Majesty, intituled "An Act for regulating the Police in Sect. 34. the City of London" (2 & 3 Vict. c. xciv.).

Jurisdiction of Aldermen of City of London.—In Edwards v. Hodges, 19 J. P. 102 ; 15 C. B. 477; 3 C. L. R. 472; 24 L. J. M. C. 81; 1 Jur. 91, it was held that an alderman sitting at the Mansion House or Guildhall has not the power to send a metropolitan police constable to view deserted premises and to put the landlord into possession thereof which a police magistrate has by virtue of the Metropolitan Police Courts Act, 1840 (3 & 4 Vict. c. 84), s. 13. By the City of London Ballot Act, 1887, summary convictions for penalties under 35 & 36 Vict. c. 33, in regard to municipal elections in the City of London, shall not take place except before two magistrates of the said City, sitting at the Mansion House or Guildhall Justice Rooms.

See also the S. J. Act, 1879, s. 54, proviso, post.

35. To what proceeding this Act shall not extend.] Nothing in this Act shall extend or be construed to extend to any warrant or order for the removal of any poor person who is or shall become chargeable to any parish, township, or place; nor to any complaints or orders made with respect to lunatics, or the expenses incurred for the lodging, maintenance, medicine, clothing, or care of any lunatic or insane person;

nor shall anything in this Act extend or be construed to extend to any complaints, orders, or warrants in matters of bastardy made against the putative father of any bastard child, save and except such of the provisions aforesaid as relate to the backing of warrants for compelling the appearance of such putative father or warrants of distress, or to the levying of sums ordered to be paid, or to the imprisonment of a defendant for non-payment of the same;

Revenue Laws.-Section 53 of the S. J. Act, 1879, post, enacts that the S. J. Acts shall apply to informations, complaints, and other proceedings before a court of summary jurisdiction under the statutes relating to the Post Office, Inland Revenue, and Customs, but with provision that where the fine payable on conviction exceeds £50 imprisonment in default may be for six months.

Bastardy.-As to the levying of sums under an order in bastardy or an order enforceable in the same manner, see s. 54 of the S. J. Act, 1879, post.

Post Office.-By 47 & 48 Vict. c. 76, Sched., that portion of s. 53 of the S. J. Act, 1879, referring to offences under the statutes relating to the Post Office, for which a person is liable

Sect. 35.

NOTE.

to forfeit a sum not exceeding £20 is repealed and all summary offences under the Post Office Acts are now recoverable under the S. J. Act.

In the matters excepted from the operation of this statute, justices for adjoining counties cannot act in one for the other; therefore an order of removal of a pauper from Oxfordshire to Northamptonshire is bad which is made in Buckinghamshire (R. v. Tiffield, 22 J. P. 784).

Order of Removal.—Again, an order for payment of costs of maintenance under an order of removal does not come within the exemption in this section, and therefore the limitation in s. 11 applies (Collumpton v. Brighton, 3 L. T. 318; S.C. nom. Hill v. Thorncroft, 24 J. P. 741; 30 L. J. M. C. 52; 7 Jur. 163). And see note to s. 6, ante, P. 34.

Lunatics-Liability of Husband.-As to this, see the Poor Law Amendment Act, 1850 (13 & 14 Vict. c. 101), s. 5, by which section an order of maintenance made thereunder may be enforced in manner prescribed by the S. J. Act, 1848, i.e., as a civil debt. See ss. 6 and 35 of the S. J. Act, 1879, post.

Further, with regard to this section, see the S. J. Act, 1863 (26 & 27 Vict. c. 77), s. 1, ante, p. 34, in the notes to s. 6 of this Act, and the cases there cited.

36. [Repealed by Statute Law Revision Act, 1875.]

37. Extent of Act and saving.] The town of Berwickupon-Tweed shall be deemed to be within England for all the purposes of this Act; but nothing in this Act shall extend or be construed to extend to Scotland or Ireland, or to the Isles of Man, Jersey, Guernsey, Alderney, or Sark, save and except the several provisions respecting the backing of warrants contained in the Indictable Offences Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. c. 42), and incorporated into this Act as aforesaid.

This town

Berwick-upon-Tweed. was originally part of Scotland, but is now part of the realm of England, and bound by all Acts of the British Parliament, whether specially named or otherwise (20 Geo. 2, c. 42, s. 3 (The Wales and Berwick Act, 1746)). It is a county of a town corporate, and is no part of the county of Northumberland. See also R. v. Cowle, 2 Burr. 834.

38 & 39. [Repealed by Statute Law Revision Act, 1875.] Schedule repealed by Statute Law Revision Act, 1891. See Consolidated Forms, 1886, substituted by S. J. Rules, 1886, post.

THE

SUMMARY JURISDICTION ACT, 1879.

42 & 43 VICT. C. 49.

An Act to amend the Law relating to the Summary Jurisdiction of Magistrates. [11th August 1879.]

1. Short title.] This Act may be cited for all purposes as the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879.

2. Extent.] This Act shall not extend to Scotland or Ireland.

3. [Repealed by 57 ₫ 58 Vict. c. 56, Sched.]

PART I.

Court of Summary Jurisdiction.

