demanding with threats an exorbitant sum for services may be larceny. When goods are once taken with a felonious intent, the offence cannot be purged by a restoration of them to the owners (R. v. Lovell, 50 L. J. 91; 45 J. P. 406).

Larceny by trick.-Where the owner obtains the goods animo furandi by a trick or fraudulent expedient, and the owner did not intend to part with the right of property, a conversion of them to the party's own use will be larceny ; but where the party parts with the property and ownership, and not merely the possession, by means of some trick or fraud, the offence, if the case be within the criminal law, will be that of obtaining goods by false pretences. It is sometimes difficult to decide whether the offence be larceny or the misdemeanor of obtaining goods by false pretences. See R. v. Prince, 1 L. R. C. C. 150; and 19 L. T. 364.

Misdelivery.-A person wrongfully appropriating to his own use goods, &c., delivered to him by mistake may be convicted of stealing them (R. v. Little, 32 J. P. 40).

Larceny by finding.-In cases where goods are lost, and a person finding them converts them to his own use, believing that the owner can be found, he commits a larceny of the goods. Railway servants are guilty of larceny if they appropriate to their own use property found in railway carriages (R. v. Pierce, 32 J. P. 438).

Bailees.

Persons to whom goods are entrusted for a specific purpose, viz., to be conveyed, repaired, &c., are considered "bailees" of such goods. If the bailee converts the same to his own use, &c., he is guilty of larceny. But a person cannot be convicted of larceny as a bailee, unless the bailment be to re-deliver the very same chattel or money. Section 3 of the Larceny Act deals specifically with this offence. See EPITOME OF STATUTES, post.

Recent possession.-Possession of stolen property recently after its loss, if unexplained, is presumptive evidence that the party in possession stole it, but after the lapse of many months a person cannot be called to account for the manner in which the property came into his possession.

Animals—feræ naturæ.—The offence of stealing rooks from trees is not punishable either as larceny or by summary conviction, they being animals fera natura, and not protected by any particular statute, but proceedings under Malicious Injuries Act can be taken in cases where the trees are damaged.

Young partridges reared by a hen, and which still remain with the hen, are the subjects of larceny (R. v. Shickle, 32 J. P. 790). Dead game, before it is reduced into possession, is not the subject of larceny, and if a person pick up wounded game alive, but in a dying state, he is not guilty of larceny (R. v. Roe, 22 L. J. 415). If rabbits be caught by poachers, and placed by them in a ditch, and afterwards taken away by them, the offence is not larceny, the animals being fera naturæ (R. v. Townley, 40 L. J. 144; 25 J. P. 723. also R. v. Read and R. v. Petch, under title GAME, ante).

See

Larceny by servants. Where a servant disposes of his master's property, which is under his charge, he is guilty of larceny, the possession of the servant being in law the possession of the master. An unauthorized gift by a servant of his master's goods will be a felony. As to misappropriation of corn by servants, see title MASTER AND SERVANT, post. A servant taking his master's corn, without authority, to give to his master's horses, shall not be guilty of felony, but shall be liable to imprisonment (26 & 27 Vict. c. 103).

As to larceny by husband or wife, see title HUSBAND AND WIFE, post.

Several counts may be inserted in the same indictment against the same person for any number of distinct acts of stealing, not exceeding three, committed against the same person, within six months from the first to the last of such acts.

Venue. The trial may take place either in the jurisdiction in which the larceny was committed, or in which the offender shall have in his possession the stolen property (section 114 of the Larceny Act).

Receiving stolen goods.-This subject is treated of under the Larceny Act, sections 91-95. See EPITOME OF STATUTES, post; see also Prevention of Crimes Act, sections 16 and 19, post; also under title EVIDENCE, ante. The offence may either amount to a felony or a misdemeanor: see sections 91 and 95 of Larceny Act.

