of lucre or not. Reg. v. Barratt, 9 C. & P. 387-Parke. It was no answer to an indictment under 9 Geo. 4, c. 31, s. 20, for taking away a girl under the age of sixteen years, to show that the girl alleged to be abducted went voluntarily from her home in consequence of the persuasion of the prisoner, to a place at some distance, where she met the prisoner, and whence she went away with him without any reluctance. Reg. v. Kipps, 4 Cox, C. C. 167. On an indictment for taking an unmarried girl under the age of sixteen from the possession of her father:-Held, that the statute was satisfied, though the man and the girl quitted the house together in consequence of a proposition which emanated from the girl herself to that effect, and a statement by her to the man that she intended to leave her father's house. Reg. v. Biswell, 2 Cox, C. C. 279-Alderson. In order to constitute an offence within 9 Geo. 4, c. 31, s. 20, it is sufficient, if, by moral force, a willingness on the part of the girl to go away with the prisoner is created; but if her going away with him is entirely voluntary, no offence is committed. Reg. v. Handley, 1 F. & F. 648-Wightman. A girl, under sixteen, who was living in her father's house, was induced by the prisoner to go to a chapel and to be married to him. She was only away from home for an hour or two, and after her return continued to live with her father as before, he being ignorant of what had taken place. The marriage was never consummated :- Held, that there was sufficient evidence of her having been taken out of her father's possession to satisfy 9 Geo. 4, c. 31, s. 20. Reg. v. Baillie, 8 Cox, C. C. 238-Chambers, C. S., and Gurney, Recorder. When a girl, under sixteen, has been found in the streets by herself and seduced away, that is not a takFISH. DIG.--3 ing out of the possession of the father, even though he is living in the place and she lives with him. Reg. v. Green, 3 F. & F. 274Martin. Where a person was indicted for the abduction of a girl under sixteen, and it did not appear that he had any improper motive, the jury was directed that if they thought he merely wished to have the child to live with him, and honestly believed that he had a right to the custody of the child, although he had no such right, they ought to acquit him. Reg. v. Tinkler, 1 F. & F. 513-Cockburn. A. was convicted for taking an unmarried girl, under sixteen, out of the possession of her father, and against his will. It was proved that A. (who had previously stayed out with the girl for a night), having met her by arrangement, stayed with her away from her father's house for three days, sleeping with her at night; that he took her away without her father's consent, and against his will, in order to gratify his passions, and then allow her to return home, but not with a view of keeping her away from her home permanently:-Held, that the evidence justified the conviction. Reg. v. Timmins, Bell, C. C. 276; 8 Cox, C. C. 401; 30 L. J., M. C. 45; 6 Jur., N. S. 1309; 9 W. R. 36; 3 L. T., N. S. 337. It is not necessary to shew a trespass, or anything of that nature, in the taking, other than the act of taking. Reg. v. Frazier, 8 Cox, C. C. 446-Pollock. A. was indicted for fraudulently alluring C. out of the possession of her mother and stepfather, the latter having the lawful care of her; and B. with being an accessory before the fact. C. was sent by her mother to live with her grandmother. Instead of going there, she went to B.'s house, and did not return home when desired to do so by her mother. After remaining with B. a month, she left with A., her pa- the act at the particular time at ternal uncle, and was married to which she gives effect to his previous him without her mother's knowl-persuasions. Ib. edge:-Held, that the averments The prisoner met a girl under sixthat the girl was in the possession teen years of age in the street and inand under the care of her stepfather duced her to go with him to a place might be rejected as surplusage. at some distance, where he seduced Reg. v. Burrell, L. & C. 354; 12 her, and detained her for some W. R. 149; 9 L. T., N. S. 426; hours. He then took her back to 33 L. J., M. C. 54; 9 Cox, C. C. the street where he had met her, 368. and she returned home to her father's :--Held, in the absence of any evidence that the prisoner knew or had reason for knowing, or that he believed that the girl was under the care of her father at the time, that the conviction under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 55, could not be sustained. Reg. v. Hibbert, 19, L. T., N. S. 799; 17 W. R. 384; 38 L. J., M. C. 61; 1 L. R., C. C. 184; 11 Cox, C. C. 246. Held, also, upon objection, that there was no evidence that the alluring was fraudulent, or that the girl was taken out of her mother's possession, that the facts did not support the indictment. Ib. 2. Children. By 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 56, "whosoever shall unlawfully, "either by force or fraud, lead or "take away, or decoy or entice "away or detain, any child under If a man, by previous promises to a girl under sixteen, as to what he will do if she will leave her parents' house and go to live with him, induces her at length to do so, and then receives and harbours