(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Archbold's pleading, evidence, & practice in criminal cases"

QJornrll ICaui ^rl|nnl ICtbtary 



Cornell University Library 
KD 8329.A77 1922 




3 1924 021 698 281 



■ -=^ *-Vii- 





DATE 


DUE 










) 








































































































































QAVLOHD 






PRINTED IN U.S.A 




The original of tliis book is in 
tine Cornell University Library. 

There are no known copyright restrictions in 
the United States on the use of the text. 



http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924021698281 



ARCHBOLD'S 
PLEADING, EVIDENCE & PEACTICE 

IN 

Criminal Cases 



SIR JOHN JERYTS. 

IjATE ZiOBD CHIEF JUSTICE OP THE COUBT OF COMMON PLEAB, 
WITH THE 

STATUTES, PRECEDENTS OF INDICTMENTS, &c. 

THE TWENTY-SIXTH EDITION 

BY 

HENRY DELACOMBE ROOME, 

OP THE MTDDLE TEMPLE AND SOUTH-EABTEBN CIROtTlT 
ANB 

ROBERT ERNEST ROSS, 

OV THE MIDDI/E TEMPLE; PRINCIPAL CLEBE IN THE COUBT OE CBIMINAL APPEAL, 
BABBISTEBS-AT-LAW. 



LONDON : 



SWEET & MAXWELL, LTD., 

3 CHANCERY LANE, W.C. 2. 



STEVENS & SONS, LTD., 

119 & 120 CHANCEEY LANE, W.C. 2. 



1922. 



PEINTED AT BEADING, ENGLAND, 

BY . ' / 

THE EASTERN PBESS, LIMITED. 









V 



\ 



APS 
30 




FORMER EDITIONS AND EDITORS 
OF THIS WORK. 



1st edition (1822) .tj^^cT^ition (1828) by Abchbold. 

4th edition (1831) to 9th edition (1843) by Jebvis. 
10th edition (1846) to 15th edition (1862) by Welsbt. 
16th edition (1867) to 21st edition (1893) by Bbuce. 



\ 



22nd edition (1900) 

and [• by Cbaies and Stephenson. 

23rd edition (1905) 3 

24th edition (1910) by Cbaies and Eoome. 

25th edition (1918) hj Roome and Koss. 



( V ) 



PKEFACE 

TO THE TWENTY-SIXTH EDITION. 

Since the publication in 1918 of the twenty-fifth edition, 
comparatively few changes in criminal law have been 
effected by legislation. The book has been brought up to 
date by the inclusion of such new Acts as have been 
passed, of which the most important are those relating to 
official secrets, possession of firearms, and eligibility of 
women to serve on juries. Reference will also be found 
in the text to numerous recent decisions and rulings of the 
Court of Criminal Appeal and of the House of Lords in 
criminal cases. 

The Editors desire to express their great indebtedness 
to Mr. G. B. McClure and Mr. W. Bentley Purchase, M.C., 
Barristers -at-Law, for most valuable assistance in the 
preparation of an entirely new Index and for seeing the 
book through the press. 

H. D. R. 

R. E. R. 

Temple, 

May 30th, 1922. 



( vii ) 



PEEFACE 

TO THE FIRST EDITION (1822). 

In the year 1812 I collected all the authorities upon the 
Pleas of the Grown to be found in the text-books, the 
books of reports, etc. ; all that could elucidate the subject 
in Bracton, Britton, Fleta, and the Mirror ; the substance 
of Hale, Hawkins, the Third Institute, Dalton, Foster and 
East ; all the cases upon the subject in the Year Books, 
the old reports, and in the modern and recent reports ; and 
all the statutes upon the subject down to the period at 
which I made the collection. Of these materials I framed, 
with infinite pains, a Digest in three volumes, one of which 
was actually published in the year 1813. 

When I contemplated the publication above mentioned, 
works upon the Pleas of the Crown were extremely scarce, 
those of repute, upon the subject, were rarely to be had, 
even at most extravagant prices. But immediately upon 
the publication of my First Volume, two other works 
were announced upon the same subject, one of which 
was published very shortly after it was announced : the 
other not for nearly two years afterwards. Their being 
announced, however, had the effect of deterring me from 
proceeding with my Work ; I thought they would amply 
supply the deficiency of works upon the subject ; and I 
felt too much diffidence in my own ability to enter into 
competition with the writers of them. Another, and a 
very elaborate work (a), has since been added, which has 
fully confirmed me in my determination not to publish the 
work I originally contemplated. 

(a) This is presumed to be Chitty's "Criminal Law," a valuable- 
work, numerous references to which have been inserted in the twenty- 
sixth edition. 



viii PREFACE TO FIRST EDITION. 

As the subject of Evidence in criminal cases, however, 
had not been treated of by any of these writers, and as 
some book upon the subject was extremely desirable, I 
thought I might select from the Work I originally com- 
piled such part of it as related to evidence in criminal 
cases, and publish it, without subjecting myself to the 
imputation of wishing to enter into any competition with 
the learned writers of the Works already extant upon the 
Pleas of the Crown. I have made this compilation ; I have 
added to it all the cases since decided, and the statutes 
since enacted, upon the subject ; and I have compressed 
the whole into the smallest compass that appeared to me 
to be practical, consistent with perspicuity. I have also 
added precedents of indictments and other criminal 
pleadings — not from any idea that this part of the Work 
was required by the Profession, there being already one 
or two collections of great repute upon the subject — but 
merely because I found it impracticable to give the 
evidence in particular cases in the simplified form I was 
anxious to give it, without also giving, in each case, the 
particular indictment or pleading the evidence was in- 
tended to support. And as I was thus obliged to give the 
precedents, I thought it desirable, and indeed necessary, 
also to give such a summary of the law relative to pleading 
in criminal cases generally, as would enable the reader to 
frame an indictment in cases where he might not be able 
to find a precedent. 

As to the arrangement of my materials, I have en-- 
deavoured to make it simple and perspicuous. The work 
consists of two books — the First Book, which treats of 
Pleading and Evidence in criminal cases generally, is 
divided into two parts ; the first treating of Pleading 
generally, namely, of indictments, informations, special 
pleas, demurrers, etc. ; the second treating of Evidence 
generally, namely, of evidence of records, of matters quasi 
of record, of private written instruments, and of parol 
evidence, the competency and credit of witnesses, etc., 
etc. 

The Second Book, which treats of Pleading and 



PREFACE TO FIRST EDITION. ix 

Evidence in particular cases, is divided into four parts : 
the first treats of offences against the property and persons 
of individuals; the second treats of offences of a public 
nature, namely, offences against the King and his govern- 
ment, offences against public justice, offences against the 
public peace, oSences against public trade, and offences 
against public police and economy ; the third treats of con- 
spiracies ; and the fourth of principals and accessories. 

I have now apprised the reader of what he is to expect 
in the following Work. Trifling as it may appear, it 
has cost me much time and great labour. I have taken 
infinite pains to simplify my subject ; to reject everything 
redundant or irrelevant ; to compress the whole into the 
smallest possible compass consistent with perspicuity ; 
and to clothe it in language plain, simple, and unadorned. 
In fact, my sole object has been to make this a practically 
useful book : I neither anticipate nor desire for it a higher 
commendation. 

J. F. A. 
Symonds Inn. 



( xi ) 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



BOOK I. 

Pleading, Practice, and Evidence generally. 

PAET I. 



Pleading and Praatice generally 
Ch. I. Indictment. 

Sect. 1. Wiat it is, and when it lies 

2. Against whom it lies 

3. Form of it 

4. Caption 

5. Within, what Time the Bill must be 

6. Finding the Indictment 

7. Process to compel Appearance on 

8. Bail on 

9. In what Cases quashed 

10. When and where tried 

11. Certiorari 

12. Powers of the Attorney-General over 
n. Criminal Information 

Sect. 1. Preliminary 

2. Ex officio 

3. By the Master of the Crowu Office 

III. Coroner's Inquisition 

rv. Pleas, Eeplications , etc. 

Sect. 1. Order and Time of Pleading 

2. Plea to the Jurisdiction 

3. Demurrer 

4. Special Pleas in Bar 

1. Autrefois Acquit 

2. Autrefois Convict 

3. Autrefois Attaint 

4. Pardon 

5. General Issue 



preferred 



PAGE 

1 

9 

27 

61 

63 

67 

78 

87 

98 

101 

110 

Prosecutions 122 
126 
126 
127 
129 
140 
149 
149 
150 
151 
1S4 
155 
160 
163 
164 
165 



xii TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

PAGE 

Ch. V. Trial, Judgment, and Punishment 167 

Sect. 1. Arraignment 167 

2. Summoning, impanelling, swearing, and charging 

the Petty Jury 179 

3. Proceedings at Trial 199 

4. Verdict. 210 

5. Proceedings between Verdict and Judgment ... 224 

6. Judgment and Punishments ... ... ... 229 

VI. Costs and Rewards 267 

Sect. 1. Costs payable out of Local Funds 267 

2. Costs payable by Defendant or Prosecutor ... 284 

3. Costs of removed Indictments ... ... ... 286 

4. Costs of Guardians of the Foot 287 

5. Eewards 287 

VII. Compensation and Restitution of Property ... ... 290 

Sect. 1. Compensation ... ... ... ... ... 290 

2. Restitution of Property 293 

VIII. Criminal Appeal 300 

Sect. 1. Appeals under the Criminal Appeal Act, 1907 ... 300 

2. Crown Cases Reserved ... ... ... ... 340 

3. Venire de Nicmo ... ... ... ... ... 346 



PART II. 

Evidence generally. 

Ch. I. What Allegations must be proved 349 

II. The Manner of proving the Matters put in issue 367 

Sect. 1. Preliminary Matters 367 

2. Admissions and Confessions 379 

3. Presumptions 396 

4. Written Evidence 402 

1. Public Documents 402 

2. Private Documents 443 

5. Parol Evidence 450 

1. In what Cases receivable 450 

2. Competency of Witnesses 452 

3. Privilege 467 

4. Credit of Witnesses 473 

5. The Number of Witnesses requisite ... 479 

6. Process against Witnesses ... ... ... 480 

7. Witnesses' Expenses 485 

8. Examination of Witnesses 485 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. xi 

BOOK II. 

Pleading., Practice, and Evidence in particular Gases. 

PART I. 
Offences against Individuals 





PAGE 


Ch. I. OfEencea against the Property of Individuals 


... 499 


Sect. 1. Larceny 


... 499 


Embezzlement 


... 601 


-Fraudulent Conversion 


... 621 


Bobbery, etc 


... 637 


Piracy 


... 646 


Burglary, etc 


... 653 


Demanding with Menaces, etc 


... 681 


2. False Pretences and Cheating 


... 690 


3. Receiving Stolen Property 


... 722 


4. Falsification of Accounts by Clerks, etc. . 


... 734 


5. Arson 


... 736 


6. Malicious Damage 


... 755 


7. Forgery 


... 802 


8. False Personation 


... 852 


Ch. II. Offences against the Persons of Individual*' 


... 860 


Sect. 1. Homicide 


... 860 


Murder and Manslaughter 


... 860 


Conspiracy to Murder and iijciting to 


Murder 906 


Attempts to Murder 


... 907 


2. Concealment of Birth 


... 919 


3. Attempts to procure Abortion 


... 922 


4. Assault, Battery, Wounding, etc 


... 926 


S. False Imprisonment 


... 999 


6. Abduction 


... 1006 


7. Rape, etc 


... 1016 


Procuration of Women and Girls 


... 1034 


8. Incest 


... 1042 


9. Sodomy, Bestiality 


... 1046 



PART II. 

Offences of a Public Nature. 

Ch. I. Offences against the Crown and Government 1053 

Sect. 1. High Treason , 1053 

2. Treason Felony , ...1077 

3. Attempts to injure or alarm the Sovereign ... 1079 

4. Offences against the Foreign Bnlistjjient Act, 1870 1080 



xiv TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

Ch. I. Offences againet the Crown and Government — continued, paob 
Sect. 5. Coinage Offences 1087 

6. Sedition (including Seditious Libel) 1114 

7. Unlawful Oaths 1127 

Oaths to commit Treason or Felony 1130 

8. Inciting to Mutiny 1132 

9. Illegal Training and Drilling 1135 

10. Offences relating to Public Stores 1137 

11. Disclosure, etc., of Government Secrets 1141 

12. Misconduct by Executive and Administrative 

Officials of the Crown 1154 

13. Concealing Treasure Trove ... 1155 

14. Smuggling ... ... ... ... ... ... 1155 

II. Offences against Ileligio^ and Public "Worship 1169 

Sect. 1. Blasphemy and Blasphemous Libel 1159 

2. Disturbing Public Worship 1163 

III. Offences against Public Justice 1168 

Sect. 1. Escape ... .'. 1168 

2. Breach of Prison 1176 

3. Eescue 1177 

4. Being at large during a Sentence of Penal 

Servitude 1180 

5. Perjury and Cognate Offences 1183 

6. Administering, etc., Voluntary Oaths, etc. ... 1200 

7. Embracery 1201 

8. Interference with Witnesses 1202 

9. Barratry, Champerty, and Maintenance 1203 

10. Bribery of Public Officials 1205 

11. 'Extortion by Public Officials 1206 

12. Misconduct of Officers of Justice 1208 

13. Disobeying Judicial Orders 1208 

14. Compounding Offences 1208 

15. Libels reflecting on the Administration of Justice, 

and Contempt of Court 1215 

IV. Offences against the Public Peace 1218 

Sect. 1. Unlawful Assembly 1218 

2. Bout 1221 

3. Riot 1221 

4. Affray 1227 

5. Forcible Entry and Detainer 1228 

6.' Pound-breach and Eescue of Distress 1234 

7. Challenge to Eight 1234 

8. Letters threatening to murder or to injure Property 1235 

9. Defamatory Libel 1238 

V. Offences against Public Trade 1254 

Sect. 1. Offences against Bankruptcy Law and Frauds 

on or by Creditors 1254 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. xv 

Oh. V. Offences against Public Trade — continued. page 

Sect. 2. Counterfeiting Trade Marks, etc. 1272 

3. Offences arising out of Eelation between 

Employers and Workmen 1279 

4. Offences as to the Sale of Food and Drugs ... 1287 
"VI. Offences against Public Morals, etc. 1291 

Sect. 1. Bigamy and Offences against Marriage Acts ... 1292 

2. Public Nuisance 1308 

(a) Nuisances to Public Comfort, Enjoyment, 

or Health 1310 

(b) Acts dangerous to Public Safety 1315 

(c) Acts injurious to Public Decency, Morals, 

or Order 1317 

Open and Notorious Lewdness ... 1317 
Obscene Libels, Exhibitions, etc. ... 1318 
Disorderly Houses, including Bawdy- 
houses, Gaming-houses, Betting- 
houses, and Betting and Gambling 1325 

Illegal Lotteries- ... 1342 

Unlicensed Suburban Racecourses ... 1344 

(d) Offences as to Corpses 1345 

(e) Interference with Public Bights of Passage 1347 

Nuisance to Highways 1347 

Obstruction ... 1354 

Non-repair 1359 

Non-repair of Public Bridges 1374 

3. Poaching 1380 

4. Refusing to execute a Public Office ... ... 1386 

5. Sending Unseaworthy Ship to Sea 1388 

6. Corrupt Practices and other Indictable Offences 

at Parliamentary Elections 1389 

7. Corrupt Practices and other Indictable Offences 

at Municipal and certain other Elections ... 1401 

8. Bribery and Corruption by Members and 

Servants of Public Bodies 1408 

9. Corruption of and by Agents 1411 



PABT in. 

Conspiracy, Incitement, and Attempt, to commit Crime ^415 

Sect. 1. Conspiracy 1415 

2. Soliciting or inciting to commit a Crime ... 1428 

3. Attempt to commit Crime 1431 



xvi TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



PAET IV. 

PAGE 

Principals in the Second Degree, AcoesBories, Abettors, etc. ... 1435 
Sect. 1. Principals in the Second Degree in Felony ... 1435 

2. Accessories before the Fact to Felony 1443 

3. Accessories after the Fact to Felony 1451 

4. Misprision of Treason or Felony 1455 

5. Abettors in Misdemeanor 1456 



PAET V. 

Sect. 1. Offences committed after Previous Convictions ... 1459 

2. Offences by Habitual Criminals 1469 

3. Offences by Habitual Drunkards 1476 



APPENDICES 1483 

A. The Indictments Act, 1915, and Rules 1483 

B. Table of Principal Indictable Offences 1491 

C. Memorandum on Punishments 1516 



INDEX 152L 



( xvii ) 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 

[The few repealed enactments included in this table cure marked.*} 

\_The heavy type indicates the page on which the full text of an enactment is 

printed.] 



Incert. temp. 

PAGE 

Statutum de Conspiratoribus 1203, 

1275. 

3 Bdw. 1 (Stat. West. Prim.)— 

c. 25 (ChampeHy) 1203 

c. 26 (Extortion) 1206 

1276. 

*4 Edw. 1, St. 2 (Coroner) 6, 140 

1285. 

13 Edw. 1, c. 34 (Abduction) 1006 

c. 35 (Abduction) 1006 

c. 49 (Champerty) ... 1203 

1295. 

23 Edw. 1 (Stat, de frang. pris. . 
1 Edw. 2, St. 2, c. 1, 
Ruffhead) 1176 

1297. 

25 Edw. 1 (Magna Gharta), c. 14 246 

1300. 

28 Bdw. 1, u. 11 (Champerty) ... 1203 

1305. 

83 Edw. 1, c. 4 (Ordinacio de In- 

quisitionibus) ... 189 
(Ordinacufde Gon- 
spiratoribus) 

1203, 1413 

1328. 

2 Edw. 3 (Stat. Northampton), 

c. 3 1227 



1331. 

5 Edw. 3, c. 11 (Capias) 

A.C.P. 



84 



1351. 

PAGE 

25 Edw. 3, St. 5, c. 2 (Treason) 

3, 58, 1033, 1431 
c. 3 (Juries) 196 

1357. 

31 Edw. 3, St. 1, c. 14 (Escape) ... 1169 

1360. 

34 Edw. 3, 0. 1 (Justices) 

84, 1203, 1222 

1381. 

5 Eic. 2, St. 1, u. 7 (c. 8, Ruffhead: 

Forcible Entry) 1228 

1391. 

15 Eic. 2, c. 2 (Forcible Entry) 

1222, 1228 
* c. 3 (Admiralty) 647 

1392-3. 

16 Eic. 2, c. 5 (Praemunire) ...... 1114 

1394. 

17 Eic. 2, c. 8 (Riot, etc.) 1223 



IMl. 

