1841. REGINA v. GURNEY, B.-I will reserve all the points for the consideration of the Judges. Verdict-Guilty. EWINGTON. Balguy and Hayes, for the prosecution. Hill and W. T. S. Daniel, for the defendant. [Attornies-Sanders, and Ewington.] Nov. 13th. BEFORE LORD DENMAN, C. J., TINDAL, C. J., LORD ABIN- Hill, for the defendant.-The first question is, whether the defendant could commit perjury before these commissioners of bankrupt, as there was no good petitioning creditor's debt; and there is in the present case not only no proof of a good petitioning creditor's debt, but there is proof that the petitioning creditor's debt did not amount to £100. It has been said that the Lord Chancellor might make the fiat good by ordering another debt to be substituted. But the Lord Chancellor has made no such order, and the fiat is therefore bad. Lord ABINGER, C. B.-You cannot dispute the authority of the commissioners to take the preliminary proceedings under the fiat, to ascertain whether the party should be adjudged a bankrupt or not. They were authorized to do that by the fiat of the Lord Chancellor; but you say that, if there was no good petitioning creditor's debt, the commissioners had no authority to inquire and examine witnesses as to the bankrupt's property. Hill.-A case might occur where a party might sue out a fiat who had no debt at all, and perhaps the Lord Chancellor would not substitute another petitioning creditor's debt, although the bankrupt might owe debts to a sufficient amount; indeed, I am told that the practice is, where a bankrupt has brought an action, and there is an application to substitute another petitioning creditor's debt, for the Lord Chancellor to grant the order without prejudice to the action. Lord DENMAN, C. J.-Mr. Hill, we need not trouble you further. The case was considered by the Judges, who held the conviction wrong. 1841. REGINA v. EWINGTON. NORTHERN SPRING CIRCUIT, 1841. DURHAM ASSIZES. BEFORE MR. JUSTICE MAULE. REGINA V. ATKINSON. FORGERY.-The prisoner was indicted for forging and uttering a certain instrument, with intent to defraud Jonathan Backhouse and others. The indictment contained eight counts, of which the third, sixth, seventh, and eighth only became material. The third count charged the pri on an indictment for forg ing and uttering "warrant and order for the payment of a warrant and money, to wit, order for the payment of £85," and for forging and uttering an "acquittance and receipt for money, to wit, for £85;" it was proved, that J. M. had paid £85 into the D. bank, and had taken an accountable receipt for that amount; and that the course of dealing at the D. bank was to treat the accountable receipt with the depositor's signature on the face of it as an order for the payment of the money deposited and interest; and that the prisoner went to the D. bank with the receipt that had been given to J. M., and having written the name of J. M. on the face of it he delivered it to the bankers, who paid him £85, and also 21. 17s. 6d. for interest. The prisoner was convicted, and the fifteen Judges held the conviction right. 1841. REGINA V. ATKINSON. soner with feloniously forging "a certain warrant and order for the payment of money, to wit, a warrant and order for the payment of £85," with intent to defraud, &c. The sixth count differed from the third, in describing the instrument forged as an "acquittance and receipt for money, to wit, for £85." The seventh and eighth counts were for uttering forged instruments described as in the third and sixth counts. It appeared that a person named John Mann, in the month of June, 1839, had deposited the sum of £85 in the hands of Jonathan Backhouse and others, who constituted the Darlington Bank at Stockton, and that on that occasion he received from the Bank an accountable receipt in the following form : This receipt not transferable. No. F. 266, Darlington Bank, Stockton, 12th 6 M., 1839. Received of John Mann, Eighty-five Pounds to his credit. For Jonathan Backhouse & Co. £85. Entered, F. B. It further appeared that in the month of October 1840, the prisoner, having this receipt in his possession, went to the bank, and representing himself to be John Mann therein mentioned, wrote the words "John Mann" on the face of the receipt and delivered it to the bankers, who paid him the sum of 871. 