her secretly, he is liable to be convicted for taking her out of the possession of her parents, even although he does not meet her by any previous arrangement and is not otherwise actually a party to her act in leaving. Reg. v. Robb, 4 F. & F. 59-Pol-"the age of fourteen years, with inlock. tent to deprive any parent, guarOn an indictment for unlawfully "dian or other person having the taking away a girl against the will"lawful care or charge of such child of her parents, if they have encouraged her in a lax course of life, the case does not come within 9 Geo. 4, c. 31, s. 90. Reg. v. Primelt, 1 F. & F. 50--Cockburn. A man dealing with an unmarried girl does so at his peril; and if she turns out to be under sixteen, is liable to be indicted for unlawfully taking her away. Reg. v. Ollifier, 10 Cox, C. C. 402--Bramwell. 66 of the possession of such child, or "with intent to steal any article up"on or about the person of such "child, to whomsoever such article may belong, and whosoever shall, "with any such intent, receive or "harbour any such child, knowing "the same to have been, by force "or fraud, led, taken, decoyed, en"ticed away or detained, as in this "section before mentioned, shall be A man is not bound to return 'guilty of felony, and, being conto her father's custody a girl who, "victed thereof, shall be liable, at without any inducement on his "the discretion of the court, to be part, has left her home, and has "kept in penal servitude for any come to him; but if, at any time," term not exceeding seven years, he has attempted to induce her to" and not less than five years (27 & leave home without her parents' consent, and she afterwards does so, he is guilty of the abduction of the girl, even though he disapproves of "28 Vict. c. 47), or to be imprison"ed for any term not exceeding "two years, with or without hard "labor, and, if a male under the 66 66 A prisoner was taken into custody at the house of his brother on a charge of abduction; when he was taken, a letter was found in a writing-desk in the room in which he and his brother were. The letter was directed to a person in the neighborhood of the prisoner's late age of sixteen years, with or without whipping; provided that no person who shall have claimed any right to the possession of such child, or shall be the mother or "shall have claimed to be the fa"ther of an illegitimate child, shall "be liable to be prosecuted by vir"tue hereof on account of the get-residence. "ting possession of such child, or taking such child out of the pos"session of any person having the "lawful charge thereof." (Former provision, 9 Geo. 4, c. 31, s. 21, repealed by 24 & 25 Vict. c. 95.) 3. Indictment. The police-officer was going to open it, when the prisoner told him it had nothing to do with the business that he had come about:-Held, that the letter was receivable in evidence on the trial of the prisoner for the abduction. Reg. v. Barratt, 9 C. & P. 387Parke. On a prosecution on 3 Hen. 7, c. 2, it was essential that there should be a continuance of the force into the county where the defilement took place. Rex v. Gordon, 1 Russ. C. & M. 943. If, on an indictment for abduction on 9 Geo. 4, c. 31, s. 19, the jury was not satisfied that the prisoner was actuated by motives of lucre, and they were satisfied that he used force to the person of the lady in taking her away, and that he took her away against her consent, they might convict him of an assault under 7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. c. 85, s. 11. IV. Reg. v. Barratt, 9 C. & P. 387Parke. 4. Evidence. The wife is a witness as well for as against her husband, although she has cohabited with him from the day of the marriage. Rex v. Perry, 1 Russ. C. & M. 949. Where several defendants were indicted for a misdemeanor in conspiring to carry away a young lady, under the age of sixteen, from the custody appointed by her father, and to cause her to marry one of the defendants; and, in another, for conspiring to take her away by force, being an heiress, and to marry her to one of the defendants:-Held, that, assuming the young lady to be at the time the lawful wife of one of the defendants, she was a competent witness for the prosecution, although there was no evidence to support that part of the indictment which charged force. Rex v. Wakefield, 2 Lewin, C. C. 279. 66 1. Selling Unwholesome Provisions. 23 & 24 Vict. c. 84, enacts "penalties on persons selling arti"cles of food or drink, knowing the "same to be injurious to health; " and see 11 & 12 Vict. c. 107, s. 3." Victuallers, brewers and other common dealers in victuals, who in the course of their trade sell provisions unfit for the food of man, are criminally responsible under 51 Hen. 3, "Pillor' et Tumbrel' &c." and of Edw. 1, "De Pistoribus et Hasiatoribus et aliis Vitellariis," if they do so knowingly, and probably if they even do not, and are liable civilly to the vendee without any fraud on their part or warranty of the soundness of the thing sold: but a private person, not following any of these trades, who sells an unwholesome article for food, is not liable under such circumstances. | three bushels 46 lbs of oat-meal and Burnby v. Rollitt, 16 M. & W. 644; 11 Jur. 827; 17 L. J., Exch. 190. A meat