13 H. 4, c. 7 (Riot) .. 



1414. 

2 H. 5, St. 1, c. 8 (Riot) 



1220 
1220 



1429. 

8 H. 6, c. 9 (Forcible Entry) 1229 

1435. 

14 H. 6, c. 1 (Judgment) 230 

b 



xvidi TABLE OF 

PAGE 

:20 H. 6, o. 9 (Trial of Peeresses) 169 

H87. 

3 H. 7, i;. 3 (Calendar) 105 

.10 H. 7, u. 22, Jr. {Poyning's Act) 

1054, 1069 

149S. 

11 H. 7, c. 1 (Treason) 1055 

1511. 

3 H. 8, 0. 11 (Physicians) 1387n. 

1513. 

3 H. 8, i;. 6 (Physicians) 1387n. 

0. 16 (Surgeons) 1387n. 

1515. 

6 H. 8, c. 6 (Certiorari) 120 

1529. 

*21 H. 8, c. 11 (Restitution). .393, 295 

1530. 

22 H. 8, 0. 5 (Bridges), s. 1 1378 

8. 2 1376 

es. 3, 4 1376 

8. 6 1376 

s. 7 1376 

1531. 

23 H. 8, c. 13 (Borough Ju/rors) ... 182 

1536. 

28 H. 8, c. 15 (Offences at Sea) 

31, 32, 646 

1540. 

32 H. 8, o. 9 (Maintenance and 

Embracery), s. 3 1202 

c. 40 (Physicians) .... 1387™. 

c. 42 (Surgeons) 1387n. 

1551. 

33 H. 8, c. 9 (Gaming) 1329 

o. 39 (Crown Debts), 

es. 40-42 96 

1543. 

35 H. 8, c. 2 (Treason Abroad) 

30, 104, 122, 1088, 1074 



STATUTES. 

1557. 

PAGE 

1 Edw. 6, c. 1 (Sacrament), sb. 1-4 1159 

c. 7 (Judge of Assize), 

s. 5 228, 230 

* c. 12 (Stolen Horses), 

B. 10 213 

1558. 

2 & 3 Edw. 6, c. 1 (Uniformity) 404 

1551. 

5 & 6 Edw. 6, c. 1 (Uniformity), 

s. 4 404 

c. 4 (Brawling)... 1165 

c. 11 (Treason 

A broad), 

e. 4 1086 

u. 16 (Sale of Pub- 
lic Offices) 1155 

1555. 

1 Mary, sess. 1, c. 1 (Treason) ... 1056 

sess. 2, c. 3 (SacramiBnt) 

1159, 1164 

1555. 

1 & 2 Ph. & M. c. 10 (Treason), 

ss. 6, 8 ... 1086 

1556. 

2 & 3 Ph. & M. c. 7 (Stolen 

Horses) 293 
1558. 
1 Eliz. c. 1 (Public Worship) 

480, 1159 

c. 2 (Uniformity) 404 

s. 3 1159, 1164 

1571. 

13 Eliz. u. 5 (Fraudulent Convey- 
ances), ss. 1, 2 ... 1270 

1575. 

18 Eliz. c. 5 126 

ss. 4, 5 1211, 1214 

1588. 

31 Eliz. c. 5 (Penal Statutes) 

126, 1204 

8. 5 64 

c. 11 (Forcible Entry) ... 1230 

s. 12 (Stolen Horses) 293 

1601. 

43 Eliz. 0. 2 (Poor Law) 1387 



TABLE OF 
1623. 

PAGE 

21 Jac. 1, 0. 8 (Cer^tiorari), a. 4 

116, 119, 1222 

c. 15 {Forcible Entry) 1230 

1661. 

13 Car, 2, st. 1, c. 1 (Treasonable 

Practices) , 

Bs. 3, 4 ... 1114 

c. 5 (Tumultuous 

Petitioning), 
s. 1 1220 

1662. 

14 Car. 2, c. 4 (Uniformity) 404 

s. 20 1159 

1670. 

*22 & 23 Car. 2, ^. 22 (Estreats), 

s. 5 95 

1677. 

29 Car. 2, c. 7 (Sunday), a. 6 

902, 1001 

1679. 

31 Car. 2 (Habeas Corpus) 87, 93 

s. 4 94 

6 101, 103 

11 1000 

1688. 

1 W. & M. c. 18 (Toleration), 

s. 15. .1164, 1166 

c. 21 (Clerk of 

Peac e) , 

a. 8 1155 

sess. 2, c. 2 (Bill 

of Rights) 
87, 246, 1058, 1123 

1690. 

2 W. & M. c. 5 (Distress for 

Rent), s. 3 1234 

1692. 

4 W. & M. u. 18 (Information),. 

as. 1, 6 ... 129 

c. 24 (Estreats), a. 4 95 

1694. 

6 & 7 W. 3, c. 4 (Apothecaries) 1387n. 

169S. 

7 & 8 W. 3, c. 3 (Treason)— 

- s. 1 174, loae 



STATUTES. xix 

1695. 

PAGE 

7 & 8 W. 3, c. S— continued. 

s. 2 191, 379, 

479, 10S7 

a 1057 

4 479, 1037 

5 63, 1057 

6 63, 1068 

7 188, 10S8 

8 354,1088 

9 1058 

' 10 169, 1058 

11 1058 

1697. 

9 W. 3, c. 35 (Blasphemy : 9 & 

10 W. 3, c. 32, 
Ruffhead) — 

8.1 239, 480, 1160 

2 63, 1160 

3 1160 

1698. 

10 W. 3, c. 12 (Fees of Court : 10 

& 11 Will. 3, 
c. 23, Ruffhead), 

SB. 7, 8 27 

t. 28 (Lotteries : c. 17, 

Ruffhead), ss. 1, 

2, 3 1342 

1699. 

11 W. 3, c. 7 (Piracy)— 

s. 7 648 

■ ss. 8, 9 32, 649 

8. 10 32, 650 

c. 12 (Offences by Offi- 
cials Abroad: 

11 & 12 W. 3, 
Ruffhead) , 

31, 104, 127, 1154 

1700. 

12 & 13 W. 3, c. 2 (Act of Settle- 

ment) 1068 

8. 3 454 

1702. 

1 Anne, c. 12 (Bridges ; 1 Anne, 
St. 1, c. 18, 
Ruffhead) — 

SB. 1, 2, 3 1377 

B. 4 1377 

5 112, 1377 

8 1378 

9 1378 

St. 2, c. 21, s. 3 

{Treason) 1058 



XX TABLE OF 

1707. 

PAQE 

6 Anne, c. 11 (Act of Union) 1058 

0. 41 (Succession to Grown) 

s. 1 1058 

■ 2 1114 

1708. 

7 Anne, o. 12 (Diplomatic Privi- 

lege) 10 

c. 21 [Treason), ss. 1, 10 1054 

s. 14 

188, 10S8 

1714. 

1 G. 1, St. 2, c. 5 [Riot) 63, 905 

e. 1 1224 

2 1225 

3 1003 

5 122S 

8 63,1226 

1716. 

*3 G. 1, o. 15 (Estreats), s. 12 ... 95 

1717. 

4 G. 1, c. 11 (Piracy), s. 7 6S0 

1721. 

8 G. 1, c. 2 (Lottery) 1342 

c. 24 (Piracy), ss. 1, 3 

32, 680 

1722. 

9 G. 1, c. 19 (Lottery), a. 4 1342 

1723. 

12 G. 1, c. 29 (Barratry, etc.), 

e. 4 1203 

1731. 

5 G. 2, c. 19 (Quarter Sessions), 

3s. 2, 3 116 

1732. 

6 G. 2, „. 35 (Lottery), a. 29 ... 1342 

1735. 

9 G. 2, c. 5 (Witchcraft), e. 4 ... 690 

1737. 

11 G. 2, c. 19 (Rescue of Dis- 
tress), s. 10 ... 1234 



STATUTES. 



1742. 



PABB 

16 G. 2, 0. 31 (Prison Escape)— 

B. 1 1169 

__ 2 1170 

88. 3,4 1171 

iUi. 

18 G. 2, c. 15 (Surgeons) 1387n. 

c. 30 (Piracy), ss. 1, 2, 

3 32, 155, 6S1 

1745. 

19 G. 2, c. 21 (Swearing), e. 12 63 

1747. 

20 G. 2, u. 30 (Treason) 1059 

1751. 

24 G. 2, c. 23 (Calendar) 350 

1752. 

25 G. 2, u. 86 (Disorderly 

Houses) — 

s. 2 1325 

ss. 3,4 1325 

a. 5 1326 

6 1326 

8 1326 

10 113,1326 

0. 37 (Murder), a. 9 1178 

1766. 

6 G. 3, c. 53 (Coinage, Offences, 

etc.), e. 3 1087 

1770. 

10 G. 3, c. 47 (India), a. 4 104 

1772. 

12 G. 3, c. 11 (Royal Marriages) 1307 

o. 20 (Piracy) 647, 651 

c. 24 (Dockyards , etc.. 

Protection), s. 1 235, 

e. 2 31 

1773. 

13 G. 3, c. 52 (Plate Assay), s. 14 848 

c. 63 (India) 31,440 

a. 39 104 

sa. 40, 44 482 



1774. 

14 G. 3, c. 78 (Accidental Fires), 



86 



744 



TABLE OF 
1781. 

PAGE 

21 G. 3, i>. 70 (India), ». 7 63,104 

1784. 

24 G-. 3, aess. 2, c. 25 (India), 63,440 

1786. 

26 G. 3, c. 57 (India) 440,445 

c. 71 (Knackers), ss. 8, 9 245 

1787. 

27 G. 3, c. 44 (Ecclesiastical 

CouHs), ». 27 ... 1165 

1790. 

30 G. 3, c. 48 (Treason), s. 1 ... 10S9 

1791. 

31 G. 3, c. 32 (Roman Catholics) 

ss. 7, 8 1387»i. 

1792. 

32 G. 3, u. 66 (ServanW Charac- 

ters) 853 

-^ c. 60 (Libel)— 

s. 1 216,1238 

2 209,1238 

3 216,1238 

4 1238 

1793. 

33 G. 3, c. 52 (India), s. 62 1206 

141 63 

u. 67 (Shipping Offences), 

es. 1, 3, 7, 8 ... 1226 

1795. 

36 G. 3, c. 7 (Treason), s. 1 ... 38, 1059 

8B. 2, 6 ... 1059 

1797, 

37 G. 3, c. 70 (Incitement to 

Mutiny) — 

B. 1 1132 

2 43, 155,1133 

3 1133 

c. 123 (Unlawful Oaths) 610 

8.1 1127 

2 1127 

es. 3,4 1127 

s. 5 1128 

6 44,1128 

7 155,1128 



STATUTES. xxi 

1798. 

PAGE 

38 G. 3, c. 52 (Counties of 

Cities) — 
. s. 2 39 

3 39 

- 10 38 

11 184 

1799. 

39 G. 3, c. 37 (Offences at Sea) 24,646 
0. 79 (Unlawful Socie- 
ties) — 

ss. 2-5 1128 

e. 28 1121 

1800. 

39 & 40 G. 3, c. 93 (Treason) 

191,480,1060 

c. 94 (Criminal 

Lunatics) , 

s. 1 217 

3. 2... 170, 217 

1801. 

41 G. 3, u. 90 (Cnmn Debts), 

s. 3 425 

9 404 

c. 109 (Inclosures)i 

s. 9 1362 

1802, 

42 G. 3, e. 85 (Offences by Offi- 

cials Abroad) 
104, 440, 482, 1154 

a. 1 31 

c. 119 (Lottery), ». 2 ... 1343 

1803. 

43 G. 3, c. 59 (Bridges), ss. 5, 7 1378 

1805. 

45 G. 3, c. 92 (Writ of Subpoena), 

ss. 3, 4 481 

1808. 

48 G. 3, c. 58 (Bail Bonds), s. 1 85 
c. 75 (Burial of Drowned 

Persons) 813 

1809. 

49 G. 3, u. 126 (Sale of Public 

Offices), ss. 1,3 ... 1155 
=.14 1154 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1810. 

PAGE 

50 G. 3, c. 102 (Unlawful 

Oaths, I.) ... 1128 

1811. 

51 G. 3, c. 100 (Counties of 

Cities) — 

s. 1 39 

2 287 

1812. 

52 G. 3, c. 38 (Militia), s. 197 1387n. 

c. 104 (Unlawful Oaths) — 

s. 1 1130 

es. 2,4 1131 

s. 5 1131 

6 1131 

7 44, 1131 

8 155, 1131 

c. 146 (Births, etc., 

Registers) ... 413 
c. 155 (Religious Wor- 
ship) . 

s. 9 1387m. 

12 1164 

14 1164 

c. 156 (Prisioners of War 

Escape), ss. 1,2 1171 
3, 4 1172 

1813. 

53 G- 3, c. 89 (Elections), s. 6 ... 104 

1814. 

54 G. 3, c. 146 (Treason), as. 1,2 1060 

1815. 

55 G. 3, c. 50 (Gaol Fees Aboli- 

tion) — 

ss. 4, 5 227,1206 

s. 9 227,1206 

13 227,1206 

1816. 

*56 G. 3, c. 87 (Grand Jury, I.) 73 
K,. 138 (Pillory Aboli- 
tion), ». 2 ... 240 

1817. 

57 a. 3, c. 6 (Treason), s. 1 ... 38, 1061 

s. 4 1061 

ss. 5, 6 1061 

c. 19 (Seditious Meet- 
ings) 610 

s. 25 1128, 1220 

c. xxix., (Michael Angela 

Taylor's Act) 1357 



1818. 

PAGE 

68 G 3, c. 70 (Disorderly Houses), 

s. 7 1326 

1819. 

59 G. 3, c. 12 (Poor Relief), s. 7 607 
* c. 46 (Appeals of Felony) 293 

1820. 

60 G. 3 & 1 G. 4, u. 1 (Unlawful 

Drilling) — 

ss. 1, 2 ... 1135 

s. 4 1136 

7 64, 1136 

63 G. 3 & 1 G. 4, c. 4 (Pleading 
in Misdemeanor) — 

ss. 1,2 ... 160 

s 4 110, 114 

8 129 

9 129 

10 150 

c. 8 (Criminal 

Libel) — 

s. 1, ... 1114 

ss. 2,4, 7 ... Ills 

1 G. 4, c. 67 (Whipping) 244 

c. 90 (Offences at Sea), 

s. 1 646 

1821. 

1 & 2 G. 4, c. 41 (Steam Engine 
Furnaces) , 

BS.1,2, 3 1310 

c. 88 (Rescue), s. 1 ... 1178 

1822. 

3 G. 4, u. 46 (Levy of Fines) — 

s. 2 95,97 

- — ss. 5, 6 98 

s. 8 98 

0. 114 (Hard Labour) ... 242 

c. 126 (Turnpike Roads), 

B. 110 1347 

1823. 

4 G. 4, u. 37 (Levy of Fines), s. 5 98 
c. 48 (Judgment of Death) 235 

c. 60 (Lottery), s. 41 ... 1343 

* e. 64 (Escape), s. 44 ... 42,1169 

c. 76 (Marriage) — 

8. 14 1299 

ss. 16, 17 1299 

s. 21 65, 1307 

22 :.. 1299 

26 1295 

31 1296 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1824. 

PAOE 

5 G. 4, c. 83 (Vagrancy) — 

s. 3 466 

4 1318, 1320 

5 271, 302 



6 
10 



1003 
245 



84 [Transportation) — 

s. 22 42, 289, 1180 

24 423, 1180 

9S (Turnpikes), s. 50 ... 1206 
118 (Slave Trade) 32 

s. 9 6S1 

lii. (Birmingham Assay) — 

s. 22 848 



1825. 

6 G. 4, c. 50 (Juries)— 

s. 1 72, 179 

ss. 8, 9 184 

s.lO 184 

12 185 

18 193 



14 184, 186 



20 

21 

22 

26 

26 . 

29 

30 



184, 188, 190, 198 
. 1061, 1068, 1087 

184, 186 

184 

181 

190 

187 



34 ; 187, 188 

ss. 50, 52 180 

8.61 1202 

62 1068 

c. 66 (Trial of Peers, S.) 169 
c. 92 (Marriage) 1294 



1826. 

7 G. 4, c. 16 (Chelsea Hospital)— 



.38 



853 

834 
417 



46 (Country Bankers) 

s. 7 

64 (Criminal Law) — 

SB. 2-5 433, 439 

s. 12 37, 1067 

13 37, 1067 

21 44, 208, 225 

ss. 22-25 267 

S.28 287 

29 288 

30 289 

31 97 



1827. 

PAGE 

8 G. 4, u. 28 (Criminal Law) — 

— 8.1 168 

2 149, 168, 169 

— 3 191 

— 4 164 

— 6 1442n. 

— 7 1442 

— 8 236 

— 10 232 

11 198, 423, 

8$9, 1459 

— 12 646 

— 13 164, 264 

c. 53 (Eaxise) — 

s. 43 41 



1828. 

9 G. 4, c. 32 (Pardon), a. 3 ... 165, 263 

c. 64 (juries, I.) — 

3. 9 191 

33 264 

c. 69 (Night Pouching) — 

s. 1 901, 1380 

2 212, 901, 966 

4 64, 66, 967, 1381 

o 1381 

9 .'.'.'. "i'67, 901, 967^ 1381 

SS.12, 18 1382 



1829. 

10 G. 4, t. 7 (Roman Catholics), 

ss. 29, 34 236 

c. 44 (Metropolitan 

Police), s. i 964 

c. Ixxxvii. (C o V e n t 

Garden) ... 607 



1830. 

11 (?-. 4 & 1 W. 4, c. 39 (Pardon), 

s. 7 264 

i;. 66 (Forgery)— 

s. 21 .... 844 

c. 70 (Quarter 

Sessions), e. 35 105 



1831. 

1 W. 4, c. 22 (Evidence on Com- 
mission) ;. 440 

1 & 2 W. 4, c. 32 (Game), s. 2 ... 545 

u. 41 (Special Con- 

.Hable), e. 9 901 
s. 11 963 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1832. 

PAGE 

2 & 3 W. 4, <^. 53 (Army Prize)— 

s. 49 8S4 

- o. 71 (Prescription).. 1360 
c. 75 (Anatomy), s. 7 1346 

c. 115 (Roman 

Catholic 
Churches) ... 1164 

1833. 

3 & 4 W. 4, u. 49 (Quakers, etc.) 478 

. u. 71 (Circuits) .... 186™. 

c. 99 (Fines, etc.) 

S3. 26, 27, 28, 

29 95 

33, 38 96 

183f. 

