Quare, whe-
ther it is any defence that the party charged
did not know that there was no lawful excuse
for the absenting; but, semble, that if it is 80,
is a matter arising on "not guilty," and on
which the Magistrate's adjudication is conclu-
sive. And the point cannot be raised upon a
warrant of commitment stating the offence of
the principal sufficiently, with averment of the
absence of lawful excuse, and then alleging that
the prisoner aided in the commission of the said
offence. Ex parte Smith, 186

CONVICTION. See Certificate of Registry of a
Ship. Justice of the Peace. Metropolitan
Building Act. Pilot.

CORONER'S FEES-discretion of Quarter Sessions as
to allowance of ]-The Court of Quarter Sessions
are the proper judges of whether or not a coroner
has acted properly in holding an inquest so as
to entitle him to the fee of 20s. allowed by 25
Geo. 3. c. 29; and this Court will not interfere
with the exercise of the discretion of the Quarter
Sessions. Quære Whether the Court of
Quarter Sessions have a discretion to disallow
the fee of 6s. 8d. granted by 7 Will. 4. & 1 Vict.
c. 68. 8. 3. when the disbursements attending
the holding of an inquest are allowed to the
coroner. R. v. the Justices of Gloucestershire
(Ex parte Gaisford), 15

COSTS-on appeal from Special Sessions of High-
ways]-The provisions of 12 & 13 Vict. c. 45.
88. 5, 6, with regard to allowance of costs, are
applicable to an appeal to Quarter Sessions
against a decision of Special Sessions of Highways
dismissing an appeal against the allowance of the
accounts of the surveyors of highways. R. v.
Padwick, 113

COUNTY COURT-conviction for delivering false
process]-The prisoner, who had a claim for a
debt against the prosecutor, sent him the follow-
ing paper by post :-"In the County Court of
Leicestershire, at Melton Mowbray. Castle,
plaintiff; Charles, defendant. Take notice, that
you are required to produce at the above court,
on the trial of this cause, on the 17th day of
September instant, the several accounts and
memorandums given to you or to your wife,
by the above plaintiff at various times, held this
2nd day of September 1857. By the plaintiff
to Mr. Thomas Charles, the above defendant.
Balance of Account, 38. 5d." No plaint had,
in fact, been taken out in the county court, and
it was held, a conviction for delivering a paper
falsely purporting to be a process of the county
court, under 9 & 10 Vict. c. 95. s. 57, could not
be sustained, as the paper did not purport to
be a process of the court, and was only a notice
to produce. R. v. Castle, 70

See Perjury.

DISORDERLY HOUSE-evidence necessary to support
conviction]-By a section of a local act for
NEW SERIES, XXVII.-MAG. CAS.

regulation of a borough, which recited that it
was expedient to make regulations for preventing
disorderly conduct in houses of public resort, the
keeper of any place for refreshment, not being
licensed, who should wilfully and knowingly
permit drunkenness or other disorderly conduct
in such place, or knowingly permit prostitutes
or persons of notoriously bad character to meet
together and remain therein, was made liable to
a penalty. A magistrate dismissed a complaint
under this section, and stated, on appeal, that
defendant knowingly permitted twenty prosti-
tutes to meet together, and remain in his coffee-
shop (being a place within the section), together
with a number of men, and that he allowed
them to remain after he had been warned and
knew that they were prostitutes; but no dis-
orderly conduct was proved to have taken place
in the shop. The question for the Court was,
whether the magistrate was bound on the above
facts to convict-and it was held, that proof of
disorderly conduct was not necessary to justify
a conviction; but that, as it did not appear that
the prostitutes were allowed to remain in the
shop beyond the time necessary for taking re-
freshment, the magistrate was not bound to
convict. Greig v. Bendino, 294

ELECTION by prosecutor as to articles stolen]-
When many articles are charged as having been
stolen, and there is direct evidence as to fixing
the time when some were stolen, but the evi-
dence as to the time when the residue were
taken is of an indefinite character, the prisoner
cannot compel the prosecutor to elect upon
which articles he will proceed. R. v. John-
son, 52

EMBEZZLEMENT-agent for sale of goods not a ser-
vant]-Prisoner kept a refreshment house, and
was employed by the prosecutors to get orders
for their goods, to collect the money and pay it
over. He was paid by commission. He was
to go about among the farmers to get orders,
but no definite time was to be spent in so doing.
He was styled by them their agent for the par-
ticular district. The prosecutors had a store
at B. under the controul of the prisoner, who
supplied customers from the stores pursuant to
orders he obtained. In order to obtain the
security of a guarantee society for the pri-
soner's conduct, and in compliance with their
regulations, it was arranged that the prosecutors
should pay the prisoner a salary of 11. a year.
The prisoner having got into arrear was treated
by the prosecutors as a debtor for the amount.
The prisoner fraudulently appropriated money
received from customers and gave a false
account. It was held, that a conviction for
embezzlement could not be sustained, as the
facts did not establish that the prisoner was
the servant of the prosecutors. R. v. Walker,
207

servant to agent]- Receipt by servant to
agent of railway company of money for the
company on account of his master. R. v. Thorpe,
264

2 T

See Receiving.