If a husband, knowing that his wife has stolen goods, receives them from her, he may be convicted as a receiver (R. v. M'Athey, 32 L. J. 35). If stolen goods be returned to the thief in order to detect the receiver, the receiver cannot be convicted, since they were not stolen property at the time he received them (R. v. Headcock, 38 L. J. 787; 42 J. P. 695). RESTITUTION OF STOLEN PROPERTY. See RESTITUTION,

post.

Legal Terms. See p. 67.

Libel.

A libel consists of defamatory matter expressed either in printing, writing, signs, such as hanging in effigy, or pictures, tending to blacken the character of one who is dead, or the reputation of one who is alive, and to expose him to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule. For such libels an indictment lies. The offence is a misdemeanor (a) triable at assizes. The offender is liable to two years' imprisonment (one year if he does not know it to be false), and to pay such fine as the court may direct (6 & 7 Vict. c. 96).

A libel may be "published" by delivering, reading, exhibiting, or otherwise communicating its purport to any other person than the one libelled.

(a) A libel on the dead is not a misdemeanor unless calculated to throw discredit on one who is alive.

Although a bona fide belief in the truth of the matter, and the existence of a legal, moral, or social duty to publish it is a good defence at a subsequent stage of the proceedings, it forms no defence (except in the case of a libel published in a newspaper) in proceedings before justices.

A fair criticism upon persons who submit themselves or their work to public criticism, or a report of proceedings in Parliament or in courts of justice, does not come within the definition of libel.

By 8 & 9 Vict. c. 85, it is a misdemeanor to propose to abstain from or offer to prevent the printing or publishing any matter or thing touching any other person "with intent" to extort money or some other valuable. Punishment, three years' imprisonment.

Words spoken, however scurrilous, even though spoken personally to an individual, are not the subject of indictment unless they directly tend to a breach of the peace. Blasphemous publications, or publications which are immodest or immoral, are offences indictable as misdemeanors.

Newspaper Libel and Registration Act, 1881.-The Act (44 & 45 Vict. c. 60) requires that the fiat or allowance of the director of public prosecutions in England or Her Majesty's Attorney-General in Ireland shall be had and obtained before any criminal prosecution can be commenced against any proprietor, publisher, editor, or any person responsible for the publication of a newspaper for any libel published therein (a).

Section 2 of Act enacts that reports of certain meetings shall be privileged if the report was fair and accurate, and published without malice and for public benefit.

The section contains a proviso withdrawing protection afforded by section when the defendant refused to insert in the newspaper in which the report complained of appeared

(a) In R. v. Yates, Q. B. D., 17th July, 1883, several points of interest bearing on this section were raised. See 48 J. P. 113.

a reasonable letter or statement of explanation or contradiction by or on behalf of the plaintiff or prosecutor.

[Persons printing papers or books to be published are required to keep for six months a copy of same.

Vict. c. 24, Sched. II.]

32 & 33

Sections 4 & 5 of Act relate to hearing and evidence, and permit a court of summary jurisdiction to deal with charges of libel where the court are of opinion the libel was of a trivial character. Offences under the Act are subject to the provisions of the Vexatious Indictment Act, 22 & 23 Vict. c. 17, s. 6.

Sections 7 to 10 and 12 and 15 relate to registration of names, &c., of newspaper proprietors. Section 16 relates to procedure.

Licensing Laws.

Licenses for the sale of intoxicating liquor by retail are issued by the Excise. Each license is in force for one year only. For the issue and renewal of public and beerhouse licenses (for consumption on or off the premises) and certain other licenses, it is necessary for the applicant to obtain a certificate from the magistrates at their annual licensing sessions.

The following statutes, which may be divided into five groups, deal with the sale of intoxicating liquors by retail:

In 1828 the Alehouse Act, 9 Geo. 4, c. 61 (dealing with inns or victualling houses), now called the Intoxicating Liquor Licensing Act, 1828, was passed (b). The Act reduced into one statute all the earlier enactments relating to the police law of licensing, and provided the present licensing machinery under the absolute control of the justices.

(b) This Act was amended by 5 & 6 Vict. c. 44, and the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882.