4 & 5 W. 4, u. 36 (Centra! 

Criminal 
Court) — 

ss. 2, 3 40, 105 

s. 4 105 

15 105 

16 110, 113 

19 109 

21 105 

22 35 

G. 67 (Transporta- 
tion) 1181 

0. 76 (Paoi' Law) ... 1406 

. ss. 46, 97 608 

=. 48 1388 

70 97 

109 961 

1838. 

5 & 6 "W. 4, c. 38 (Calendar of 

Prisoners) , 

3. 3 105 

c. 50 (Highways) — 

s. 21 1378 

, 23 1361 

75 1234 

78 954 

84 1357 

94 1347 

95 1347 

96 1359 

—— 99 71, 1349 

107 1349 

108 1850 

0. 64 (Marriage) 

1301, 1303 

c. 62 (Statutory 

Declarations) 1193 

ss. 6, 7 120n 

13 1200 



1836. 

PAGE 

6 & 7 W. 4, 0. 38 (Licensing, I.), 

s. 12 1479 

c. 66 (Lottery), s. 1 1343 

c. 85 (Marriaage), 

s. 2 1296 

4 1300 1307 

16 1296 

, 18 1296 

19 1296 

20 1295 

21 1296 

39 1296, 1307 

40 ~ 1307 

41 65, 1308 

42 1300, 1308 

c. 86 (Births, Deaths, 

and Marriages 
Registration) — 
S.35 1296 

38 413, 1296 

c. Ill (Previous Con- 
victions) 

198, 1460 

c. 114 (Trials for 

Felony) — 
8. 1 ... 174, 203 
4 437 



1837. 

7 W. 4 & 1 Vict. u. 22 (Births, 

etc.. Regis- 
tration) — 

s. 3 1308 

18 ... 184, 1387m. 

* „. 23 (Pillory) ... 240 

u. 77 (C entr al 

Criminal 

Oourt) , 

88. 1, 3-7 235 

c. 88 (Piracy)— 

s. 2 ... 235, 6S2 

3 6S2 

4 1440 

c. 91 (Punish- 
ments) , 

s. 1 1131, 

1133, 1178, 
1226 



1838. 

1 & 2 Vict. 0. 4 (Juries, Quarter 

Sessions) ... 105, 187 
0. 37 (Grand Jury, I.)- 74 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1838. 

PASB 

! 2 "Vict. — oontinued. 

c. 38 (Vagrancy), s. 2 1320 

c. 77 {Affirmations)... 478 

c. 82 {P arkhurst 

Prison) — 

BS. 12-14 1172 

s. 18 42 

c. 94 (Public Records) — 

ss. 1-3 413 

11-13 .... 703 

c. 105 (Oaths) ... 477, 1193 



1839. 

2 & 3 Vict. c. 47 (Metropolitan 
Police) — 

s. 5 964 

18 963 

26 1138 

54 (12) 1318 

58 1478 

66 295 

c. 71 (Metropolitan 

Police Courts) 964 

s. 17 82, 1002 

ss. 27, 28, 40 295 

c. 93 (County Police) — 

s. 8 963, 964 

10 183 

c. xciv. (City of Lon- 

don Police)... 295 



1840. 

3 & 4 Vict. c. 9 (Pa/rliamentary 

Papers) 1123 

c. 72 (Marriage) — 

s. 5 1296 

c. 88 (County Police), 

s. 18 

c. 92 (Non-Parochial 

Registers) — 

ss. 6, 17, 20 

s. 8 

c. 97 (Regulation of 

Railways) — 

6s. 13, 14 



964 



414 
843 



783 



1841. 

4 & 5 Vict. c. 22 (Punishment of 



169 



1842. 

PASE 

5 & 6 Vict. c. 24 (Dublin Police), 

a. 15 1479 

c. 28 (Piracy, I.), 

ss. 16, 18 652 

— — c. 29 (Pentonville 
Prison) — 

ss. 24, 25 1172 

s. 28 42,1172 

c. 35 (Income Tax) — 

8. 35 1387n. 

c. 38 (Quarter Sessions) — 

«. 1 107, 108 

2 110 

i;. 51 (Treason) — 

e. 1 ... 191, 480. 1062 

2 ... 191,245, 1079 

3 ...; 1079 

c. 98 (Prisons) 1173 

^. 109 (Parish Con- 
stables) 964 



1843. 

6 & 7 Vict. c. 18 (Parliamentary 
Registration) — 

6 81 1398 

ss. 85-89 1399 

• s. 88 480, 1399 

c. 30 (Pound Breach) 1234 

c. 40 (Hosiery) — 

ss. 2, 3, 11 ... 577, 606 

4, 5, 11 723 

c. 68 (Theatres) 1325 

c. 85 (Evidence) — 

s. 1 4S4, 474 

u. 86 (Hackney Car- 
riages) — 

s. 20 846 

28 1478 

c. 96 (Libel)— 

s. 4 212, 1238 

5 ... 212, 247, 1239 

6 1239 

7 1116, 1122, 

1239 

8 138, 1253n. 



1844. 

& 8 Vict c. 2 (Admiralty Offences), 

ss. 1-4 35 

u. 19 (Inferior Court), 

s. 7 ;... 960 

c. 22 (Gold and Silver 

848 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



18M. 

PAGE 

7 & 8 Vict. — continued. 

c. 24 {Conspiracy) — 

3. 1 1«6 

4 1416 

c. 29 (Night Poaching), 

s. 1 967, 1382 

u. 81 (Marriage, I.) — 

s. 3 1300 

£8. 68-70 1297 

c. 101 (Poor Law] 

s. 8 1418 

9 287 

31 1345 

71 408n. 



184S. 

8 & 9 Vict. c. 83 (Poor Scotland), 



466 
u. 109 (Gaming) — 

s. 2 1329 

ss 4, 5 1330 

6, 7 1330 

s. 8 1330 

9 1331 

17 690, 720 

c. 113 (Evidence) — 

s. 1 ..,. 163, 418, 442 

2 420 

3 ... 405, 406, 419 

4 851 

c. 114 (Gaol Fees 

Abolition) .... 227 



9 & 10 Vict. c. 33 (Seditious 
Meetings), 

s. 1 1128 

c. 59 (Jewish Wor- 
ship) — 

„. 2 1164 

4 1164 



1847. 

10 & 11 Vict. c. 15 (Gas Works), 

3. 29 1313 

c. 34 (Towns Im- 
provement) 1368 
c. 89 (Town Police) 

3.20 963 

28 1318 

29 1478 

SS.61 1478 

a. 66 1357 



1848. 



11 & 12 Vict. 


c. 12 (Treason 




Felony)— 




s. 2 1062 




3 1077 




6 1077 




7 155, 1077 




8 1077 




c. 42 (Indictable 




Offences), 




s 1 1195 




3 80,83, 




109, 1179 




10 ... 902, 1002 




11 82 




ss. 12, 13, 14 82 




3. 17 ... 75,148, 




379,429 




18 ... 380,394. 




459 




19 935. 




20 ... 438,481, 




1005 




21 1005 




22 106 




23 89, 90, 92 




24 93 




25 106 




27 437 




28 381 




c. 43 (Summary 




Jurisdiction), 




». 5 1446, 1457 




10 53n. 




11 63 




12 935 




36 64 




c. 44 (Justices 




Protection) 1002 




c. 78 (Grown 




Gases) — 




». 1 ... 3M,343 




2 341 




4 341 



1849. 

12 & 13 Vict. c. 45 (Qua/rter 



s. 17 98 

18 1311 

96 (Admiralty 



Colonies)... 36 
c 103 (Poor Law)— 

s. 6 1388 

ss. 16,17 ..-. 1345 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



13 & 14 Vict, c, 



1850. 

26 {Piracy), s. 2 
101 (Poor Law)— 

B. 9 

18 



PAGE 

652 

960 

1388 



14 & 15 Vict: 






1851. 

19 (Prevention of 
Offerutes) — 
8. 5 ... 214,908, 
910 

11 ... 685,968, 

1004 

12 6SS 

13 6S6 

55 (Criminal 

Justice 
Adminis- 
tration) — 

s. 4 280 

5 ... 272,289 

68. 6,7 289 

a. 8 288 

19 39,105, 

287 
23 39,287 

92 (Summary 
Jurisdiction, 

I.), 8. 6 ... 501 

93 (Petty Ses- 

sions, I.), 

B. 19 82 

99 (Evidence) — 

B. 3 469 

7 .... 412, Ml 

8 416 

13 ... 159,421 

14 ... 413, M3 
16 1194 

100 (Criminal 
Procedure) — 
s. 9.. .4, 60, 157, 
215 

12 60,155, 

157 ,,213 
18 52,350 

27 101 

28 .... 158,242 

29 ... 242,344, 

721,1320 
105 (Poor Law), 

a. 18 961 



1852. 

PAGB 

15 & 16 Vict. c. 56 (Pharmacy) 416, 847 

c. 76 (Common Law 

Procedure) — 

ss. 105, 106 186 

s. 108 187 

aa. 110, 112, 

113 187 

». 115 185 



16 & 17 Vict, c 



1853. 

2 (Bank of Eng- 
land) ... 571,808 
30 (Criminal 
Procedure) — 

B. 2 98 

9 76,483 

48 (Coin, 

Colonies)... 1088 
, 73 (Naval 

Volunteers) , 

e. 8 1387m. 

, 99 (Penal Servi- 
tude) — 
a. 5 264 

6 237 

7 237 

13 237 

14 237 

15 236 

. 119 (Betting)— , 

s. 1 1334 

88. 2,3 133S 

4, 7, 11, 
12 1336 



185$. 



17 & 18 Vict. 



1062 



1331 
1332 



c. 26 (Treason) 
c. .38 (Gaming 

Houses) — 
s. 2 .. 
4 .. 
c. 80 (Birfhs, 

Dearths and 
Ma/niages, S.) 
ss. 66,58,62 1297 
0. 102 (Corrupt 
Practices) 

e. 2 1396 

3 1397 

10 107, 1398 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1855. 

PAGE 

18 & 19 Vict. c. 29 {Registration 

of Births, S.) 1297 
i;. 81 {Public Wor- 
ship) — 
S8. 2, 3, 4, 10 1165 

s. 11 H65 

c. 86 {Religious 

Worship) — 
B. 1 1164 

2 1165 

u. 120 {Metropolis) — 

e. 60 418 



1856. 

19 & 20 Vict. c. 16 {Central 
Criminal 
Ccmrt) 40 

38. 1,2 118 

o. 3 ... 118,120 

S3. 4-7 118 

8, 10 ... 481 

6. 9 92 

13...118,271»i., 

286 

ss. 2S, 26 ... 286 

c. 54 {Grand, Jury) — 

ss. 2,3 73 

c. 69 {County and 

B or oug h 

Police) 964 

... 96 (Afomage,5.),1300 

c. 119 {Marriage and 

Registration) — 
a. 17 1296,1299 

S3. 20-22 ... 1296 



1857. 

20 & 21 Vict. c. 3 {Penal Servi- 
tude) — 

s. 1 237 

2 ... 107, 237 

3 42,238,1181 

4 238 

6 ... 107, 238 

c. 72 (Police, Scot- 

land), e. 11.. 1002 

u. 77 {Probate 

Court) — 

3. 22 426 

SB. 61, 62 ... 426 

c. 81 {Burials) — 

8. 15 



843 
25 ... 142,1346 



1857. 

PAGE 

20 & 21 Vict. — continued. 

- c. 83 {Obscene Pub- 

lications) — 

s. 1 1320 

4 1321 

c. 85 {Matrimonial 

CoMses) — 

8. 13 426 

88. 21,25 ...48,661 

1858. 

21 & 22 Vict. c. 25 {Nan- Parochial 

Registers) — 

es. 1,3. ..415, 843 

c. 73 {Quarter 

Sessions) — 
83. 9-11 ... 105 

s. 12 232 

c. 90 {Medical) — 

6. 27 416 

35 183, 1387n. 

38 847 



1859. 

22 Vict. c. 20 {Evidence by 

Commission) ... 440 

c. 25 {Convict Prisons 

Abroad), ss. 2, 

14, 19 1181 

22 & 23 Vict. c. 17 {Vexatious 

Indictments) , 67 
s. 1 67,71 

2 68 

c. 21 {Fines) 98 

s. 32 95 

u. 35 {Law of Pro- 

perty)— 

s. 24 ... 122,571 

25 572 

c. 40 {Naval Volun- 

teers), 

8. 7 1387n. 

c. 63 {British Law 

Ascertain- 
ment) 406 

1860. 

23 & 24 Vict. c. 18 {Marriage) ... 1296 

c. 27 {Refreshment 

House) — 

s. 41 1478 

u. 32 {Ecclesiastical 

Jurisdiction) — 

s. 1... 1163, 1165 

^ ss. 2,4,6... 1165 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1860. 

PAGE 

23 & 24 Vict. — continued. 

c. 38 {Law oif Pro- 

perty), s. 8 372 

c. 68 (Highways, 

S. Wales] 1348 
c. 75 {Criminal 

Lunatics) — 
s. 12 1172 

13 973 

c. 85 {Births, 

Deaths and 
Marriages, S.) 1297 

c. 107 {Refreshment 

House, I.), 
s. 42 1479 

c. 127 {Solicitors), 

o. 22 416 



24 & 25 Vict. 



1861. 

c. 11 {Foreign 

Law) 406 

c. 51 {Metrop. 
Police), 

3. 53 963 

c. 70 (Locomo- 
tives) — 

s. 7 1375 

13 1352 

c. 94 (Accessories, 
etc.) — 

"s. 1 41,57,158, 
14416 

2 .... 56, 1446 

3 .... 56,14S3 

4 1483 

5 1447 

6 1447 

7 .... 41,1447 
8.. ..1440, 1436 
9 .... 86,1448 

0. 96 (Larceny) — 

s. 1 ... 363,568 

12 331 

13 331 

14 331 

15 332 

16 332 

17 333 

18 349 

19 349 

21 349 

22 349 

23 550 

24 ... 333,557 



1861. 

FAGH 

24 & 25 Vict. c. 96— continued. 

s. 25 883 

26 887 

27 .... 367,678 

28 368 

29 .... 361,566 

30 866 

33 573 

36 573 

39 379 

82 623 

83 624 

84 624 

85 ... 383,384, 

561, 624 

86 628 

87 628 

98 1441 

■ 102 1212 

103 295 

108 291 

115 37, 862 

116 172 

^— 117 862 

c. 97 (Malicious 

Damage) — 
■ o. 1 736 

2 737 

3 737 

- 4 737 

5 737 

6 737 

■ 7 738 

8 738 

9 .... 788,761 

10 .... 788,762 

11 .... 214,763 

12 .... 214,764 

13 766 

14 767 

15 768 

16 782 

17 782 

18 732 

19 792 

20 793 

21 793 

22 794 

23 796 

24 796 

25 797 

— ^ 26 747 

27 747 

28 770 

29 771 

30 778 

31 779 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



24 & 25 Vict, c, 



1861. 

PAGE 

97 — continued. 

8. 32 787 

33 781 

34 782 

35 .... 157,783 

36 .... 167,783 

37 783 

38 784 

39 798 

40 788 

41 788 

42 748 

43 749 

44 749 

45 774 

46 774 

47 778 

48 777 

49 776 

50 1233 

51 799 

52 .... 800,801 

54 75S 

55 755 

56 .. 738, 1441 
67 738 

58 738 

59 739 

60 739 

61 739 

66 291 

67 739 

72 37, 739 

73 .... 247, 740 
75 .... 246,740 

u. 98 (Forgery)— 

=. 3 886 

5 840 

6 842 

28 849 

34 88, 888 

36 843 

37 844 

44 838 

47 838 

48 838 

49 839, 1441 

50 37, 839 

51 840 

i;. 99 {Coinage 

Offences) — 

s. 1 1087 

2 1091 

3 1093 

4 1098 

5 1098 

6 1097 



1861. 

PAGE 

24 & 25 Viet. c. 99— continued. 

s 7 1099 

8 1099 

9 1101,1470n; 

10 1101,1470n. 

11 1107 

12 .. 211, 1101 

13 1101 

14.. .1091, 1098, 

1109 

15.. .1102, 1107, 

1470k. 

16 1096 

17 1096 

18 1091 

19 1100 

20 1102 

21 1102 

22 1091 

23 1107 

24 1109 

25 1113 

27 1088 

28 .... 41,1088 

29 1089 

30 1089 

31 1089 

35... 1089, 1442 

36 .... 37,1089 

37 ... 173,198, 

1090 

38 . 247,1091 

c.,100 {Offences against 

the Person) — 

s. 1 860 

2 .... 236,860 

3 861 

4... 4,30,906 

5 ... 246, 430, 

862 

7 .... 863,886 

8 863 

9 30, 863 

10 31, 863 

11...4,108,214, 

907, 910 
—^ 12....4,108,91S 

13.. ..4, 108, 917 

14....4,108,911 

15 4,108, 

917 918 

16 ... 108,1238 

17 987 

18 .... 214, 936 

19 911 

20 ... 214,936, 

941 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



24 & 25 Vict, 



1861. 

PAGE 

c. 100 — continued. 

s. 21 .... 245,943 

22 944 

23 .... 214,946 

24 52,214, 

945 

25 .... 214,945 

26 2,971 

27 .... 430,977 

28 947 

29 947 

30 948 

31 951 

32 952 

33 953 

34 953 

35 954 

36 955 

87 956 

38 .... 961,964 

39 1226 

40 1226 

42 .... 161,430 

43 .... 430, 926 

44 .... 161,163 

45 161 

46 .... 162,927 
4V .... 212,927 

48 1016 

52 ... 430,1032 
53... 1006,1008 

54 1007 

55 .... 25, 430, 

1008 

56 ... 430,1014 
57. ..26, 41, 46, 

1292 
58 .... 359,922 
59...922, 926n. 

60 .... 214,919 

61 ... 238,1046 
, 62 4,430, 

994, 1048 

63 ... 11,1016, 

1018 

64 915 

65 916 

66 864 

67 ... 864,1442 

68 37, 864 

70 .... 246,865 

71 .... 247,865 

73 .... 287,971 

74 284 

c. 110 (Old Metal 

Dealers) 

723, 1138 



1862. 

PAGE 

25 & 26 Vict. c. 35 (Public Houses 
(Amdt.) S.), 

s. 19 (d) 1479 

c. 63 (Land Registry), 

ss. 105, 106, 

107, 138, 139 846 

u. 61 (Highway) — 

». 18 1348 

19 1348 

32 1371 

35 1370 

36 1361 

c. 65 (Homicide) — 

ss. 11, 12..41, 271n., 

286, 864 

c. 67 (Declaration 

of Title), 

a. 44 1200 

c. 68 (Fine Arts 

Copyright) , 

ss. 7, 8 803 

c. 107 (Juries) — 

SB. 4-6 184 

8-14 184 

s.ll 186 

c. 114 (Poaching), 

s. 1 1382 

1863. 

