for the purpose aforesaid, or native of any of the aforesaid islands, on board any vessel either on the high seas or elsewhere without the consent of such native, proof of which consent lies on the party accused:

(iii.) Contracts for the shipping, embarking, receiving, detaining, or confining on board any vessel for the purpose aforesaid any such native without his consent, proof of which consent lies on the party accused:

(iv.) Fits out, mans, navigates, equips, uses, employs, lets or takes on freight or hire any vessel, or commands or serves or is on board any such vessel with intent to commit, or that any one on board such vessel should commit, any of the offences above enumerated:

(v.) Ships, lades, receives, or puts on board, or contracts for the shipping, lading, receiving, or putting on board of any vessel money, goods, or other articles with the intent that they should be employed, or knowing that they will be employed, in the commission of any of the offences above enumerated.

Any person who aids, abets, counsels, or procures the commission of any of the said offences, is liable to be tried and punished as a principal offender.

G

PART III.

ABUSES AND OBSTRUCTIONS OF PUBLIC AUTHORITY.

CHAP. XI.-ABUSES OF AUTHORITY-| CHAP. XIV.-MISLEADING JUSTICEFALSE SWEARING

OPPRESSION-EXTORTION-FRAUD
-NEGLECT OF DUTY-REFUSAL

TO ACT.

FUL ORDERS.

PERJURY
SUBORNATION.

CHAP. XII. DISOBEDIENCE TO LAW- CHAP XV. - ESCAPE

CHAP. XIII.-BRIBERY AND CORRUP

TION- -SALE OF OFFICES.

PRISON BREACH MISPRISIONS—
COMPOUNDING OFFENCES.

CHAPTER XI.

ABUSES OF AUTHORITY, OPPRESSION, EXTORTION, FRAUD, NEGLECT OF DUTY, REFUSAL TO ACT.

ARTICLE 118.

PUBLIC OFFICER DEFINED.

1 THE expression "public officer," in this chapter, means a person invested with authority to execute any public duty, and legally bound to do so, but does not include any member of either House of Parliament as such, or any ecclesiastical, naval, or military officer acting in the discharge of duties for the due discharge of which he can be made accountable only by an ecclesiastical, naval, or military court.

2

ARTICLE 119.

EXTORTION AND OPPRESSION BY PUBLIC OFFICERS.

Every public officer commits a misdemeanor who, in the

1 See 7 Rep. Crim. Law Crs. ch. iv. p. 153, and cf. 5 Rep. Crim. Law Crs. p. 40. It would be foreign to the purpose of this work to discuss the question of the limits of the jurisdiction of the Courts of Common Law, and Ecclesiastical and Military Courts.

2 R. v. Wyat, 1 Salk. 380; R. v. Bembridge, 3 Doug. 327, and 22 St. Tr. 1-159; Bacon, Abridgment, tit. "Office and Officer," N.; R. v. Bowron, 3 B. & Ad. 434; and see cases referred to in the Illustrations.

exercise, or under colour of exercising the duties of his office, does any illegal act, or abuses any discretionary power with which he is invested by law from an improper motive, the existence of which motive may be inferred either from the nature of the act, or from the circumstances of the case. But an illegal exercise of authority caused by a mistake as to the law, made in good faith, is not a misdemeanor within this Article.

'If the illegal act consists in taking under colour of office from any person any money or valuable thing which is not due from him at the time when it is taken, the offence is called "extortion."

If it consists in inflicting upon any person any bodily harm, imprisonment, or other injury, not being extortion, the offence is called "oppression.'

Illustrations.

(1.) 'The Lord Chief Justice of England passes upon B and C sentences for similar offences so disproportionate as to show partiality. He commits oppression.

(2.) The Governor-General of India wrongfully compels a native prince to pay sums of money to the Indian government. He commits extortion. (3.) A and B, justices of the peace, refuse licences to the keepers of public houses, because they refuse to vote as the justices wish. A and B commit oppression.

4

(4.) A, a justice of the peace, sends his servant to the house of correction for being saucy and giving too much corn to his horses. A commits oppression.

14th Article of impeachment against Scroggs, C.J., 8 St. Tr. 199.

2 This was the gist of the Cheyte Singh charge in the impeachment of Warren Hastings. It is remarkable that neither in Debrett's History of the Trial, nor in Mr. Mill's History of India, nor in Lord Macaulay's elaborate Essay on Warren Hastings, nor in Marshman's History of India, are the charges against Hastings distinctly stated. It seems to a lawyer natural to give at least an abstract of the indictment in order to render an account of a trial intelligible, but historians are apt to take a different view. Lord Macaulay in particular is so much interested in Burke's rhetoric that he omits to say what it was all about. In Mr. Massey's History of George III., vol. iii. p. 337, Burke's summary of the ten charges which he opened is given, but Mr. Massey observes that only one of the ten was distinct and substantive." The transactions with Cheyte Singh are described in Mill's British India, iv. 321, &c., in Lord Macaulay's Essays, p. 620 (ed. of 1850), and in Marshman's History, i. 424.