4. Mitigation of punishment by court.] Subject as in this Act mentioned, and notwithstanding any enactment to the contrary, where a court of summary jurisdiction has authority under this Act, or under any other Act, whether past or future, to impose imprisonment or to impose a fine for an offence punishable on summary conviction, that court may, in the case of imprisonment, impose the same without hard labour, and reduce the prescribed period thereof, or do either of such acts; and in the case of a fine, if it be imposed as in respect of a first offence, may reduce the prescribed amount thereof.

And where in the case either of imprisonment or a fine there is prescribed a requirement for the offender to enter into his recognizance and to find sureties for keeping the peace, and observing some other condition, or to do any of such things, the court may dispense with any such requirement or any part thereof.

Sect. 4.

And where a court of summary jurisdiction has authority under an Act of Parliament other than this Act, whether past or future, to impose imprisonment for an offence punishable on summary conviction, and has not authority to impose a fine for that offence, that court when adjudicating on such offence may, notwithstanding, if the court think that the justice of the case will be better met by a fine than by imprisonment, impose a fine not exceeding twenty-five pounds, and not being of such an amount as will subject the offender under the provisions of this Act, in default of payment of the fine, to any greater term of imprisonment than that to which he is liable under the Act authorising the said imprisonment.

Before the passing of this Act, in the cases of summary convictions, founded upon statutes which imposed hard labour, the justices had no discretion, but were bound to sentence the accused person to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour.

This section gives them in such cases a discretion as to the imposition of hard labour; they may also in their discretion reduce the prescribed period of the imprisonment, the prescribed amount of the fine (if it be imposed in respect of a first offence), and they may dispense with recognizances, etc., in certain cases. A new authority is hereby given to justices in their discretion to impose a fine not exceeding £25 in cases where the statute only authorises them to impose imprisonment in the conviction.

The provision as to the reduction of a fine in this section is only intended to apply where Parliament does not subsequently legislate specifically to the contrary. In a case under the Cotton Cloth Factories Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 62), s. 13, it was held that the specific offence there framed had been expressly taken out of the scope of this section, and that the provision in this section as to the reduction of a fine was only intended to apply where Parliament did not subsequently legislate specifically to the contrary (Osborn v. Wood and Brothers, [1897] 1 Q. B. 197; 61 J. P. 118; 66 L. J. Q. B. 178; 18 Cox C. C. 494).

A magistrate has no power to treat a second offence of keeping a dog without a licence as a first offence upon the ground that the prior information was not set out either in the information or summons before him, when it is proved to him at the hearing that the defendant has been previously convicted (Murray v. Thompson (1888), 22 Q. B. D. 142; 53 J. P. 70; 58 L. J. M. C. 41; 60 LT. 151; 16 Cox C. C. 554). Generally as to mitigation of penalties by justices, see an article at 61 J. P. 131.

See Rule 4 of S. J. Rules, 1886, post, as to appropriation of a fine under a statute.

In the case of an offence of keeping a carriage without a licence contrary to s. 27 of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1869, in order to prevent such offence being dealt with as a first offence

within the meaning of s. 4 of the S. J. Act, 1879, it is not necessary that the previous conviction should have occurred within the same year (Phillips v. Stephens, 62 J. P. 789; 79 L. T. 280).

As to directing the treatment of prisoners sentenced to imprisonment without hard labour, see s. 6 of the Prison Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 41), post.

5. Scale of imprisonment for non-payment of money.] The period of imprisonment imposed by a court of summary jurisdiction under this Act, or under any other Act, whether past or future, in respect of the non-payment of any sum of money adjudged to be paid by a conviction, or in respect of the default of a sufficient distress to satisfy any such sum, shall, notwithstanding any enactment to the contrary in any past Act, be such period as in the opinion of the court will satisfy the justice of the case, but shall not exceed in any case the maximum fixed by the following scale; that is to say,

Where the amount of the sum or sums of

money adjudged to be paid by a conviction, as ascertained by the conviction,

Does not exceed 10s.

Exceeds 10s. but does not exceed £1
Exceeds £1 but does not exceed £5
Exceeds £5 but does not exceed £20
Exceeds £20

The said period

shall not exceed

7 days.

14 days.
1 month.

2 months.

3 months.

And such imprisonment shall be without hard labour, except where hard labour is authorised by the Act on which the conviction is founded, in which case the imprisonment may, if the court thinks the justice of the case requires it, be with hard labour, so that the term. of hard labour awarded do not exceed the term authorised by the said Act.

This section enables hard labour to be added to imprisonment for non-payment of a penalty if the Act authorising the conviction says that imprisonment with hard labour may be imposed as a punishment for the offence (R. v. Tynemouth JJ., 16 Q. B. D. 647 ; 50 J. P. 454; 54 L. T. 386; 55 L. J. M. C. 181). See also R. v. Turnbull, 82 L. T. Newsp. 64.

This section replaces in effect the Small Penalties Act, 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 127), now repealed.

Under the repealed s. 57 of 2 & 3 Vict. c. 47 (The Metropolitan Police Act, 1839), and the Metropolitan Police Act, 1864 (27 & 28 Vict. c. 55), the penalty for continuing street music after being

Sect. 4.

NOTE.