26 & 27 Vict. c. 29 (Elections), 

s. 6 417, 1398 

c. 44 (Garrotters), 

s. 1 243 

c. 73 (India Stock) — 

«. 14 856 

c. 87 (Savings Bank) — 

s. 9 625 

c. 90 (Marriage, I.) — 

ss. 17, 18 ... 1297 

s. 23 844 

e. 103 (Misappro- 

priation by 
Servants), 

s. 1 602 

c. 119 (Exhibition 

M e dais) , 
, s. 5 385 

1865. 

27 & 28 Vict. c. 47 (Penal Servi- 

tude) — 

s. 4 233, 1182 

ss. 5, 8 1182 

s. 9 234, 1460 

10 234,1461 

c. 101 (Highways), 

B. 7 1370 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1865. 

PAGE 

28 & 29 Vict. c. 18 (Criminal Pro- 
cedure) — 

s. 1 .... 446,475 

2 .... 201,204 

3 489 

4 493 

5 493 

6 473, 1461 

7 444 

8 .... 446,833 

c. 63 (Colonial 

Laws), s. 6 404 
c. 79 (Union Charge- 
ability), a. 9 287 

c. 83 (Locomotives), 

s. 12 1332 

c. 89 (Greenwich 

Hospital) , 

s. 45 1137 

c. 104 (Crown 

Suits) , 
ss. 31, 32, 
- 34 126 

c. 124 (Admiralty 

Powers) — 

ss. 6, 7 846 

s. 8 833 

9 833 

0. 126 (Prisons) — 

ss. 3, 4 1172 

s. 17 (5) 243 

37 1172 

ss. 57, 58 1173 

^ — s. 62 105 

ss. 63-65 1175 

s. 73 42, 1170 



1866. 

29 & 30 Vict. 0. 109 (Naval Dis- 
cipline) — 

s. 33 602 

34 748 

65 466 

82 1172 

c. 113 (Poor Law), 

s. 10 1387 



1867. 

30 & 31 Vict. c. 19 (Petty Ses- 
sions , I.), 
B. 1 82 



1867. 

PAGE 

30 & 31 Vict. — continued. 

c. 29 (Sale of Bank 

Share s ) , 

ss. 1, 3 .... 849 

c. 36 (Criminal Law 

Amendment) — 

s. 1 60,70 

3 .... 429,438 

4 438 

6 433 

7 436 

10 78 

c. 36 (Chester), 

s. 4 862 

li. 105 (Corrupt 

Practices) — 

a. 49 1397 

50 1398 

1868. 

31 & 32 Vict. c. 24 (Capital Punish- 

ment) — 

ss. 2, 3 861 

e. 5 142 

ss. 6, 7, 15, 

16 861 

c. 37 (Documentary 

Evidence) — 

s. 2 407 

3 409 

4 (1) .... 851 

6 409 

6 410 

o. 45 (Sea Fisheries) — 

as. 28, 42, 43, 

51, 52 .... 538 
55, 65 .... 339 

e. 72 (Promissory... 

Oaths) 

1200, ia87«. 

c. 110 (Telegraphs)— 

s. 20 387 

21 387 

e. exiii. (Gun Barrel 

Proof) 760 

e. 119 (Regulation 

of Rail- 
ways) .... 270 
0. 121 (Pharmacy) — 

fi. 13 416 

14 847 

c. 122 (Poor Law), 

s. 13 1345 

c. 125 (Election 

Petitions) 

1390, 1393re. 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1869. 

PAQE 

32 & 33 Vict. c. 10 (Colonial Pri- 

soners' Re- 
moval) 237 

c. 24 (Newspapers), 

8. 1, sched. 1121 

c. 62 (Debtors)— 

SB. 4-10 1001 

B. 6 859 

13, sub- 

8. 1... 362, 
705, 714, 
717, 1267 

8iib-s. 2, 3... 1271 

o. 18 68,70, 

1267 
20 .. 108, 1268 

23 1268 

c. 73 (Telegraphs)— 

fl. 23 587 

24 S88 

1870. 

33 & 34 Vict. e. 10 (Coin), s. 5... 1088 

c. 14 (Naturalization) — 

ss. 4, 6 1076 

». 5 188 

7 1387n. 

c. 23 (Forfeitures) — 

B. 1 86,164, 

26«, 1062, 

1456 

2 26S 

3 284 

4 290 

6 264 

es. 6, 8 265 

. s. 31 1062 

0. 49 (Marriage, I.) 1300 

0. 52 (Extradition) 83 

B. 16 34 

19 174 

c. 57 ( Gun and 

Pistol) 760 

u. 58 (Forgery) — 

s. 4 836 

c. 65 (Larceny Ad- 

vertisements), 
ss. 2, 3 1213 

c. 73 (Bridges), 

8. 12 1379 

c. 75 (Evidence), 

s. 83 408 

c. 76 (Debtors) ..... 1001 

c. 77 (juries) — 

s, 6 187 

7 180 

A.C.E. 



1870. 

PAGE 

33 & 34 Vict. c. 11— continued. 

». 8 182 

9 182 

10 72,182, 

196 

SB. 11-14 184 

s. 12 184 

BB. 15-18.. 181, 187, 

188 

B. 19 184 

. 20 .... 184,18® 

23 .... 207,218. 

c. 90 (Foreign En- 

listment) — 

es. 1-3 108a 

ss. 4-7 1081 

s. 8 1082 

SB. 9, 10 .... 1083 

s. 11 108S 

68. 12, 13 .... 108* 

8. 14 1084 

15 1084 

^s. 16, 17.. 31, 1084 

s. 18 1083 

ss. 19, 20 .... 1083 

21-29 1085 

s. 30 1086 

SB. 31, 32 .... 1087 

s. 33 1087 

c. 99 (Stat. Law 

Revision) ... 1121 

u. 110 (Matrimonial 

Causes, I.) 1300 

1871. 

34 & 35 Vict. c. 31 (Trade Union)— 

s. 2 1280 

12 606 

. 13 (5) .... 417 

18 852 

23 1280 

o. 41 (Gas Works 

Clauses), e. 9 1313 

0. 48 (Promissory 

Oaths) 

1200, 1387n. 

c. 70 (Local Govern- 

ment Board), 

s. 5 408 

0. 105 (Petroleum) 1315 

c. 112 (Prevention 

of Grimes) — 

6. 4 1182 

5 ...1182,1461 

7 ... 156,1462 

8 1464 

c 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1871. 

PAGE 

34 & 35 Vict. 0. lll-^oonUnued. 

• s. 9 ... 173, 199, 

1465 

-^ 12 961 

13 723 

18 ... 422,1466 

20 ... 173,1467 



1872. 

35 & 36 Vict. u. 10 (Marriage) ... 1296 

u. 19 (Pacific 

Islanders), 

407, 1000 

c. 33 (Ballot)— 

s. 3 1400 

10 1399 

11 1400 

20 1407 

24 ... 480,859, 

1397, 1399 

c. 62 (Grand Jury) 

72, 104 

c. 65 (Bastardy), 

s. 4 4.56 

i;. 92 (Parish Con- 

stables) 964 

c. 93 (Pawnbrokers) — 

Bs. 6, 24, 49 815 

s. 30 294 

34 295 

38 723 

c. 94 (Licensing) — 

B. 12. ..1004, 1478 



1873. 

36 & 37 Vict. 0. 60 (Extradition) 83 
c. 66 (Judicature) — 

s. 16 .. 90,93,95, 

104, 109, 
217 

26 135 

29 ... 104,109, 

230 

32 95 

34 90, 93, 

110, 118 
47 .... 301,342 

61 .... 403,420 

76 1220 

c. 71 (Salmon 

Fishery) , 

s. 13 787 

c. 88 (Slave Trade), 

s. 26 42,44 



1874. 

PAGE 

37 & 38 Vict. u. 15 (Betting) 1336 

c. 35 (Stat. Law 

Rev.) 662 

c. 36 (Personation) — 

s. 1 858 

2 838 

3 .... 107,858 

c. 42 (B uilding 

Societies) — 

B. 20 417 

31 606 

u. 62 (Infants Re- 

lief) 1264 

c. 81 (Great S e al 

Offices), 8. 5 420 

c. 88 (Births and 

Deaths Regis- 
tration) — 

s. 38 414 

i;. 96 (S t a t. Law 

Rev.) 108 

1875. 

38 & 39 Vict. c. 17 (Explosives) 894 

s 80 1315 

81 848 

86 916 

91 1316 

92 8, 1316 

102 1316 

■ c. 24 (Falsification 

of Accounts) — 

s. 1 734 

3 734 

c. 25 (Public Stores) — 

ss. 2, 3, 4 ... 1137 

6, 7 1138 

9, 10 .... 1138 

s. 12 1138 

S3. 13, 16, 17 1139 

sched 1139 

c. 56 (Public Health) — 

B. 91 1310 

Ill 1310 

BS. 116-119 .... 1289 

s. 142 1345 

144 1351 

ss. 144-148 .... 1351 

a. 149 1364 

171 1318 

186 419 

199 419 

216 1352 

326 419 

c. 63 (Food and 

Drugs) — 
ss. 2, 3 1287 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



38 & 39 Vict. 



187S. 

c. 63 — continued. 
ss. 4, 5, 8 

s. 20 

25 

28 



.. 1288 

.. 1289 

.. 1289 

1288 



c. 77 (Judicature) — 

■ s. 19 90,9.3 

23 ... 40,186n. 
c. 83 (Local Loans), 

s. 32 8S7 

c. 86 (Conspiracy, 
etc.) — 

s. 3 1281 

ss. 4, 5 1282 

6. 6 972 

7 1283 

9 8, 128S 

S3. 11, 12, 14 1286 
15, 16 .... 1286 
u. 87 (Land Transfer) — 
ss. 99, 100 846 

8.102- 847 

103 .... 385,847 
125 846 



1876. 

39 & 40 Vict. .„. 22 (Trade Union)— 

s. 5 606 

16 1280 

c. 36 (Customs) — 

B. 9...183,1387n. 

29 603 

85 603 

ss. 150, 151 .. 1100 

8. 186 .... 126,302 

189 11S7 

190... 1003,1155 

191 Il86 

193 .... 239,968 

217 1206 

229 42, 968 

255 968 

257 64, 968 

258 41, 968 

269 126 

260 969 

261 969 

c. 57 (Winter 

Assizes) 

186n.,832 

c. 77 (Cruelty t o 

Animals), 

es. 2, 6, 14 791 

». 21 792 

15 8, 791 



1876. 

39 & 40 Vict. — continued. 

c. 78 (Jury, L)- 

s. 10 

13 



191 
229 



1877. 

40 & 41 Vict. c. 14 

457, 1352 

u. 21 (Prison)— 

8S. 28, 30 ... 1175 

s. 40... 240,1116 

0. 26 (Law List), 

s. 16 416 

c. 46 (Winter 

Assizes) ... 186n. 

c. 5,9 (Colonial Stock), 

s. 21 857 

1878. 

41 & 42 Vict. c. 14 (Baths, etc.), 

s. 11 1318 

c. 33 (Dentists) 

s. 30.. .183, 1387m. 

34 847 

c. 49 (Weights and , 

Measures) 721 

c. 73 (Territorial 

Waters 
Jurisdiction) — 

s. 2 34 

3 34, 122 

4 34 

6 .... 646,652 

7 34 

c. 77 (Highways 

and Loco- 
motives) — 

3. 10...271w.,1350 

13 1347 

21 1379 

38 13S1 

1879. 

42 & 43 Vict. c. 1 (Spring Assizes) 

186n., 862 

s. 3 142 

c. 11 (Bankers Books 

Evidence) — 

ss. 3, 4, 5, 6, 

7, 8, 9 ... 448 

10. 11 .... 449 

c. 18 (Racecourses, 

Licensing).. 1344 
u. 19 (Inebriates), 

a. 3 1476 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1879. 

PAGE 

42 & 43 Vict. — continued. 

c. 21 {Customs and 

Inland Revenue) — 

s. 10 1157 

14 1157 

u. 22 {Prosecution 

of Offences) — 

s. 2 342 

5 ... 147,438, 

1210 

7 294 

9 123 

c. 34 {Children's 

Dangerous 
Performances) 430 

8s. 3,4 ...978,979 

c. 47 {Petroleum) ... 1315 

c. 49 {Summary 

Jurisdictixm) — 

s. 10 13,786, 

989 

11 13,786 

ss. 11-13 ... 606 

a. 12 1477 

17 7 

20 (1) ...935jt. 

20 (7) ... 784 

22 (2) ... 423 

24 1005 

26 457 

27,sub-s.3 

161,163, 
298 

sub-s.3,4 161 

28 1478 

37 1002 

42.. 92 

c. 55 {Prevention of 

Crime), s. 2.. 1462 

c. 59 {Statute Law 

Revision) ... 647 
c. 75 {Corrupt Prac- 
tices) 1393n. 



1880. 



655 



43 & 44 Vict. c. 9 (Time), s.l 

c. 19 {Taxes)— 

s. 40 183 

c. 41 {Burials) , 3. 7 

1161,1166 

c. 45 {Criminal Law 

Amendment) , 
a. 2 ... 402,1032 

u. 47 {Ground 

Game) 554 



1881. 

PAGE 

44 & 45 Vict. c. 48 {London 

County Coun- 
cil), s. 33... -419 

c. 58 {Army) — 

SB. 12,14... 1134 

17, 18 ... 603 

20,22... 1172 

s. 69 411 

70... 411,466 

142 (2) 854 

147 188 

153 1134 

156 (1) 1140 

156 (7) 1140 

c. 60 {Newspaper 

Libel) — 

6S. 1,4,5 ...1240 

s. 6... 68,1241 

15 415, 1241 

18 1241 

c. 62 {Veterinary 

Surgeons), 

a. 9 417 

12 .'. 847 

u. 64 {Central Cri- 
minal Court, 
Prisons), s. 2 

35,105,142,861 
c. 67 {Petroleum) 1315 

"c. 68 {Judicature) — 

s. 15 312 

18 105 

c. 69 {Fugitive 

Offenders) ... 174 

es. 20, 21 37 

1882. 

45 & 46 Vict. c. 9 {Documentary 
Evidence) — 

s. 2... 405,410 

3 851 

c. 48 {Reserve Forces), 

s. 7 1387n. 

15 1134 

17 1134 

c. 49 {Militia), 

8. 41 ... 1387n. 
c. 50 {Municipal 

Corporations) — 

B. 22, sub-s. 

5, 6 418 

24 419 

34 1386 

74 1407 

75 1407 

77 1406 

92 (6) ... 1404 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1882. 

FASE 

45 & 46 Vict. c. 50 — continued. 

s. 101 1404 

119 1379 

165 105 

168 105 

186, sub-a. 1 

72,182 
188 39,963 

191 964 

222 98 

223 1002 

242 (3) ... 1286 

u. 56 {Electric 

Lighting), 
s. 22 784 

c. 61 (Bins of Ex. 

change) — 

6. 3 (1) ... 809 

5 810 

73 809 

81 (3) ... 809 

c. 72 (Revenue), 

s. ll,8ub-s. 

2 «9 

c. 75 {Marrie d 

Women's 
Property) 

23, 88, 246 

B. 1 661 

12 48,515,722 

■ 16 ... 49,515 

722,728 

1883. 

46 & 47 Vict. c. 3 (Explosive 

Substances) — 
63. 2, 3, 4 ... 756 

o. 5 787 

6 385,757 

7 122,757 

ss. 8,9 738 

c. 22 (Sea Fisheries), 

s. 17 271n. 

c. 34 (Cheap 

Trains)... 275 

c. 38 (T rial of 

Lunatics) , 

B. 2 217 

c. 44 (Borough Con- 
stables), s. 2 963 

c. 45 (Counterfeit 

Medals), ss. 2, 

3 1113 

c. 51 (Corrupt and 

Illegal Prac- 
tices) — 
a. 1 1389 



46 & 47 Vict 



1883. 

PACE 

o. 51 — continued, 

o. 2 1389 

3 1390 

6 ...1388,1390 

ss. 7-12 1394 

s. 33 (7) ... 1390 
38 (8) ... 1390 
41 (4) ... 1391 

43 1391 

as. 45,50 ... 1393 

B. 51 ...65,1393 

52... 215, 1394 

63... 107,417, 

1394 

56 1394 

57 (1) ... 1396 

58 139S 

59... 384,1398 

60 1396 

64 1389 

65 1393n. 

u. 52 (Bankruptcy) — 

s. 32 1388 

c. 55 (Revenue), 

s. 17 840 



47 & 48 Vict. 



1884. 

u. 14 (Married 

Women's 

Property) 438 

c. 19 (Summary 

Jurisdiction, 

J.),aa. 4,6, 

7,9 13 

c. 20 (Greek Mar- 
riages) 1295 

c. 30 (Great Seal) 411 
e. 31 (C clonial 
Prisoners ' 
Removal) 237 
c. 61 (Judicature), 

S.15. 126 

c. 64 (Criminal 
Lunatics), 

78, 170, 218 
i;. 70 (Municipal 
Elections) — 

s. 1 1401 

2... 1388,1402 

3 1388 

7 1407 

21, sub-s. 5 1402 

23 1402 

^6, aub-8. 4 1402 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



188^. 

PAGE 

47 & 48 Vict. e. 10— continued. 

B. 30...66,107,216 

385,417,1405 

32 (2) ... 1403 

34 1401 

35..65,107,385, 

417, 1401 

36 107,385,, 

417, 1388, 
1402 

c. 72 {Disused Burial 

Grounds) , 

s. 3 5, 1346 

c. 76 {Post Office 

Protection) — 

s. 1 S88 

11 S88,852 



1885. 

48 & 49 Vict. c. 49 {Subma/rine 
Telegraphy) , 

s. 3 784 

c. 69 {Criminal Law 

Amendment), 

8. 2 ... 480,1034 

3 ... 214,480, 

1033 

4. .4, 214, 246, 

372, 402, 
1016, 1024 

5 ... 4,65,214, 

372, 402 

5,sub-s.l 4, 

212, 1024', 
1030 

5,sub-s. 2 4, 

1016, 1020 

6 1023 

7 1012 

8 1033 

9 214, 

1017, 1029 

10 1035 

11 4,1048 

12 1026 

13 1327 

■ 16 1021 

17 68,107, 

1012 

20 1017 

c. 75 {Assault on 

Police) , 
6S. 1,2 961 



1887. 