R. v. Williams, 2 Burr. 1317.

4 R. v. Okey, 8. Mod. 46. According to R. v. Morfit, Rus. & R. 307, decided long afterwards, A might have committed his servant for theft.

(5.) 1 A, a justice, acting as such, orders B to be whipped, without such proof or information as the law requires. A commits oppression.

(6.) 2 A, a constable, having B in custody on a warrant for an assault, obtains money from B upon colour and pretence that A will procure the warrant to be discharged. A commits extortion.

(7,) 3 A, a justice, commits B, a pauper, to prison for refusing to answer questions which A had a right to put as to B's settlement, believing in good faith that A had a legal right to commit B. A does not commit a misdemeanor.

4

(8.) * A, a justice, illegally refuses to accept bail for a person entitled to be bailed, under an opinion, hastily adopted in a crisis of real danger, that it was right to do so. A does not commit a misdemeanor.

ARTICLE 120.

ILLEGALLY IMPRISONING SUBJECTS BEYOND THE SEAS.

"Every one commits a misdemeanor who knowingly frames, contrives, writes, seals, or countersigns any warrant for the commitment, detainer, or transportation of any subject of this realm resident in England, Wales, or Berwick, as a prisoner in or to Scotland, Ireland, Jersey, Guernsey, or any other place beyond the sea, with or without the Queen's dominions, or who so commits, detains, imprisons, or transports any person.

Whoever commits any such misdemeanor is put out of the Queen's protection. His lands, tenements, goods, and chattels are forfeited to the Queen, and he is to be imprisoned for life (or perhaps at the Queen's pleasure).

ARTICLE 121.

FRAUDS AND BREACHES OF TRUST BY OFFICERS.

Every public officer commits a misdemeanor who, in the discharge of the duties of his office commits any fraud or breach of trust affecting the public, whether such fraud or

1 See precedent of indictment, 2 Chit. Crim. Law, 236.

Precedent of indictment, 2 Chit. Crim. Law, 292.

3 R. v. Jackson, 1 T. R. 653.

R. v Badger, 4 Q. B. 475.

31 Car. 2, c. 2, s. 11, the Habeas Corpus Act. The penalty is præmunire, as explained by Coke, 1 Inst. 130 a. 7th Rep. C. C. L. p. 37.

6 See cases in Illustrations.

breach of trust would have been criminal or not if committed against a private person.

1

Illustrations.

(1.) 1A, an accountant in the office of the Paymaster-General, fraudulently omits to make certain entries in his accounts, whereby he enables the cashier to retain large sums of money in his own possession, and to appropriate the interest on such sums to himself after the time when they ought to have been paid to the Crown. A commits a misdemeanor.

(2.) 2 A, a commissary-general of stores in the West Indies, makes contracts with B to supply stores, on the condition that B should divide the profits with A. A commits a misdemeanor.

3

ARTICLE 122.

NEGLECT OF OFFICIAL DUTY.

Every public officer commits a misdemeanor who wilfully neglects to perform any duty which he is bound either by common law or by statute to perform, provided that the discharge of such duty is not attended with greater danger than a man of ordinary firmness and activity may be expected to encounter.

Illustrations.

(1.) * A, the mayor of B, neglects to perform various acts which it was in his power to do, and which a man of ordinary prudence, firmness, and activity, might have been expected to do, in order to suppress riots in B. A is guilty of a misdemeanor.

(2.) 5 A, the Lord Mayor of London, refrains from making the proclamation in the Riot Act, and from ordering soldiers to disperse a mob, because he is afraid to do so, in circumstances in which a man of ordinary courage would not have been afraid. A commits a misdemeanor.

6

(3.) A, a sheriff, refuses to execute a criminal condemned to death. A commits a misdemeanor.

1 R. v. Bembridge, 3 Doug. 332; 22 St. Tr. 1-159. This would now be an offence in the case of a private person under 38 & 39 Vict. c. 24, s. 2. See post, Art. 352.

2 R. v. Valentine Jones, 31 St. Tr. 251.

3 R. v. Wyat, 1 Salk. 381; R. v. Bembridge, 3 Doug. 332; 22 St. Tr. 1-159; Comyn's Digest, tit. Indictment, D.; R. v. Jones, Strange, 1146; 4 Steph. Com. 326.

R. v. Pinney, 5 C. & P. 254, and 3 B. & Ad. 946. This is the case of the Bristol riots. Mr. Pinney was, in fact, acquitted; but the case involves the principle of the illustration.

5 R. v. Kennett (Lord Mayor in 1780), printed in 5 C. & P. 282, as a note to R v. Pinney.

• R. v. Antrobus, 2 A. & E. 798.