17s. 6d., being the amount mentioned in the receipt with interest. It further appeared that interest by the course of dealing between the bankers and their customers was payable on their accountable receipts, and that the bankers on having a receipt delivered back to them, with the name of the party who had deposited written upon it by him, treated it as an order for the payment of the amount deposited with the interest then due, and paid such amount and interest accordingly. Grainger and Otter, for the prisoner, objected that on this evidence the counts above specified were disproved, that the document itself, independently of the evidence, had no meaning, and that the evidence shewed it to be an order or warrant, not for £85, as stated in the counts, but for 871. 17s. 6d. Knowles and W. S. Grey, for the prosecution, submitted that it was not necessary to state the amount at all, and that being stated under a videlicet, it need not be proved precisely. They cited the case of Rex v. Johnson (a). MAULE, J.—I shall reserve the point for the consideration of the fifteen Judges. Verdict-Guilty. Knowles and W. S. Grey, for the prosecution. Grainger and Otter, for the prisoner. 1841. REGINA V. ATKINSON. [Attornies-Pullman, and Marshall.] (a) 3 M. & S. 539. In that case the prisoner was indicted for embezzling bank-notes, which were described in the indictment as "divers, to wit, nine bank-notes for the payment of divers sums of money, amounting in the whole to a certain sum of money, to wit, the sum of £9, and of the value of £9." It was objected that the notes were not sufficiently described. The Court held the description to be sufficient; and Lord Ellenborough said, "If bank-notes be recognised by that description in the act of Parliament, the indictment has done enough in laying them under such a description; but it goes further, and adds, unnecessarily perhaps, for the payment of money,' and moreover gives their amount in number and value;" "and Mr. Justice Bayley said, "It appears to me that bank-notes is a sufficient description of the thing embezzled. Many acts of Parliament have described them as bank-notes, and no otherwise; therefore I must take it that bank-notes is in general a sufficiently certain description of this chattel. If that be so, is it necessary to go farther in this indictment, and state of what particular value each note is? I think not." 1841. REGINA v. ATKINSON. In the ensuing term the case was considered by the fifteen Judges, on the question, "whether the evidence supported the 3rd, 6th, 7th, and 8th counts, or either of them," and their Lordships held the conviction right. YORKSHIRE ASSIZES. BEFORE MR. BARON ROLFE. an offence charged as a larceny cannot be pleaded in bar to an in REGINA V. HENDERSON and BARLOW. An acquittal of FALSE PRETENCES.-The indictment charged that Francis Pawson was possessed of a certain mare, and that the defendant Henderson was possessed of a certain horse, and that the defendants did falsely pretend to Francis dictment for the same offence Pawson," that he, the said Jeremiah Barlow, was then charged as a false pretence. and there possessed of a certain sum of money, to wit, the Semble, that sum of £12;" and that if Francis Pawson would exchange obtaining money by the false his mare for the defendant Henderson's horse, the derepresentation of an existing fendant Barlow was willing and ready to purchase the fact, the party making the horse of Francis Pawson, and pay him £12; by means of representation, which false pretences the defendants obtained the mare to be false, is an from Francis Pawson, with intent to defraud him of the obtaining money by false same; "whereas, in truth and in fact, the said Jeremiah Barlow was not then and there possessed of the said sum of £12, and was not then and there ready and willing to purchase the said horse of him the said Francis Pawson, and was not then and there ready and willing to pay the said Francis Pawson the said sum of £12." then knowing it pretences with in the stat. 7 & 8 Gen. 4, c. 29, s, 53. An indictment for false pretences a gainst H. and B. charged that F. P. was possessed of a mare, and H. of a horse, and that H. and B. falsely pretended to F. P. that B. "was then and there possessed of a certain sum of money, to wit, the sum of £12," and that if F. P. would exchange his mare for H.'s horse, B. was willing and ready to purchase the horse of F. P. and give him £12. for it; "whereas in truth and in fact the said J. B. was not then and there possessed of the said sum of £12," and was not then and there ready and willing to purchase the said horse:Held, that the indictment was bad, as it did not aver that the defendants knew that B. was not possessed of £12. |