PAGE 

50 & 51 Vict. c. xiii. {City of 
London), 

107, 1401 

c. 20 {Criminal 

Law and 
Procedure, L) 1145 

u. 28 {Merchandise 

Marks) — 

s. 2 8,1272 

3 1274 

ss. 4,5 127S 

6,7,8 ... 1276 

s. 9 1276 

ss. 10,11 1277 

s 12 1277 

13 68,1277 

15 65,1277 

18 1277 

19 ... 385,1278 

• c. 29 {Margarine), 

s. 7 1289 

c. 55 {Shenffs)— 

s. 8 (2) ... 962 

13 862 

27 1156 

29 ...1173,1206 

39 1456 

c. 71 {Coroners) 

s. 3 141,143 

4,sub-s. (1) 143 

(2) 144, 

440 

(3) 141, 

144 
(5) 144, 

145 
5 439 

sub-s. (1) 146 

(2) 147 

(3) 146 

6 142 

7 (1) ... 148 

8 (1) ... 180 

(2) 141,1207 

9 146 

18 (1) ... 144 

(2) ... 143 

(4) ... 147 

(5) 146,439 

19 (2) ... 143 

20 147 

21 143 

36 1155 

37 144 

40 (1) ... 143 

45 140 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1888. 

-PAGE 

51 & 52 Vict. c. 3 {Stat. Law 

Rev.), a. 1, 
par. 2... 86 

c. 41 {Loeal Govern- 

ment) — 

B. 3 1325, 

1351, 1379 

6 1379 

11 1380 

22 (5) ... 418 

23 419 

24 ...-. 283 

34 (2) ... 1380 

75 .... 65, 107, 

215, 417, 
1386, 1407 

78 (3). .71, 1380 

79 (2) 1380 

83 (6) 184 

87 (1) (5) 270 

88 180 

89...31,40,104, 

180, 187 

89 (3). ...30, 185 

100 289 

c. 43 {County Courts) — 

a. 28 427 

33 611 

48 962 

180 849 

0. 46 {Oaths)— 

o. 1 479 

2 .... 198,479 

3 478 

5 477 

c. 64 {Law of Libel) — 

ss. 1, 3 1124, 

1241 

s. 4 1242 

8 ... 136,1242 

9 1242 

c. 65 {Solicitors, 

s. 5 416 

1889. 

52 & 53 Vict. c. 10 {Commissioners 

jot Oaths)— 

B. 1 858 

-,— 3 421 

6 416 

u. 12 {Assizes Belief) — 

a. 1 106 

3 .... 103,106 

5. .77, 103,110 

c. 45 {Factors) — 

s. 2 (2) 637 

ss. 8, 9 296 



1889. 

PAGE 

62 & 53 Vict. — continued. 

c. 63 {Interpretation) — 

8. 1 (2) .... 9 

2(1).... 9 

3 66, 232 

9 405 

12,aub-s. 2 408 

sub-s.4, 8 408 

13 (4) ... 172, 

267n. 

13 (14)... 267k. 

21 1198 

24 1002 

30 1077 

33... 6, 165, 160 

34 37 

38,siib-s.l 272, 

993 

2 8, 

994, 1416 

42 6 

c. 69 {Public Bodies 

Corrupt Prac- 
tices) — 
s. 1 1408 

2 1409 

3 1409 

4 ... 122,1409 

6 ... 107, 1410 

7 1410 

1890. 

53 & 54 Vict. c. 5 {Lunacy) — 

s. 84 142 

116 1476 

68. 207-229 .... 974 

6. 297 1345 

315 25 

317 1199 

318 1199 

319 142 

322 2,974 

324 1017 

325 ... 974,1017 

327 122 

341 14, 974 

c. 21 {Inland 

Revenue) — 

s. 8 183, 

1387n. 

10 1206 

11 961 

c. 37 {Foreign 

Jurisdiction) , 

174, 406 

c. 46 {Police) 760 



xl 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1890. 

PAGE 

53 & 54 Vict. — continued. 

e. 69 (Public Health), 

s. 51 1325 

c. ccxliii. (London 

County Coun- 
cil), s. 26 ... 183 



1891. 

54 & 65 Vict. c. 15 (Merchandise 
Marks), 
sa. 1, 2 1278 

c. 38 (Stamp Duties 

Management) — 

B. 13 (3)-(9) 

sm, 8S0 

18 850 

23 850 

27 850 

0. 39 (Stamps), 

B. 14 (4)..M7, 745 

0. 68 (County Coun- 

cil Elections) 1405 
u. 69 (Penal Servi- 
tude) — 

B. 1 .... 238,239 

2 1465 

3 ... 234,1461 

4 (1) ... 1462, 

1465 

(2) .... 146S 

6 ... 234,1461 

6 1465 

c. 76 (Public Health, 

London) — 

s 23 1314 

47... 1289, 1314 

89 1345 

138 ...1310,1313 



1892. 

55 & 56 Vict. c. 4 (Betting and Loans, 
Infants) — 

s. 1 1336 

2 1336 

- 3 1337 

4 1837 

6 1387 

c. 23 (Foreign 

Marriage) — 

s. 13 1297 

16 415 

19 1299 

22 1299 



1892. 

PAGE 

56 & 56 Vict. — continued. 

c. 32 (Clergy Dis- 
cipline).. 1051, 1065 

c. 56 (Coroners), 

B. 1 145 

c 59 (Telegraphs), 

s. 1 784 

c. 64 (Witnesses at 

Public Inquiries) — 

ss. 1, 2 1202 

8. 3 .: 1203 

ss. 4,5,7 1203 



56 & 57 Vict. 



1893. 

c. 15 (Music, etc., 
Licences, 
Middlesex).. 1325 
0. 39 (Industrial and 
Provident 
Society) — 

8. 8 417 

64 606 

75 417 

0. 54 (Stat. Law 

Rev.) 243 

c. 61 (Public Autho- 
rities Protec- 
tion), ss. 1, 2 64 
i;. 66 (Statutory Rules 

Publication) 406 
c. 71 (Sale of Goods)— 
s. 22 .... 293,297 

24 .... 294,295 

25 .... 297,637 
62 294 

c. 73 (Local Govern- 
ment) — 

s. 3 (6) .... 1407 
5 (1) .... 607 

5 (2) .... 185 

6 1349 

19 607 

20 (6) .... 1407 
23 (6) .... 1407 
25.. .1348, 1851, 

1368n. 

33 607 

48 65,107, 

215, 418, 
1386, 1407 

69 419 

74 (4) .... 1407 
sched. l,pt. 3... 419 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



xli 



1894. 

PAGE 

57 & 58 Viot. c. 19 {Merchandise 
Marks) — 

». 1 1278 

2 1279 

c. coxxi. (London), 

s. 10 419 

0. 60 (Merchant 

Shipping) — 

I s. 64, sub-ss. 

2, 3 ... 415 

66 847 

73 971 

104 847 

130 847 

154 847 

180 847 

220 775 

225 606 

240 415 

248 601 

253 415 

282 847 

287 : 1479 

457 1388 

38. 538-542 ... 1188 

s 564 848 

666 777 

sa. 667-669 ... 775 

680 ... 775.777, 

848,958 

684 959 

685 959 

686 36 

687 36 

—^ 689 482 

■ 691 .... 440,482 

694 415 

695 .... 415,848 

701 271n. 

719 .... 408,415 

720 415 

722 848 

742 989 



1895. 

58 & 59 Vict. c. 9 (Evidence) .... 408 

c. 33 (Extradition) 85 

c. 39 (Summary Juris- 
diction: Mar- 
ried Women) 

s. 4 .... 661, 927 

5 928 

c. 40 (Corrupt Prac- 

tices) 1394 



1896. 

PASE 

59 & 60 Vict. 0. 25 (Friendly 

Societies) — 

a. 11 417 

32 ... 610,1128 

87 606 

100 417 

c. 26 (Industrial 

and Collecting 
Societies) , 

s. 14 606 

0. 36 (Locomotives) — 

s. 1 1332 

5 1315 

sohed. ... 1353 

c. 59 (Public Enter- 
tainment) . . . 1325 

1897. 

60 & 61 Viot. c. 18 (Juries, De- 

tention)... W7,W8 
c. 30 (Police Pro- 
perty) 295 

c. 52 (Dangerous 

Performances) 430 

ss. 1, 2 979 

0. 65 (Land Transfer) — 

ss. 20, 26 ... 847 



61 & 62 Vict, 



1898. 

0. 6 (Juries) 187 

c. 7 (Bail) So 

c. 29 (Locomotives) 1353 
u. 36 (Criminal 
Evidence) 
B. 1 .... 438 
sub-e. (a) 
461 
(h) 
488 
(c) 



ss. 4, 5 



(d) 

(e) 

(/) 
488 

(?) 

(h) 

489 

463, 

. 202 
207n 



,496 
488, 
,996 
202, 
,461 
438, 

461 
438, 

461 
438, 

461 
206, 
,462 
439, 

468 
203, 
,463 
1185 
205, 
,463 

463 



xlii 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1898. 

PAGE 

61 & 62 Vict. i;. 36— continued. 

as. 6, 7 466 

sched. ... 466 

c. 39 (Vagrancy) ... 468 

s. 1 (1) ... 1039 

(2) ... 1040 

(3) ... 1040 

c. 41 (Prison) — 

s. 1 1173 

2 309 

4 243 

5 246 

6 ... 240,1116 

10 ... 904,905, 

964,1005, 

1173 

11....76,78,483 

12 .... 227,232 

15 (2). .241, 243 

c. 58 (Marriage) ... 1295 

B. 7 844 

13 1296 

15 1307 

c. 60 (Inebriates)... 21 

s. 1 ... 191,1476 

2 1476 

es. 3, 4 ..... 1477 

5,6,8,9, 

21 1477 

s. 29 1477 

sched. 1...1478, 1479 

1899. 

62 & 63 Vict. c. 14 (London Gov- 

ernment)... 65, 107 

s. 2 ... 418,1408 

5 (2) .... 419 

7 1386 

ss. 11, 25 .... 186 

s. 34 1386 

sched. 2 419 

c. 22 (Summary 

Junsdiction) , 

9. 3 69S 

c. 23 (Anchors and 

Chain Cables), 
ss. 13,14,15, 
16 722 

c. 29 (Public Enter- 

tain/ments).. 1325 

c. 33 (Board of 

Education) , 

s. 7 408 

c. 35 (Inebriates), 

s. 1 1478 

c. 51 (Food and 

Drugs), e.l 1279 



1899. 

PAGE 

62 & 63 Vict. c. 51— continued. 

s. 12 1288 

ss. 19, 20 .... 1289 

s. 26 1287 

1900. 

63 & 64 Vict. c. 51 (Money Lenders)— 

s. 2 (1) 122 

4 690 

5 1337 

6 690 

1901. 

1 Edw. 7, c. 17 (Lunatic, Ireland), 

s. 2 974,1017 

c. 22 (Factories), 

e. 118 1387n. 

1902. 

2 Edw. 7, c. 8 (Cremation) — 

e. 8 1346 

—^ 10 1345 

c. 17 (Midwives) — 

s 7 417 

12 847 

c. 28 (Licensing) — 

=. 2 (3) 1479 

, 6 (1) 1477 

c. 42 (Education) 1406 

1903. 

3 Edw. 7, c. 16 (Naval Volun- 

teers), s. 1... 1387n. 
c. 24 (Education) 1406 

c. 25 (Licensing, S.) — 

s. 70 1479 

110 1479n. 

c. 31 (Board of Agri- 
culture)... iQQ, 1279n. 

c. 36 (Motor Gar), 

s. 15 1353 

c. 38 (Poor Prisoners' 

Defence) — 

s. 1 17S,281 

ss. 2, 3 176 

c. 44 (General Dealers, 

I.) 723 

1904. 

4 Edw. 7, 0. 15 (Prevention of 

Cruelty to 
Children) — 

3. 27 65,1028 

c. 24 (Wireless Tele- 
graph) 1148 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



xliii 



1905. 

PAOE 

5 Edw. 7, i;. 11 (Railwa/y Fires) 1363 

0. 13 (AZiens), B. 3... 236, 303 

c. 15 (Trade Marks)— 

B. 52 408 

66 1279 

1906. 

6 Edw. 7, c. 14 (Alkali, etc., 

Works) 1313 

c. 21 (Ground Game)... 555 

c. 34 (Prevention of 

Corruption) — 

- s. 1 3, mi 

2 122, 1411 

(1)-... 68, 68n., 

1411 

(2) .... 68,1412 

(3) 1412 

(5) . 107, 1412 

(6) 1412 

c. 43 (Street Betting)— 

8. 1 1337 

2 1339 

u. 47 (Trade Disputes) 

8. 1 1281 

2 (1) 1285 

3 128S 

5 (2) 1285 

(3) 1282 

e. 48 (Merchant Ship- 
ping) — 

s. 30 958 

36 958 

43 957 

49 959 

SB. 84, 86 36 

1907. 

7 Edw. 7, c. 9 (Territorial Forces), 

a. 20 1134 

23 (4)....183,1387n. 

c. 13 (Income Tax), 

B. 23 (1) 64 

c. 16 (Evidence, Colonial 

Statutes) — 

B. 1 (1) 404 

(2) ...404n.,8ol 

(4) 404 

c. 17 (Probation of 



s. 1 ... 260,284,291, 
295 

2 260 

3 261 

SB. 4, 6 262 

7,8,9.10... 263 



1907. 

PAGE 

7 Edw. 7 — continued. 

c. 21 (Butter and Mar- 
garine), s. 5 (1) 1279 
c. 23 (Criminal Appeal) — 

B. 1 300 

2 302 

3 302,339 

3 (a) 54, 342 

(b) 337 

4 ... 304,338,727 

5 (1) .... 304,727 

(2) .... 304, 339 

(3) ... 217,305, 

339 

(4) .... 219, 305 

6 295,305 

7 306 

8 306 

9 306 

10 307,346 

11 307 

12 308,342 

13 308,346 

(2) 308 

14 308 

(3) 232 

15 309,342 

• 16 199,310 

17 311,339 

18 311 

19 312 

20 (1) 302 

(2) ... 138,200, 

302 

(3) ... 200,303, 

1353 
(4) .... 303,342 

21 303,312 

SB. 22, 23 312 

c. 53 (Public Health, 

etc.), B. 86 ... 723 



1908. 

8 Edw. 7, c. 3 (Public Prosecutor) 

s. 1 (5) 1473 

2 (4) (5) 

271«.,288 

c. 15 (Costs in Criminal 

Cases) — 

B. 1 129,146, 

168,267,439 

BS. 2, 3 268 

s. 4 269 

5 270 

6 119,129, 

139, 284, 303 



xliv 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1908. 

PAGE 

8 Edw. 7, c. 15 — continued. 

6. 7 270 

8 271,287 

9 271,286, 

309, i3S3 

10 139,272, 

286,1372 

u. 41 (^Assizes and 

Sessions) — 

s. 1 72,105, 

106, 187 

(5) 67 

2 105,106 

3 106 

c. 45 (Incest) — 

s. 1 4, 1042 

2 1043 

3 1043 

4 (1) 68,1043 

(2) ... 107,1043 

(3) ... 214,1043 

(4) 1044 

5 199,1044 

■ 6 68,68re., 

122,1044 

ss. 7, 8 1044 

• c. 46 (Criminal Appeal) — 

B. 1 300 

2 302 

c. 48 (Post Office)— 

■ ss. 12, 19 586 

16, 18 582 

22, 23 582 

s. 36 409 

43 188,1387ra. 

50 S80 

51 S80 

52 681 

53 S81 

54 881 

55 381 

56 682 

57 582 

68 382 

69 (1) 682 

(2) .... 682,840 

60 863, 850 

61 688,801 

62 583,786 

63 (1) (a) .... 883 

(b) ... 583, 

1321 

(c) .... 1321 

(2) 383 

(3) 383 

ss. 64, 65 588,860 

66, 67 383 



1908. 

PAGE 

8 Edw. 7, c. 48 — continiied. 

a. 69 4,383 

70 684 

71 684 

72 43, 684 

73 884 

74 684 

_ 76 688 

77 383 

84 388 

ss. 86, 86 585 

8. 88 388 

89 388 

90 386 

■ 91 887 

92 (c) 586 

c. 59 (Prevention of 

Grime) — 
s. 1 12, 264 

sa. 2,3 12, 268 

4,5 12, 238 

6,7 256 

8,9 267 

s. 10 1469 

11 303, 1471 

12 1471 

13 1471 

14 1471 

15 1472 

17 257, 1470 

18 257,1471 

19 (2) 1469 

c. 66 (Public Meetings) — 

1220, 1394 

... 67 (Children)— 

s. 6 142 

12 2,162,214, 

430, 872, 894, 

895, 980, 994 

13 20n., 981 

14 981 

15 982 

16 1026 

17 1027 

18 1027 

19 982 

20 982 

21 983 

22 984 

23 988 

24 986 

26 987 

26 21, 1480 

27 987 

28 437, 987 

29 430, 988 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



xlv 



1908. 

PAGE 

8 Edw. 7, 0. 67 — continued. 

s. 30. ..430, 453, 479, 

480, 988, 1028, 
1051 

31 989 

32 81, 989 

. 32 (4) ... 54, 61, 990 

33 990 

34 287, 990 

35 68, 990 

36 .'.... 990 

37 990 

38 990, 996 

57 250 

68 (2) (7) 250 

60 251 

61 251 

62 251 

63 251 

64 252 

65 2S2 

66 252 

ss. 67-72 252 

s. 75 252 

76 264 

84 264 

94 89, 90 

as. 95,96 89 

8. 97 263 

99 246, 260, 284, 

291, 303 
100 26S 

102 12, 236, 239, 248 

103 11, 12, 236, 248, 

860 
104 249 

105 249 

106 249 

107 247 

108 248, 249 

109 249 

110 250 

114 199, 991 

115 199, 991 

116 1138 

119 896 

123 ..977, 992, 996, 

1029 

124 992 

126 992 

127 993 

128 (1) 8, 12 

(2) 2, 1033 

131 248, 993 

133 13 

134 .... 13, 260, 993 

sched. 1 994 



1908. 

FAUB 

8 Edw. 7 — continued. 

0. 68 {Port of London), 

8. 39 188 

c. 69 {Companies Con- 
solidation) — ■ 

B. 1 449 

16 49 

17 49, 417 

• 38 (1) (i) 857 

175 (1) 625 

(2) 626 

(3) 626 

(4) 626 

(5) 626 

(6) 626 

(7) ... 384, 626 

(8) 626 

(9) 626 

216 626 

217 627 

243 417 



1909. 