ERROR-Mode of assigning error in felony. Man-
sell v. R. 4

EVIDENCE search for a will]-When circum-
stances indicate no peculiarly likely place of
deposit, searching in the drawers and boxes of a
deceased person for a will, and finding none, is
sufficient prima facie evidence that there is no
will. R. v. Johnson, 52

FALSE PRETENCES-false representation of profits
of a business]-If a person is induced by false
representations as to the nature and profits of a
business to enter into and continue in partner-
ship with another, and to give him money as
part of the capital of the concern (the whole
scheme not being a mere sham), the latter can-
not be indicted for having obtained the money
by false pretences. R. v. Watson, 18

proof of one out of many alleged false pre-
tences]-An indictment alleged that prisoner
falsely pretended to the prosecutrix (among
other false pretences) that she kept a shop at A,
and that the prosecutrix might go and live with
her there until she got a situation, and that by
means of the false pretences the prisoner ob-
tained from the prosecutrix 108. The making
of the alleged false pretences was proved, and the
evidence shewed that the prisoner did not keep
a shop at A, but failed to negative the other
alleged false pretences. The jury found spe-
cially that the prisoner was guilty of fraudu-
lently obtaining the 108., and that the prosecu-
trix parted with it under the belief that the
prisoner kept a shop at A, and that the prosecu-
trix would have it when she went home with
her. It was held, the indictment was good, and
the conviction was supported by the evidence
and finding of the jury. R. v. Fry, 68

pretence that a one pound Irish note was a five
pound note]-Prisoner, with intent to defraud,
falsely pretended that an Irish one pound note
was a five pound note, and asked for change.
The prosecutrix, believing his representation,
without looking at the note, gave him change as
for a five pound note. Prisoner guilty of obtain-
ing the money by false pretences within the
statute. R. v. Jessop, 70

allegation of property obtained]-An indict-
ment, alleging that the prisoner, by means of
false pretences, did "unlawfully obtain from
A. B. a cheque for the sum of 8l. 148. 6d. of the
monies of the said W. W." sufficiently shews
that the cheque is the property of W. W.
Godfrey, 151

R. v.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

FISHING-size of mesh of net]-The meaning of
section 3. of 1 Eliz. c. 17, which enacts, that no
person shall take fish as therein mentioned,
"but only with a net or trammell whereof the
mesh or mask shall be 2 inches broad," is, that
every space between the threads of the net
should be 24 inches from one thread to the oppo
site thread, and that the superficial area which
bounded each mesh should be 2 inches square
at least. Thomas v. Evans, 172

[blocks in formation]

FORGERY-imitation of name on a picture]-If a
person knowingly sell as an original a copy of
a picture with the painter's name imitated upon
it, and by means of the imitated name know-
ingly and fraudulently induce another to buy
and pay for the picture as a genuine work of the
artist, he may be indicted for a cheat at common
law by means of a false token: but he cannot
be indicted for forging or uttering the forged
name of the painter, for the crime of forgery
must be committed with reference to some do-
cument or writing, and does not extend to the
fraudulent imitation of a name put on a picture
merely as a mark to identify it as the painter's
work. R. v. Closs, 54

letters of recommendation for a situation]—
Prisoner, with the view of getting the situation
of police constable, forged and uttered to the
chief constable, who had the power of appoint-
ment to the situation, letters containing a false
account of himself, and recommended himself as
a person of upright character. It was held, he
was guilty of forgery at common law. R. v.
Moah, 204

[blocks in formation]

a receipt stamp on the paper under the signa-
ture, and wrote on the face of the stamp the
amount in figures of the sum of the account
charged for collecting and delivery. It was held,
the prisoner was guilty of forging the receipt.
R. v. Griffith, 205

wrappers for spurious articles]-Selling spu-
rious articles in wrappers resembling those of
the genuine maker not forgery, but might be
false pretences. R. v. Smith, 225

altering shipping master's report of a sea-
man's character]--Altering in a report as to the
conduct and character of a seaman, made before
the shipping master pursuant to the statute
17 & 18 Vict. c. 104. s. 176, the letter M, which
denotes a character of middling ability, into the
letter G, which means good, with intent to
deceive, is a forgery within that section.
R. v.
Wilson, 230