salesman can be indicted at common law for knowingly sending or exposing meat for sale in a public market as fit for human food, which, in fact, was not so. Reg. v. Stevenson, 3 F. & F. 106-Willes. So a carrier, for knowingly bringing to market meat unfit for human food. Reg. v. Jarvis, 3 F. & F. 108-Gurney, Recorder. But a person is not indictable for sending to a meat salesman meat he knows to be unfit for human food, if he does not know and intend that it is to be sold as human food. Reg. v. Crawley, 3 F. & F. 109— Willes. Mixing alum with bread in such manner as that crude lumps were found in the bread, is indictable. Rex v. Dixon, 3 M. & S. 11; 4 Camp. 12. Indictment against a defendant, who was employed to make bread for the Military Asylum, which charged that he delivered to J. H. divers, to wit, 297 loaves, as and for good household bread, for the use and supply of the asylum and the children belonging thereto, whereas the loaves were not good household bread, but contained divers noxious and unwholesome materials not fit for the food of man, is sufficiently certain, without shewing what the noxious materials were, or that the defendant intended to injure the children's health. Ib. An indictment does not lie against a miller for receiving good barley to grind at his mill, and delivering a mixture of oat and barley meal dif. fering from the produce of the barley, and which is musty and unwholesome. Rex v. Haynes, 4 M. & S. 214. barley-meal mixed, other and dif ferent than the produce of the four bushels, is ill, for the uncertainty to which of the four bushels it relates. Ib. 2. Engrossing or Regrating. The common-law offence of engrossing or regrating applied only with respect to the necessaries of life. Pettamberdass v. Thackoorseydass, 5 Moo. Ind. App. 109; 7 Moore, P. C. C. 239; 15 Jur. 257; and 7 & 8 Vict. c. 24, abolished the law of engrossing or regrating. The 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 27, repealed 23 Hen. 8, c. 1, 43 Eliz. c. 13, 22 & 23 Car. 2, c. 7, 9 Geo. 1, c. 22, (the Black Act), 9 Geo. 3, c. 29, and 52 Geo. 3, c. 130; and 9 Geo. 4, c. 31, repealed 43 Geo. 3, c. 58; and 24 & 25 Vict. c. 95, repealed 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 30, 7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. c. 89; 7 & 8 Vict. c. 62, and 9 & 10 Vict. c. 25. 24 & 25 Vict. c. 97, consolidates and amends the statute law of England and Ireland in relation to this offence. 2. The Offence. Indictment against a miller, charging in the same count that he received two separate parcels of barley, each of four bushels, to be ground By 24 & 25 Vict. c. 97, s. 58, at his mill, and that he delivered" every punishment and forfeiture If a person sets fire to a stack, the fire from which is likely to and which does communicate to a barn, which is thereby burnt, the person is indictable for burning the barn. Rex v. Cooper, 5 C. & P. 535Parke. Burning a man's own house contiguous to others is a misdemeanor at common law. Rex v. Probert, 2 East, P. C. 1030; S. P. Rex v. Isaac, 2 East, P. C. 1031. A small faggot was set on fire on the boarded floor of a room, and the faggot was nearly consumed; the boards of the floor were scorched black, but not burnt, and no part of the wood of the floor was consumed :-Held, not a sufficient burning to support an indictment for arson. Reg. v. Russell, Car. & M. 541-Cresswell. Upon a trial for arson with intent to defraud an insurance company, evidence that the prisoner had made claims on two other insurance companies in respect of fires which had occurred previously, and in succession, was admitted for the purpose of showing that the fire which formed the subject of the trial was the result of design and not of accident. Reg. v. Gray, 4 F. & F. 1102— Willes. An unfurnished structure intended to be used as a house, is not a house within the meaning of the 24 & 25 Vict. c. 97, s. 2. Reg. v. Edgell, 11 Cox, C. C. 132-Lush. To constitute a setting on fire it 3. Places of Divine Worship. is not necessary that any flame By 24 & 25 Vict. c. 97, s. 1, should be visible. Rex v. Stallion," whosoever shall unlawfully and 1 M. C. C. 398. "maliciously set fire to any church, It was proved that the floor near" chapel, meeting-house, or other the hearth was scorched. It was 'place of divine worship, shall be charred in a trifling way. It had "guilty of felony, and, being conbeen at a red heat, but not in a "victed thereof, shall be liable, at blaze-Held, that this would be a "the discretion of the court, to be sufficient burning to support an in- " kept in penal servitude for life, or dictment for arson. Reg. v. Park-" for any term not less than five er, 9 C. & P. 45-Parke and Bo-" years (27 & 28 Vict. c. 47), or to sanquet. "be imprisoned for any term not One put by overseers of the poor "exceeding two years, with or withinto a house to live there is merely "out hard labour, and with or witha servant, and his possession is theirs," out solitary confinement, and, if a and therefore he may commit arson "male under the age of sixteen by burning it. Rex v. Gowan, 2 years, with or without whipping." East, P. C. 1027; 1 Leach, C. C. (Former enactment, 7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. c. 89, s. 3.) 246. |