9 Edw. 7, c. 12 {Marine Insurance) 

s. 1 1338 

0. 24 {Merchandise 

Marks, I.) ... 1279 

0. 39 {Oaths)— 

s. 2 476 

3 476 



1910. 

10 Edw. 7 & 1 Geo. 5, c. 17 
{County Com- 
mon Juries) 

184, 186 
c. 24 {Licensing Con- 
solidation) — 

s. 50 1391 

77 1328 

ss. 80, 112... 901, 1478 

c. 25 {Children Act 

(1908) Amend- 
ment) — 

d. 1 1027 

o. 32 {Registration of 

Births, Deaths, 
and M ar - 
riages {Scot- 
land) Amend- 
ment) — 
». 1 1297 



3dvi 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1 & 2 Geo. 5 



1911. 

PAGE 

c. 6 {Perjury) — 

s. 1 . 76, 1183, 1187 

2 1188 

3 1188 

4 1188 

5 1189 

6 1189 

7 3, 1190 

8 48, 1190 

9 1190 

10 107, 1192 

11 1192 

12 1192 

13 480,1191 

14 424, 1193 

16 (1) ... 477, 1193 
16 1194 

c. 7 (Municipal Elec- 
tions (Corrupt 
and Illegal 
Practices) Act) — 

s. 1 1406 

c. 27 (Protection of 

Animals Act) — 

s. 1 (1) 791 

12 (1) 1003 

i;. 28 (Official Secrets) — 

s. 1 (1) 1141 

(2) 1141 

2 (1) 1142 

(la) 1142 

(2) 1142 

3 1143 

5 1143 

6 1143 

7 1143 

8 122, 1144 

9 1144 

10 31, 109 

(1) (2) ... 1144 

(3) ...108,1144 

(4) 1143 

11 1143 

12 1143 

13 1146 

c. 50 (Coal Mines) — 

■a! 28 848 

u. 55 (National 

Insurance) 
as. 57, 88 409 



1912. 

2 & 3 G-eo. 5, c. 20 (Criminal Law 
AmenAm,ent 
Act) 



1912, 

PAGE 

2 & 3 Geo. 5, c. m— continued. 

s. 1 1004, 1037 

2 1037 

3 1037 

4 1327 

5 1328 

7 (1) 1040 

(2) 1040 

(3) 1040 

(4) 1041 

• (6) 1041 

(6) ...468, 1041 

c. cv. (L.C.C. (Finance 

Consolidation) ) — 

». 39 841 

40 842 

1913. 

3 Geo. 5j c. 4 (Prisoners (Tem- 

porary Discharge) ) 244 
3 & 4 Geo. 5, c. 7 (Children : 

Employment 
Abroad) — 

8. 1 (1) 998 

(2) ...; 998 

(3) 998 

2 998 

3 (1) 998 

(2) 998 

(3) 999 

(4) ... 468, 999 

4 999 

5 fl) 999 

(2) 999 

c. 27 (Forgery) — 

». 1 (1) :.. 804 

(2) (o) 804 

(b) 804 

(c) 804 

(3) (a) 804 

(fc) 804 

(c) 804 

2 (1) (a) 806, 807 

(b) 806, 807 

(c) 806, 808 

(2) (a) 806, 808, 

814 

(b) 806, 816 

(c) 806, 817 

(d) 806, 817 

(e) 807, 817 

(/) 807, 817 

(g) 807, 817 

(h) 807, 817 

(i) 807, 817 

(?) 807, 817 



66 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



xlvii 



1913. 

PAGE 

3 & 4 Geo. 5, c. 27 — continued. 

o. 3 (1) ... 818, 819 

(2) (o) 818, 819 

(b) 818, 819 

(c) 818, 819 

(d) 818, 819 

(e) 818, 819 

(3) (a) 818, 819 

(b) 818, 819 

(c) 818, 819 

(d) 818, 819 

(e) 818, 819 

(/) 818, 819 

(g) 818, 819 

(h) 818, 819 

(i) 818, 819 

(;■) 818, 819 

• (k) 819, 820 

(l) 819, 820 

4 (1) ... 802, 820 

(2) 820 

5 (1) 820 

(2) 821 

(3) 821 

(4) 821 

(5) 821 

6 (1) 822 

(2) 822 

(3) 822 

7 (a) (b) ... 824 

8 (1) 825 

(2) 825 

"(3) 825 

9 (a) 825 

(b) 826 

(c) 826 

(d) 826 

(e) 826 

10 (a) 826 

(b) 827 

11 827,1441 

12 (1) ....242, 827 

(2) (a), (b), 

(c), (d) 

246, 247, 827 

13 107, 827 

14 (1) 42, 802, 828 

(2) 42, 828 

15 828 

16 (1) 828 

— - (2) 829 

17 (1) 50, 829 

(2) ... 807, 829 

- (3) 829 

~- 18 (1) ... 826, 829 
(2) 830 

(3) 830 



1913. 

PAGE 

3 & 4 Geo. 5, >;. 27 — continued. 

H. 19 (1) 830 

(2) 831 

20 831 

21 831 

c. 28 {Mental 

Deficiency), 
». 1 ... 14, 238, 975 

8 258 

51 (1) 973 

(3) 976 

(4) 976 

54 976 

55 976 

56 (1) 1038 

(2) (6) ... 1039 

(6) 1017, 1039 

57 1199 

58 1199 

60 (1) ... 976, 1199 

62 1173 

65 (1) 1017 

71 976 

c. 37 {National 

Insurance) 
3. 29 (3) 40e 



4 & 5 Geo. 5, 



1914. 

t. 14 {Currency and 
Banknotes 
Act), 

3. 1... 508, 568, 808 
c. 47 {Deeds of 

Arrangement), 
Pt. IV. s. 17 ... 1254 
0. 58 {Criminal Jus- 
tice Adminis- 
tration) — 
o. 10 (1) .257 

(2) 257 

(3) 257 

(4) 237 

(5). ..237, 304 
(6) 258 

11 (1)...254, 258 

(2) (3) 256, 

258 

(4) 258 

U 799 

15 2 

16 d)'... 240, 241 

(2) 240 

(3) 241 

(4) 241 

(5) 241 

19 90 



xlviii 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



4 & 6 Geo. 5, 



1914. 

PAGE 

i;. 58 — continued. 

». 23 89 

24 88 

26 (1) 1465 

28 (1)...423, 1466 

(2). ..430, 453, 

479, 480 

(3). ..468, 1292 

36 (1) 244 

(2) 245 

39 fl).-- 149,168, 
211,213 
c. 59 (Bankruptcy) — 

a. 14 384 

15 383 

(1) 383 

(8). ..383, 1263 

23 (1) ....... 1005 

25 383 

28 (3) 428 

96 (1).. 1005, 1261 
(2)-(5).. 1261 

97 1261 

103 1005 

107 (4) 12S6 

123 (1) 1005 

125 (1) 1264 

137 (1) 428 

(2) 428 

138 (1) 428 

(2) 428 

139 428 

141 428 

142 428 

143 428 

144 (1) 429 

(2) 429 

154 383,1254 

(1) 1284 

(2) 1233 

(3) 12SS 

(4) 52 

(5) 1233 

(6) 1238 

(7) 1233 

(8) 1233 

(9) 12SS 

(10) 1233 

(11) 12SS 

(12) 1233 

(13) 1283 

(14)... 388, 1236 

(15) 1266 

(16) 1256 

155 (a), (6).. 12S6 
166 (o), (b), 

(c) 1237 



1914. 

PAGE 

4 & 6 Geo. 5, o. 59 -continued. 

e. 157 (1) (ffi), 

(b), (c).. 1287 

, (2) 1237 

(3) 1237 

B. 158 (1) 1238 

. (2) 1258 

(3) 1238 

(4) 12S8 

(5) 1238 

• 159 12,1238 

160 1239 

161 1239 

162 1259 

163 (1).. 1005, 1239 

(2) 1239 

164 68, 1260 

• (1) 1260 

(2) 1260 

(3) 1260 

(4) 1260 

165 1260 

166 383,384, 

628 

167 1261 

169 (1) (2)... 1261 



1915. 

5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90 (Indictments) — 

Appendix A, 1483 

s. 1 27 

2 (1) 27 

(2) 27 

(3) 28 

(4) 28 

3 (1) 27,44 

(2) 27,44 

4 37, 857 

5 128 

(1).... 34,101, 

288,849 

(2).... 84, 101, 

352 

(3)...SS, 1212 

(4) SS 

(5) 38 

(6) 38 

6 ; 27, 286 

7 60 

8 (1).... 60, 350, 

352 
(2) 61 

(3). ...61, 128, 

136, 144, 

151 

9 (2) 61 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



xlix 



191S. 

PAOB 

5 & 6 Geo. 5, o. 90 — oontinued. 

rules 1486-1490 

rule 1 (1) 28 

(2) 28 

(3) 28 

(4) 28 

(5) .... 28,74, 

144 

. (6) 28 

2 ... 28,128,144 

3 S7 

4 44, 4S 

5 46 

6 (1) 47 

(2) 47 

7 49, 837 

8 SO 

9 51 

10 52 

11 53 

12 61 

13 (1).... 78, 129, 

168 

(2) .... 78,268 

(3) 78 

14 61 



6 & 7 Geo. 5, 



1916. 

. 50 (Larceny) — 

e. 1 (1).... 499, 511, 

535 

(2).. ..500, 515, 

533 

(3). ...500, 542, 

643 

2 500,509, 

551,567n. 

3 546 

4 546 

5 (1) 548 

(2) 548 

(3). ..548, 1212 

6 560 

7 (1) 563 

(2) 563 

(3) 564 

8 (1) ...156,372, 

727 

(2) .... 47,572 

(3) 573 

9 576 

10 577 

11 578 

12 (1) 579 

(2) 379 

(3) 579 



1916. 

PA6B 

6 & 7 Geo. 5, c. 50, s. 12 — oontinued. 

(4) 379 

s. 13 (a) .... 52, 653 

(b) 653 

14 697 

15 (1) 598 

(2) 398 

(3) 598 

16 (a) 600 

(b) 600 

(c) 600 

17 (1) ....601,612 

(2) 601 

(3) 601 

18 (a) 380 

(b) 580 

19 601 

20 (1).... 621, 633 

(2) 621 

21 ...122,384, 621 

22 (1) 622 

(2) 622 

23 (1) ...245,637, 

643 

(2) 637 

(3) ....211, 637 

24 (1) 654 

(2) 654 

25 (1) 634 

(2) 634 

26 (1).... 634, 674 

(2) 654 

27 (1) 634 

(2) 654 

28 (1) 654 

(2) 654 

(3) 654 

(4) 654 

29 (1) 681 

(2) 681 

(3) ....682, 686 

(4) 682 

30 682 

31 (1) 682 

(2) 682 

32 (1)... .691, 1270 

(2) 691 

33 (1).... 723, 727 

(2). ...580, 724 

(3) 724 

(4) ..:.... 724 

34 1212 

35...500, 694, 1441 

36 (1) ... 49,500, 

539, 728 

(2) .... 49,300 

a. 37 (1) ....... 301 

d 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



1916. 

PA6E 

.6 & 7 Geo. 5, c. 50, s. SI— continued. 

(2) 801 

(3) 801 

(4) ....242,801 

(5) ...246, 247, 

801 

(6) ....245, SOI 

38 (1) ... 108, 802, 



(2)., 

39 (1) . 

(2) . 

(3) . 

40 (1) . 
&) 

(3) 

W 
(5) 

41 (1) 
(2) 
(3). 

42 (1) . 
(2). 

43 (1) 

(2). 
(3) 



..802,688 
.. 43,802, 
708,724 
... 43,802 
.. 48,802, 

724 
.802,691 
.. 62,802, 

691 
.. 57,803, 

724 

803 

803 

804 

804 

...804,688 
...808,724 
...808,728 
.808,728, 

730 
...806,623 
..306,561, 



44 (1)... 157, 212, 

213, 806, 

638 

..157,213, 

806 

,..157,214, 

806, 516, 

691,715 

.213,806, 

691, 715 

..807,728 

..293,807 

...293,807 

.. 294,807 

...122,807, 

580,623, 

688 

..808, OSS 

809 



(2). 
(3). 

(4).. 

(5). 

45 (1) . 
(2). 
(3). 

46 (1) . 



(2). 
(3) 

47 (1) 
(2) 

48 

49 

60 ..... 



809 
809 
809 
809 
809 



1916. 

PAGE 

6 & 7 Geo. 5— continued. 

c. 64 (Prevention of 

Corruption) — 

s. 1 1412 

2 1412 

3 1412 

4 1412 

c. 66 (Ministry of 

Pensions) — 

B. 6 (5) 409 

c. 68 (New Ministries 

and Secre- 
taries) — 
s. 11 (4) 409 

1917. 

7 & 8 Geo. 5, c. 21 (Venereal 
Disease) — 

s 1 1322 

2 1322 

3 1333 

4 1333 

5 1333 

c. 64 (Representation 

of the 
People) — 

». 22 1394 

34 1390 

35...1389,1399». 

38 1401 

1918. 

8 & 9 Geo. S, c. 55 (School Teachers 

(Superannua- 
tion) ) — 

6. 11 (1), (2), 

(3) 692 

1919. 

9 & 10 Geo. 5, c. 21 (Ministry of 

Health)— 

s. 3 (1) (a)... 1322 

7 (5) 409 

c. 46 (Police), s. 3 1133 

u. 50 (Ministry of 

Transport) , 

a. 26 (5) 409 

c. 71 (Sex Disquali- 

fication (Re- 
moval) ), B. 1 180 

c. 92 (Aliens Restric- 
tion (Amend- 
ment)), o. 3 1133 

c. 94 (Nurses Re- 
gistration), 

- s. 8 (2) 847 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



li 



10 & 11 Geo. 5, 



1920. 

PAGE 

c. 41 {Census), 

s. 8 (2) 1153 

c. 43 (Firearms) — 

B. 6 (1) (2)... 758 

7 758 

11 (l)-(4) ... 759 

11 (3) 1004 

12 (1) 759 

(2) 760 

13 (1) (2) (3) 760 

14 760 

16 1135 

c. 75 {Official 
Secrets'! — • 

B. 1 (1) 1146 

(2) 1147 

(3) 1147 

2 (1) 1147 

(2) 1147 

3 1148 

4 1148 

5 1148 



10 & 11 Geo. 5 



1920. 

PAOB 

c. 75 — continued. 

B. 6 1149 

7 4, 1150 

9 1161 

10 1131 

11 1131 

Istsched. ... 1132 

2ndsched. ... 1133 
c. 81 (Adminis- 
tration of 
Justice) , 
s. 4 (1) (2)... 74 



11 & 12 Geo. 5, 



1921. 

c. 21 (Dentists) — 

s. 15 (1) 

(2) 

u. 31 (Police Pen- 
sions) , 
s. Ifi (1) (2)... 



418 
416 



( liii ) 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

A. o: B., 24 L. R. (Ir.) 235 292 

Abbott (1847), 1 Den. 273 700 

. — (1903), 67 J. P. 151 374, 376, 

875, 1437 
Abergele (1836), 5 A. & E. 795 

116, 117, 118 
Abingdon (Lord) (1794), 1 Esp. 226 

1120, 1123 
Abraham (1798), 2 East, P. C. 941 813 

Abrahat (1798), 2 Leach, 824 531 

Abramo-pitch (1912), 76 J. P. 287 

19 733 

Absolon (1859), 1 F. & F. 498 'l420 

•Acaster (No. 2), (1912), 76 J. P. 263 468 
Ackroyd (1843), 1 C. & K. 158 

423, 1469 
Acton (W.) (1729), 17 St. Tr. 462 871 
Adam (Till) o. Bristol (Inhabs.) 

(1834), 2 A. & E. 389 ... 66 
Adams (1812), R. & R. 225 525 

— (1829), 3 C. & P. 600 397 

— (1832), Huband, Grand Jury 

in Ireland, 614 ... 192 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 299 ... 152, 754 

— (1844), 1 Den. 38 516 

— (1879), 14 Cox, 215 1192 

— (1888), 22 Q. B. D. 66 1247 

— (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 205 ... 364 
Adamson (1842), 1 C. & K. 192 ... 715 

— (1875), 1 Q. B. D. 201 ... 89 

— (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 205 364 
Adamthwaite u. Synge '(1816), 4 

Camp. 372 ... 442 
Adderbury East (Inhabs.) (1843), 

13 L. J. (M. C.) 9 ... 1375 

Addis (1834), 6 C. & P. 388 901 

Aden (1873), 12 Cox, 572 536 

Adey (1831), 1 M. & Rob. 94 469 

— (1850), 1 Den. 571 606, 607 

Admiralty Case, The (1610), 12 Co. 

Rep. 79 ... 32 
Advocate (H. M.) v. Douglas (1866), 

5 Irvine, 265... 1390 

— u. Fraser (1901), 

3 Fraser (Just. 
Sc.) 67 994 

— V. Sinclair (1890), 

17 Rettie (Just. 

Sc. '38) 174 

Ady (1835), 7 C. & P. 140 713 

Agincourt, The (1824), 1 Hagg. 

(Adm.) 271 ... 885 
Agnew V. Jobson (1877), 13 Cox, 

625 931 

Ahearne (1852), 6 Cox, 7 (ir.) 

60, 200, 1425, 1426 



PAGE 

Ahlers [1915] 1 K. B. 616 1075 

Aiokles (1784), 1 Leach, 294 ... 369, 518 

— (1785), 1 Leach, 390 1182 

Airey (1802), 2 East, P. C. 831 ... 696 ^ 
Airton v. Scott (1909), 73 J. P. 148 1338 
Alton V. Stephen (1876), 1 App. 

Cas. 456 ... 405 
Alabaster v. Harness (1895), 1 

Q. B. 339 1204 

Albert (1843), 5 Q. B. 37 29 

Alberty v. U. S. (1895), 162 U. S. 