GAME-conviction adjudging several to pay costs or
be imprisoned effect of claim of right on Jus-
tices' jurisdiction]-A conviction under 1 & 2
Will. 4. c. 32. s. 30. included four persons, and
adjudged each of them to forfeit and pay the
sum of 21. each, &c., and if the said sums be
not paid, then each of them the said C, B, W.
and S. so making default, should be imprisoned
for one month, unless the said several sums and
the costs and charges of conveying each of them
the said C, B, W. and S. so making default to
the said gaol, shall be sooner paid. This con-
viction was held to be bad, as it made each de-
fendant liable to be imprisoned until he had paid
the penalty and the expense of conveying, not
only himself, but the other persons convicted;
and not a case in which to exercise the power
of amendment under 12 & 13 Vict. c. 45. s. 7.
On the hearing of the information, defendants
bona fide claimed a right to enter upon the land
under an authority from S, who was alleged to
be owner of the land, and asked for an adjourn-
ment, as they were not then prepared with evi-
dence, which was refused. Semble-this was
such a bona fide claim of right as put an end
to the jurisdiction of the Justices. R. v. Crid-
land, 28

GENERAL RATE-Property liable to. See Rate.
HABEAS CORPUS-substitution of good for bad com-
mitment, and admissibility of affidavits upon re-
turn]-A warrant of commitment being bad, a
second warrant was allowed to be substituted
for it as the return to a habeas corpus. Upon
a return to a habeas corpus affidavits are not
admissible to shew that the offence was not com-
mitted within the jurisdiction of the Justices.
Ex parte Smith, 186

HAWKER-trading without licence: sale in market]
-To avoid the penalty of the Hawkers Act
(50 Geo. 3. c. 41), on the ground that the goods
were exposed for sale in a "legally established
market." the market must be one created by
grant, and not merely a market de facto.

Section 20. of that act applies to the offences
mentioned in section 17, and therefore a hawker
who trades without a licence contrary to section
17. may be arrested for such offence under the
powers of section 20. Benjamin v. Andrews, 310
HIGH SEAS-Offence on. See Indictment.
HIGHWAY-effect of denial of liability to repair-
On the hearing of a summons, under 5 & 6 Vict.
c. 50. s. 94, against the surveyor of a parish
respecting the repair of an alleged highway, if
the obligation to repair is denied by the parish,
the Special Sessions cannot inquire at all into
the matter, but are bound, under section 95, to
direct an indictment to be preferred against the
inhabitants of the parish. R. v. Arnould, 92

liability to repair ratione clausura]
The liability to repair a highway ratione
clausura is only on the occupier of the lands
inclosed, and not on the owner-So held by
Erle, J. and Crompton, J. By Erle, J, the
liability does not attach where the way is not
immemorial, or where the land inclosed has not
been used for passage before the inclosure.
v. Ramsden, 296

R.

assistant surveyor not an accountiny officer]
-An assistant surveyor, appointed by the high-
way board of a parish, under 5 & 6 Will. 4.
c. 50. s. 18, has no duty thrown upon him of
keeping accounts; and therefore is not liable to
penalties for not making out and laying before
the vestry and Justices in special sessions ac-
counts, pursuant to section 44. Adams v. Lake-
man, 307

See Appeal. Costs. Railway.
HUSBAND AND WIFE-Coercion of Wife.
Wounding with Intent.

See

INDICTMENT-liability to, of foreigner in English
ship-A foreigner on board an English ship on
the high seas is subject to the law of England;
and, therefore, if he there does an act which is
a criminal offence by the law of England, he
may be punished for it by that law, and may,
by virtue of the statute 18 & 19 Vict. c. 91.
8. 21, be tried for the offence before any Court
of justice in the Queen's dominions having cog-
nizance of such crimes when committed within
its limits, within whose jurisdiction he may be
brought; for when so brought, he is, within the
language of the act, "found within its jurisdic-
tion."
Nor is it material, as to the liability of
the foreigner to punishment or to the juris-
diction of the Court to try him, that he was
illegally and by force taken on board the English
ship and there detained in custody at the time
of the committal of the offence, the act alleged
to be a crime not being committed for the pur-
pose of releasing himself from the illegal duress.
R. v. Lopez; and R. v. Sattler, 48

disposing of dead body for gain]-Disposing
of dead body for dissection for gain, and pre-

« EelmineJätka »