499 ... 887n, 

Albutt (1911), 75 J. P. 112 448 

Aldred (1909), 74 J. P. 55 ... 1117, 1118, 

1125 
Aldrich ■/. Wright (1873), 53 New 

Hampshire, 398 ... 887 

Aldridge (1849), 4 Cox, 143 546 

Aleron (1909), 2 Cr. App. R. 152 ... 339 
Alexander (1830), MS 128,138 

— (1913), 23 Cox, 604 ... 17, 881 

— (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 110 

168, 334, 1010 
Alford (1776), 14 East, 218n. ...... 334 

Alison (1838), 8 C. & P. 418 ... 22, 875, 

1437 
Alivon u. Furnival (1834), 1 Cr. 

M. & R. 277 ... 442 

Allan (1841), C. & Mar. 295 1169 

AUanson b. Butler (1668), 1 Sid. 330 1005 
AUday (1837), 8 0. & P. 136 ... 216,850 
Allen (1826), 1 Mood. 154 353 

— (1835), 7 C. & P. 153 894 

— (1837), 1 Mood. 494 33, 647 

— (1839), 9 C. & P. 31 1023 

— (1848), 1 Den. 364 12,1047 

— (1862), 1 B. & S. 850 124 

— (1866), 10 Cox, 405 33 

— (1867), 17 L. T. 222 898 

— (1872), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 367 

1301, 1303, 
1303n. 

— [1912] 1 K. B. 365 285 

— Re (1904), 2 Ir. Rep. 565 ... 183n. 

— V. Allen (1894), Prob. 248 ... 491 

— V. Flood (1898), A. C. 1 

400n., 1281, 1284, 1421 

— V. L. S. W. R. (1870), 40 

L. J. (Q. B.) 55... 1003 

— V. Small (1904), 2 Ir. Rep. 

■ 705... 791 
— u. Westley (1629), Hetley, 97 

1185, 1187 
Allbusen v. Labouchere (1878), 3 

Q. B. D. 654... 469 
AUington (1893), 9 T. L. R. 199... 708 



Jiv 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Allison (1806), R. & R. 109 ... 1294, 1304 

— (1888), 16 Cox, 559 1252 

AUum (1846), 2 Cox, 62 77 

Almon (1770), 5 Burr. 2686 ... 1121, 1215 

Alsop (1869), 11 Cox, 264 1186 

Altass (1843), 1 Cox, 17 1185 

Althausen (1893), 17 Cox, 630 1296 

Altshuler (1915), 11 Cr. App. R. 243 393 
Alves V. Bunbury (1814), 4 Camp. 

28... 442 

Ambury (1852), 6 Cox, 79 289,1182 

Amery (1786), 1 T. R. 363 40 

Amey (1823), R. & R. 500 552 

— V. Long (1808), 9 East, 473 482 
Amier (1834), 6 C. & P. 344 ... 533, 673 

Amos (1851), 2 Den. 65 744 

Amphlit (1825), 4 B. & C. 35 1121 

Anderson (1816), 1 Russ. Cr. (7th ed.) 

715... 878 

— (1840), 2 Ir. Law Rep. 262 135 

— (1843), 2 M.& Rob. 469. .705, 811 

— (1868), 11 Cox, 154 441 

— (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

161 ...33,35,647 

— V. Gorrie (1895), 1 Q. B. 

668 ... 121, 132 

— 0. Vicary (1900), 2 Q. B. 

287 ... 554 
Anderton (1693), 12 St. Tr. 1245 ... 1066 
Andrews (1837), 2 M. & Rob. 37 ... 1385 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 121 ... 674 

— (1910), 74 J. P. 255 1341 

Annet (1767), 1 W. Bl. 395 1162 

Anon. (1612), 12 Co. Rep. 87 ...883, 885 

— (1639), W. Jones, 444 931 

— (1673), 1 Vent. 256 1365 

— (1684), 1 Vent. 369 100 

— (1703), 1 Salk. 380 101 

— {ineert.), 2 Salk. 451 49 

— (1704), 1 East, P. C. 263 ... 892 

— (1710), 1 Salk. 289 472 

— (1723), 1 Str. 533 142 

— (1756), 2 East, P. C. 559 .. 22, 534 

— (1763), Lofft, 146 698 

— (1775), 1 East, P. C. 261 ... 885 

— (1781),2 East, P. C. 598 570 

— (1815), 2 Chit. (K. B.) 422... 207 

— (incerf.), Rowe (Ir. K. B.), 

645 ... 133 

— (ineert.), Rowe (Ir. K. B.), 

644,727... 131 

— (1826), 2 C. & P. 549 397 

— (1829), 2 Ir. Law Rec. 

(O. S.), 479 ... 135 

— (1830), 1 B. & Ad. 382 927 

— (1836), 2 Lew. 48 934 

— (1836), 4 A. & E. 576n. ... 132, 134 

— (1838), 2 Mood. 40 938 

— (1838), 8 A. & E. 589 286 

— (1842), 6 Jur. (O. S.) 131 ... 121 

— (1845), 1 Cox, 250 1103 

— (1909), 44 L. J. Newsp. 164 1253 

— (1919), Times Newsp. 20 

June ... 1045 
Anthony (1908), 1 Cr. App. R. 82... 245 



PAGE 

Anlonelli (1905), 70 J. P. 4 ... 907, 1117, 

1247 
Antrobus (1835), 2 A. & E. 788.. .370, 866 
Apothecaries Co. v. Bentley (1824), 

1 C. & P. 538 ... 352 
Appleton o. Braybrook (Lord) 

(1816), 6 M. & S. 34... 442 
Archer (1826), 1 Mood. 143 23 

— (1843), 2 Mood. 283 911 

— (1848), 3 Cox, 228 461 

— (1855), Dears. 449 697 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 351 897 

Ardaseer Cursetjee v. Perozeboye 

(1856), 10 Moore (P. C), 375 ... 1298 
Arding v. Flower (1800), 8 T. R. 534 48* 
Ardley (1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 301.. 701 
Ardsley (1S77), 3 Q. B. D. 255 

1366, 1368, 1371 

Argent (1826), 1 Mood. 154 353 

Aris (1834), 6 C. & P. 348 753 

Armanni (1899), Cent. Cr. Ct. ... 545, 578 
Armitage v. Att.-Gen. (1906), P. 

135... 1305 
Armstrong (1875), 13 Cox, 184... 36, 396 

— V. Kierman (1855), 7 

Cox, 6 134 

— u. Mitchell (1903), 67 

J. P. 329 789,791 

Arnold (1724), 16 St. Tr. 695 13, 14 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 621...381n., 434 

— [1911] 2 K. B. 80 462 

Arnould (1857), 8 E. & B. 500 

1348, 1349 
Arrowsmith b. Le Mesurier (1806), 

2 B. & P. (N. R.) 211 ... 1000 

Arscott (1834), 6 C. & P. 408 814, 815 

Arthur (1908), 72 J. P. 318 1325 

Arton, Re (No. 2), (1896), 1 Q. B. 

509 ... 624, 734, 803 
Arundel (1594), 6 Co. Rep. 14a ... 347 

— (1849), 4 Cox, 260 459 

Ashby (1860), -2 F. & F. 560 836 

Ashby Folville (1866), L. R. 1 Q. B. 

213... 1365, 1360 

Ashe (1845), 1 Cox, 150 221 

Ashley (1843), 1 C. & K. 198 662 

Ashmall (1840), 9 C. & P. 236 1447 

Ashman (1858), 1 F. & F. 88 940 

Ashton (1831), 2 B. & Ad. 750 767 

— (1837), 2 Lew. 147 378 

Ashwell (1885), 16 Q. B. D. 190 ... 526 
Ashworth (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 

112 728 729 
Aslett (No. 2) (1804), 2 Leach, 954.. ' 569 
Aspinall (1877), 2 Q, B. D. 48 

1419, 1420, 1423 

Asplin (1873), 12 Cox, 391 843,844 

Asquith, Ex parte [1909] 1 K. B. 258 481 

Assheton (1592), K. B. Rolls 1063 

Asterley (1835), 7 C. & P. 191 696 

Aslley (1792), 2 East, P. C. 729 ... 639 
Asion (1838), 2 Russ. Cr. (7th ed.) 

1675 ... 835 

Athay (1758), 2 Burr. 653 135 

Athea (1832), 1 Mood. 329 6K 

Atftins (1765), 3 Burr. 1706 .. 7 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Iv 



Atkins (1900), 64 J. P. 361 628, 630 

Atkinson (1707), 1 Salk. 382 56 

— (1784), 1 Leach, 302n 531 

(1788), I Wms. Savind. 

(6th ed.) 249, note 1 ... 77 

— (1799), 2 East, P. C. 673... 516 

— (1814), 1 Rnss. Cr. (7th ed.) 

94,100... 24 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 325.. 811, 815 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 330... 1220, 1223 

— V. Jameson (1792), 5 T. R. 

25... 1005 
Att.-Gen. v. Antrobus (1905), 2 Ch. 

188 ... 1362 

— u. Biphosphated Guano 

Co. (1878), 11 Ch. D. 

327... 1362 

— u. Bradburv & Evans 

(1851), 7 Ex. 97 .,. 1240 

— V. Bradlaugh (1885), 14 

Q, B. D. 667 126 

— 0. Briant (1846), 15 M. 

& W. 169 ... 473 

— V. Brighton & Hove Co- 

op. Supply Ass. (1900), 

1 Ch. 276 ... 1254, 1355 

— 1/. British Museum (Trus- 

tees) (1903), 2 Ch. 598 1155 

— V. Bulpit (1821), 9 Price 4 485 

— V. Cole [1901] 1 Ch. 205 ... 1314 

— u. Churchill (1841.), 8 M. 

& W. 193 ... 40 

— D. Edison Telephone Co. 

(1881), 6 Q. B. D. 244 784 

— V. Gas Light & Coke Co. 

(1877), 7 Ch. B. 217 ... 1313 

— u. Keymer Brick & Tile 

Co. (1903), 67 J. P. 431 1309 

— (J. Le Merchant (1788), 2 

T. R. 201n. ... 368 

— a. Logan (1891), 2 Q. B. 

100... 1314 

— u. L. N. W. R. (1900), 1 

Q. B. 78 ... 10, 1313 

— V. L. S. W. R. (1905), 69 

J. P. 110... 1363 

— u. Moore (1893), 1 Ch. 676 1155 
- — V. Moorsom-Roberts (1908), 

72 J. P. 123 ... 1356 

— V. Mutual Loan Agency 

[1909], 9 N. S. W. 

Rep. 148 ... 1342, 1344 

— V. Nottingham (Mayor, 

etc.) (1904), 1 Ch. 673 1313 

— 0. Oxiord Canal Naviga- 

tion (1903), 72 L. J. 

Ch. 285 ... 1377 

— V. Parsons (1836), 2 M. & 

W. 23 ... 188 

— u. Ray (1843), 11 M. & W. 

464 ... 128 

— D. Scully (1902), 4 Ont. 

L. R. 394, 410 ... 227 

— V. Siddon (1820), 1 Cr. & 

J. 220 ... 1121 



PAGE 

Att.-Gen. u. Sillem (1863), 2 H. & 

C. 431 ... 1084 

— V. Staffordshire County 

Council (1905), 1 Ch. 

336 ... 1363, 1364, 1380 

— V. Terry (1874), L. R. 9 

Ch. App. 426n. 1313, 1357 

— ^. Theakston (1820), 8 

Price, 89 ... 410 

— V. Yorkshire (W. Riding) 

C. C. (1903), 67 J. P. 

Rep. 103 ... 1374, 1377 
Att.-Gen. (of Duchy of Lancaster) 
t'. Devonshire (Duke), 
(1885), 14 Q. B. D. 195 ... 127 

— (of Hong Kong) n. Kwok 
a Sing (1873), L. R. 5 

P. C. 179 ... 10,646 
Attwell (1801), 2 East, P. C. 768 

729, 1436 
Atwood (1617), Cro. Jac. 421 1162 

— (1787), 1 Leach, 464 455 

— V. Jolifte (1848), 3 New 

Sess. Cas. 116 ... 1230 
Audley (Lord) (1631), 3 St. Tr. 401.. 467 

Audley [1907] 1 K. B. 383 467 

Aughet (1918), 13 Cr. App. R. 101 

17, 157 

Austen [1913] 1 K. B. 551 245, 1042 

Austin (1672), 1 Vent. 189 7 

— (1845), 1 C. & K. 621 65 

— (1850), 4 Cox, 387 78 

— (1855), Dears. 612 433 

— (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 27.. .375, 376 

— and Davies (1916), 12 Cr. 

App. R. 171 ... 310 

Autey (1857), Dears. & B. 294 812 

Avery (1838), 8 C. & P. 596 ... 471, 807 

— (1859), Bell, 150 538 

Aveson u. Lord Kinnaird (1805), 

6 East, 188 ... 373 

Axtell (1661), Kel. (J.) 13 21 

Ayes (1810), R. & R. 166 879 

Aylesford Peerage Claim (1885), 

11 App. Cas. 1 ... 373 

Aylett (1785), 1 T. R. 63 51 

— (1788), 3 Bro. P. C. 529 ... 62 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 669 438 

Azire (1725), 1 Str. 633 467 

Azzopardi (1843), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

21 ... 30 



B. (alias A.) v. B. (1891), 27 L. R. 

Ir. 587, 608 ... 1302 
Backler (1831), 5 C. & P. 118 ... 447, 836 
Badash (1917), 13 Cr. App. R. 17 733 
Badcock (1813), R. & R. 249 ... 823, 1436 
Badische Anilin und Soda Fabrik 
V. Basle Chemical Works [1898] 

A. C. 200 ... 29, 32, 38 

Badger (1843), 4 Q. B. 468 87, 133 

Bahama Islands, Re a special 
reference from 1893), App. Cas. 

138 ... 1217 



Ivi 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Bagge u. Whitehead [1892] 2 Q. B. 

355 ... 1206 
Baggott (1910), 26 T. L. R. 266 ... 1475 
Baikie v. Chandless (1811), 3 Camp. 

17, 20 ... 424 
Bailey (1744), 2 Str. 1211 100 

— (1800), R. & R. 1 424 

— (1818), R. & R. 341 666 

— (1824), 1 Mood. 23 663 

— (1850), 4 Cox, 392 720 

— (1871), 12 Cox, 56 613 

— (1872), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 347 

513, 515, 567 

— (1917), 13 Cr. App. R. 27 ... 733 

— and Underwood (1913), 9 

Cr. App. R. 94 ... 1427 

— u. Jamieson (1876), 1 

C. P. D. 329 ... 1361 

BailUe (1859), 8 Cox, 238 1010 

Bain (1862), L. & C. 129 678 

Baines (1708), 2 Ld. Raym. 1265 ... 1207 

— (1886), Wood - Renton, 

Lunacy, 912 ... 20 

— (Mary) (1900), 69 L. J. 

(Q. B.) 681 ... 21, 23, 729, 1452 

— [1909] 1 K. B. 258 481 

Bainton (1738), 2 Str. 1088 77, 151 

Baird (1915), 11 Cr. App. R. 186 

362, 1270 

Balte (1765), 3 Burr. 1731 7, 1233 

Balcer (1783), 1 Leach, 290 639 

— (1829), 1 Mood. 231 813 

— (1837), 2 M. & Rob. 53 377 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 254 ... 930, 941 

— (1849), 3 Cox, 581 657, 671 

— . (1891), 113 Cent. Cr. Ct. 

Sess. Pap. 374, 589 ... 1202 

— [1895] 1 Q. B. 797 1185 

^ (1908), 28 N. Z. L. R. 536 

3n., 1431n. 

— (1911), 7 Cr. App. R. 217 168 

Baldoclc (1846), 2 Cox, 55 753 

Baldry (1852), 2 Den. 430 385, 392 

Balfour (1895), Q. B. D.. Oct. 15... 151 
Ball (1807), R. & R. 132 363, 834 

— (1824), 1 Mood. 30 744 

— (1832), 1 Mood. 330 901, 967 

~ (1834), 6 C. & P. 563 ... 1130, 1218 

— (1839), 8 C. & P. 745 489 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 249 701 

— (1854), 6 Cox, 360 1187 

— [1911] A. C. 47 301, 307, 356, 

363, 1045 

— Ex parte (1879), 10 Ch. D. 

667 ... 292 

Ballard (1914), 11 Cr. App. R. 1 ... 730 

Balls (1836), 7 C. & P. 416, 426, 429 835 

— (1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 328 

619, 620 

Balme (1777), 2 Cowp. 648 5 

Balmerino (Lord) (1746), 18 St. Tr. 

441 ... 1067 

Balstone, 10 Cox, 20 ...: 942 

Baltimore (Lord) (1768), 4 Burr. 

.2179 ... 1436 

Bamber (1843), 5 Q. B. 279 ... 1363, 1370 



PAGE 

Bambridge (1730), 17 St. Tr. 383, 

397 ... 871 

Bamfield (1834), 1 Mood. 416 811 

Bamford v. Turnley (1862), 3 B. & 

S. 62 ... 1314 

Bancroft (1909), 26 T. L. R. 10 ... 699 
Bank Prosecutions (1810), R. & R. 

378 ... 835 
Bank of N. S. W. o. Piper (1897), 

App'. Cas. 383 ... 26 

Banks (1794), 1 Esp. 145 1140 

— (1873), 12 Cox, 393 ... 1418, 1430 

— [1911] 2 K. B. 1095 149, 159 

— [1916] 2 K. B. 621 202, 1025 

— V. Goodfellow (1870), L. R. 

5 Q. B. 549 ... 13 
Bannen (1844), 1 C. & K. 295 

IIU, 1435 
Banson u. Offley (1687), 2 Show. 

510 ... 1439 
Barber (1844), 1 C. & K. 434 ... 203, 808 

— (1844), 1 C. & K. 442 1445 

— V. Penley [1893] 2 Ch. 447 

1309, 1343 
Barclay v. Pearson [1893] 2 Ch. 154 1343 

Barham ^826), 1 Mood. 151 ... 967, 1384 

Barker (iSOO), 1 East, 186 133 

— (1829), 3 C. & P. 589 ... 365, 1022 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 326 745 

— (1890), 25 Q. B. D. 213 ... 1306, 

1369, 1370 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 283 ... 709 

— V. Arnold [1911] 2 K. B. 120 462 

— V. Braham (1773), 2 W. Bl. 

866 ... 1001 

Barley (1847), 2 Cox, 191 486 

Barnard (1837), 7 C. & P. 784 ... 703, 705 
— V. Roberts (1907), 21 Cox, 

'■ 425 ... 556 

Barnard Castle (1841), 10 L. J. 

(M. C.) 53 ... 1349 
Barnes (1835), 7 C. & P. 166 289 

— (1850), 2 Den. 59 ... 517, 525, 696 

— (1858), 8 Cox, 129 612 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 539 1197 

— V. HoUoway (1799), 8 T. R. 

150 ... 351 

— V. Trompowsky (1797), 7 

T. R. 266 ... 444, 445 

— V. Ward (1850), 9 C. B. 392 1315 
Barnett (1848), 2 C. & K. 594 ... 643, 645 

— V. Campbell (1902), 21 

N. Z. L. R. 484 ... 295 

— [1919] 1 K. B. 640 '. 119 

Barnoldswick (1843), 4 Q. B. 499 ... 1368 

Barr (1814), 4 Camp. 16 1360 

Barraclough [1906] 1 K. B. 201 

353, 1319, 1321, 1322, 1324 
— , V. Brown [1897] A. C. 

615 ... 1357 

Barratt (1840), 9 C. & P. 387 ... 1008 

— (1873), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 81 1020 
Barrett (1836), 2 Lew. 264 173 

— (1846).,. 2 C. & K. 343 894 

— (1852), 6 Cox, 78 289 

— , (1862), L. & C. 263 1329 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ivii 



PAGE 

Barrett (1870), Ir. Rep. 4 C. L. 285 121 

— (1885), 15 Cox, 658 1015 

— (1899), 130 Cent. Cr. Ct, 

Sess. Pap. 797 ... 802 

— B. Burden (1893), 63 L. J. 

(M. C.) 33 ... 1344 

— V. Long (1851), 8 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 1076 ... 189 
Barron (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 236 

354, 1047 

— [1914] 2 K. B. 570 156, 157, 

158, 161 
Barronet, Re (1853), 1 E. & B. 1 

10, 24, 87, 877 
Barrow (1866), 10 Cox, 407 207n. 

— (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 156 

1016, 1021 

— u. Humphreys (1820), 3 B. 

& Aid. 598 ... 484 
Barthelemy (1852), 1 E. & B. 8 ... 88, 94 
Bartholomew (1908), 72 J. P. 79 ... 1357 
Bartlett (1841), 2 M. & Rob. 362 ... 810 

— (1843), 1 D. & L. 95 1195 

— (1831), 2 Deac. Cr. L. 1517 769 

— (1846), 2 C. & K. 321 175 

— Ex parte (1861), 30 L. J. 

(M. C.) 65 ... 1348 

— (1920), 14 Cr. App. R. 157 337 

— V. Parker [1912] 2 K. B. 

497 ... 1344 

Barton (1848), 3 Cox, 275 17 

Baskerville [1916] 2 K. B. 658 ... 336, 456 

Bass (1782), 1 Leach, 251 530 

Bastable v. Little [1907] 1 K. B. 59 965 
Bastin d. Carew (1824), Ry. & M. 

127 ... 489 
Batchelor u. Honeywood (1799), 

2 Esp. 714 ... 447 
Batchelour v. Gee (1914), 30 

T. L. R. 506 ... .1288 

Bate (1871), 11 Cox, 686 381, 386, 

920 922 
Bateman (1845), 1 Cox, 186 ' 806 

— (1857), 8 E. & B. 584 1311 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 1068 ... 382 

— V. Bluck (1852), 18 Q. B. 

870 ... 1361 
Bater v. Bater [1906] P. 209 ... 1305, 1306 
Bates (1848), 3 Cox, 201 ... 694, 698, 706 

— (1860), 2 F. & F. 317 434 

— [1911] 1 K. B. 964 758 

Batstone (1866), 10 Cox, 20 747 

Batt (1834), 6 C. & P. 329 764, 765 

Battams (1801), 1 East, 298 110 

Battier (1880), 44 J. P. 490 69 

Batty (1842), 2 Mood. 257 610 

— (1912), 76 J. P. 388 728 

Bauld (1876), 13 Cox, 282 1284 

Baumgarten (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 

212 ... 2.34 

Baxter (1851), 5 Cox, 302 617, 1154 

Bayard [1892] 2 Q. B. 181 116, 120 

Bayley (1856), Dears. & B. 121 ... 610 
Baylis (1762), 3 Burr. .1318 133 

— (1849), 4 Cox, 23 453 



PAGE 

Baynes o. Brewster (1841^, 2 

Q. B. D. 375 ... 900 
Baynham v. Brook (1588), 5 Co. 

Rep. 366 ... 193 
Baynton (1702), 14 St. Tr. 631, 632 228 

Bazeley (1799), 2 Leach, 835 532 

Beacall (1824), 1 C. & P. 310, 454 

164, 264, 606 
Beadle (1857), 26 L. J. (M. C.) Ill 129 
Beak o. Thyrwhit (1868), 3 Mod. 

194 ... 157 
Beake v. Tyrrell (1688), 1 Show. 6 157 

Beat (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 95 400 

Beale (1798), 1 East, 183, eit. ... 130, 1205 
. — (1865), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 10 

1028, 1031 

Beall (1899), O. B. D 90 

— (1899), 34 L. J. Newsp. 623... 1428 

Beaman (1842), C. & Mar. 595 530 

Beamish v. Beamish (1859), 9 

H. L. C. 247 ... 1298 
Beamon v. Ellice (1831), 4 C. & P. 

585 ... 485 
Bean (1842), 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1382.. 1079 

Beaney (1820), R. & R. 416 213 

Bear (1698), 2 Salk. 417 1245 

Beard (1837), 8 C. & P. 143 206 

— D. U. S. (1894), 158 U. S. 

550 ... 887n. 
Beardmore (1836), 7 C. & P. 497 ... 103 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 260 

490, 494 
Beardsall (1876), 1 Q. B. D. 452 ... 1400 
Beardsley v. Giddings [1904] 1 K. B. 

847... 65 

Beare (1698), 1 Ld. Raym. 414 1121 

Beaton (1764), 1 W. Bl. 479 164 

Beatson v. Skene (1860), 5 H. & N. 

838 ... 473, 1251 
Beatty u. Gillbanks (1882), 9 Q. B. 

D. 308... 1219 
Beaty v. Glenister (1884), 51 L. T. 

304... 1219 
Beaumont (1854), Dears. 270 616 

— V. Mountain (1834), 10 

Bing. 404 ... 405 
Beaurain i^. Scott (1812), 3 Camp. 

388... 426 
Beaver (1866), 10 Cox, 274 75 

— (1905), 9 Canada Cr. Cas. 

415... 1318/1. 
Beawfage (1613), 10 Co. Rep. 996., 

102a... 1207 
Beckett (1836), 1 M. & Rob. 526 ... 938 
Beckley (1888), 20 Q. B. D. 187 ... 68, 100 
Beckwith u. Philby (1827), 6 B. & 

C. 635 ... 899, 1003 
Beddall v. Maitland (1881), 17 Ch. 

D. 174... 1232 
Bedfordshire (1855), 4 E. & B. 535 

370, 1366 

Bedingfield (1879), 14 Cox, 341 ... 371, 

376, 377 

Beeby (18.38), 8 L. J. (M. C.) 38 ... 1365 

— (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 138... 209 

Beech (1912), 23 Cox, 181 872,942 



Iviii 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Beecham [1921] 3 K. B. 464 335, 462 

Beechey (1817), R. & R, 319 608 

Beeley v. Wingfield (1809), 11 East, 

46...1210n. 

Beer (1898), 62 J. P. 120 994 

Beere (1843), 2 M. & Rob, 472 

209 221 

Beesby [1909] 1 K. B. 849 ' 8 

Beeston (1854), Dears. 405 432,433 

Beezley (1830), 4 C. & P. 220 ... 486, 497 
Bcighton (1897), 18 Cox, 535 ... 1025, 1031 
Belanger (1902), 6 Canada Cr. Cas. 

295... 73n. 

Belany (ineert.), 3 Cox, 82,Ci( 486 

Bell (1831), 5 C. & P. 162 394 

— (1871), 12 Cox, 37 69,70 

— (1874), Ir. Rep, 8 C. L. 542... 920, 921 

— (1914), 30 T. L. R. 645 1472 

— V. Stone (1795), 1 B. & P. 

331 ... 1245 
Bellamy (1824), Ry. & M. 171 ...423,427 

— !). Wells (1890), 39 W. R. 

158 ... 1309, 1312, 1354 
Bellencontre, Re [1891] 2 Q. B. 

122... 535, 538 
Bellew's Case (1672), 1 Vent. 254n... 1054 
Bellingham (1812), Coll. Lun. 636 

Add. ... 15 
Bellis (1893), 62 L. J. (M. C.) 155 ... 1015 

— (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 283 

412, 1029, 1031 
Belmore (Countess) i\ Kent C. C. 

[1901] 1 Ch. 873 ... 1355, 1364 
Belton (1696), 1 Salk. 372 100 

— V. Busby (1899), 2 Q. B. 

380 ... 1340 

Bembridge (1783), 22 St. Tr. 1 1154 

Benesech (1796), Peake, Add. Cas. 

93... 1185,1187 

Benfield (1760), 2 Burr. 980 54,56, 

59, 131 
Benford v. Sims (1898), 2 O. B. 

641 ... 1457 

Benge (1865), 4 F. & F. 504 893 

Bengough v. Rossiter (1792), 4 

T. R. 505... 80 
Benjamin (1913), 8 Cr. App. R. 146 370 
Bennet v. Watson (1814), 3 M. & 

Sel. 1 ... 1005 
Bennett (1815), R. & R. 289 681 

— (1858), Boll, 1 894,1315 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 1105 ... 932 

— (1894), 63 L. J. (M. C.) 

181 ... 606 

— (1908), 72 J. P. 362 69,310 

— (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 146 

352, 631, 711 
Benson (1811), 2 Camp. 508 425 

— [1908] 2 K. B. 270 55 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 70 ... 464 

Bent (1845), 1 Den. 157 1389, 1399 

Bentlcy (1850), 4 Cox, 408 940 

— D. Vilmont (1888), 12 App. 

Cas. 471 ... 294, 296, 525 

Berchet (1690), 1 Show. 106 127 

Berens (1865), 4 F. & F. 842 203 



PAGE 

Berger [1894] 1 O. B. 823 412,1355, 

1372n. 

— (1915), 11 Cr. App. R. 72 ... 728 
Berkeley Peerage Claim (1811), 4 

Camp. 401 ... 443 
Bernadotti (1869), 11 Cox, 316 ... 375, 378 
Bernard (1858), 8 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

887 ... 30, 165, 340, 492, 906, 907, 1424 

— (1908), 1 Cr. App. R. 218 .. 461 
Berriman (1854), 6 Cox, 388 ... 380n., 920 
Berry (1791), 4 T. R. 217 351 

— (1859), Bell, 46 1186 

— (18591, Bell, 95 538 

— (1876), 1 Q. B. D. 447 13, 

171, 217 

— (1897), 104 L. T. J. 110 ... 171, 173 

— V. Adamson (1827), 6 B. & 

C. 528... 1000 
Berryman v. Wise (1791), 4 T. R. 

366...964, 1216, 1249 
Bertrand (1867), L. R. 1 P. C. 

520...209, 221, 487 

Berwick (1746), 18 St. Tr. 367 380 

Bessell v. Wilson (1853), 12 L. T. 

(O. S.) 233 ... 295 
Best (1705), 2 Ld. Raym. 1167.. .1418, 1424 

— (1839), 9 C. & P. 368 1212,1215 

— [1909] 1 K. B. 692 392 

Bethell, Re (1888), 38 Ch. D. 220... 1298 
Betterton (1695), cas. temp. Holt. 

538 ... 1309 
Belts (1850), 16 Q. B. 1022 ... 1313, 1358 

— (1859), Bell, 90 615 

— u. Stevens [1910] 1 K. B. 1 ... 965 
Beverley's Case (1603), 4 Co. Rep. 

125 ... 14 
Beverley (Mayor, etc., of) u. Craven 

(1838), 2 M. & Rob. 140 ... 4()3 
Bcwdley Case (1868), 19 L. T. 

676...1411n. 

Bexley (1906), 70 J. P. 263 393 

Bianci (1903), 67 J. P. 443 296 

Bibithe (1598), 4 Co. Rep. 43b 1445 

Bickerstaff (1848), 2 C. & K. 761 ... 591 

Bicldey (1909), 73 J. P. 239 455,924 

Bigg (1717), 3 P. Wms. 419 805 

Biggin [1920] 1 K. B. 213 464 

Biggleswade R. D. C. (1900), 64 

J. P. 442 ...1349, 1351 
Billingham (1825), 2 C. & P. 234 ... 1219 

Bingley (1821), R. & R. 446 353, 

837, 1436 
Bingley U. D. C. i-. Ferrand (1903), 

67J. P.370... 1352,1370 
Binkes (1805), 2 Smith (K. B.) 620... 150 
Birchall (1866), 4 F. & F. 1087 

883, 891, 893 

— (1912), 109 L. T. 478 883 

Birchenough (1836), 7 C. & P. 575... 158 
Bird (1839), 9 C. & P. 44 664 

— (1850), 5 Cox, 1 885 

— (1850), 5 Cox, 11 340,346 

— (1851), 2 Den. 94 156 

— (1891), 17 Cox, 387 1196 

— (1898), 19 Cox, 180 ...382, 394, 460 



^ABLE OF CASES. 



lix 



PAGE 

Biiu u. Holbrook (1828), 4 Bing. 

628... 896 

— u. Jones (1845), 7 Q. B. 742 ... 1000 

Birdseye (1830), 4 C. & P. 386 357 

Birkett (1805), R. & R. 86 833 

Birmingham and Gloucester Rail. 

Co. (No. 1) (1840), 2 Q. B. 47 

9, 112, 117 
Birmingham and Gloucester Rail. 

Co. (No. 2) (1841), 3 Q. B. 224 ... 153 
Birmingham (1828), 8 B. & C. 29... 1299 

— (Churchwardens, etc., 
of) (1861), 1 B. & S. 

763... 374 
Birt (1831), 5 C. & P. 154 1218, 1224 

— (1899), 63 J. P. 328 630 

— u. Barlow (1779), 1 Doug. 171.. 413 

Birtles (1911), 75 J. P. 288 1294 

Bi.shop (1738), Andr. 220 100 

— (1822), 5 B. & Aid. 612 135 

— (1879), 5 Q. B. D. 259 26 

Bishop Auckland (1834), 1 A. & E. 

744... 1368 
Bishop Auckland L. B. v. Bishop 
Auckland Iron Co. (1882), 10 

Q. B. D. 138 ...1312 
Bispham (1830), 4 C. & P. 392 ... 474 

Biswell (1847), 2 Cox, 279 1010 

Bjornsen (1865), L. & C. 545 33, 960 

Blaby [1894] 2 Q. B. 170 ... 230, 1106, 1469 

Black (1910), 74 J. P. 71 148, 439 

Blackburn (1853), 6 Cox, 333 ... 387, 488 

— (1868), 11 Cox, 157 609 

— V. Hargreave (1828), 2 

Lew. 259... 481 

Blackham (1787), 2 East, P. C.711.. 641 

Blades (1880), unreported 203 

— V. Higgs (1865), 11 H. L. 

C. 621... 544 
Blake (1844), 6 Q. B. 126 1423, 1427 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 275 

200, 357, 1470 

— D. Albion Lite Assurance 
Society (1884), 4 C. P. D. 

94... 357 
Blakeman (1850), 3 C. & K. 97 ... 191 
Blakemore (1852), 2 Den. 410 ... 346, 1370 
Blandy (1752), 18 St. Tr. 1117 ... 373, 374 
Bleasdale (1848), 2 C. & K. 765 

356, 364, 541, 579, 1435 

Blenkinsop (1847), 1 Den. 276 810 

Bliss Hill (1918), 82 J. P. 194 366 

Bliss V. Hall (1838), 4 Bing. (N. C) 

183 1312 
Bloodworth (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 

80 ... 1045 
Bloom (1910), 74 J. P. 183; 4 Cr. 

App. R. 30 ...337, 539 
Blower v. HoUis (1833), 1 Cr. & 

M. 393 ... 425 
BIyth u. Hulton, Ltd. (1908), 72 

J. P. 401 ... 1344 
Blythe (1895), 1 Canada Cr. Cas. 

263... 1034n. 
Boaler (1888), 21 Q. B. D. 284 

212,231, 1239; 1243 



PAGE 

Boaler (1888), Shorlt & Mellor, 

Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 17n. ... 113 

— (1892), 17 Cox, 569 105,113 

— In re (1914), 30 T. L. R. 

580 ... 71 

Boden (1844), 1 C. & K. 395 512 

Bodle (1833), 6 C. & P. 186 486 

Boggett V. Frier (1809), 11 East, 

301 ... 661 
Bolivia (Republic) v. Indemnity 
Mutual Marine Assurance Co., 

Ltd. [1909] 1 K. B. 785 ... 646 
BoUand (1772), 1 Leach, 83 805 

— Ex parte (1828), Mont. & 

Mac. 314, 397 ... 291 

Boltz (1826), 5 B. & C. 334 226 

Bolton (Lord) v. Tomlin (1822), 5 

A. & E. 856... 490 

Bolus (1870), 23 L. T. 339 1263 

Bond (1716), 1 Str. 22 1345n. 

— (1798), 27 St. Tr. 523 1075 

— (1849), 1 Den. 517 52,381 

— [1906] 2 K. B. 389 ... 355, 359, 924 

— V. Evans (1890), 21 Q. B. 

D. 249... 26 

— V. Plumb [1894] 1 Q. B. 169 ... 1339 
Bonelli (in bonis) (1876), 1 P. D. 

69... 406 
Bonner (1834), 6 C. & P. 386 ... 375, 376 

Bonnet (1718), 15 St. Tr. 1231 64^ 

Bono (1913), 29 T. L. R. 635 448 

Bontien (1813), R. & R. 260 805 

Boober (1850), 4 Cox, 272 1111 

Booth (1872), 12 Cox, 231 1009, 1011, 

1012 

— and Jones (1910), 74 J. P. 

475 393 

Boreham (1847), 2 Cox, 189 '". 811 

Boroski (1682), 9 St. Tr. 1 396 

Borrett (1833), 6 C. & P. 124 ... 589, 590 

Borron (1820), 3 B. & Aid. 432 133 

Borrowes [1900] 2 Ir. Rep., 593 800 

Borthwick (1779), 1 Doug. 207 

905, 1436, 1439 

Bostock (1893), 17 Cox, 700 212,1032 

Boswell (1842), C. & Mar. 584 387 

Botfield (1841), C. & Mar. 151 1354 

Botha (1852), 1 Searle (Cape), 149.. 1076 
Bottomley (1903), 115 L. T. J. 88 

378, 888 

— V. Director of Public 
Prosecutions (1915), 79 

J. P. 153 ... 1343 
Boucher (1831), 4 C. & P. 562 

364, 1237 

— (1841), 5 Jur. 709 792 

Boughton (1895), 2 Ir. Rep. 386 

109, 121 

— (1910), 6 Cr. App. R. 8.. 386 

Boult (1848), 2 C. & K. 604 803 

Boulter (1852), 2 Den. 396 1191 

— (1908), 72 J. P. 188 1162 

— 0. Kent JJ. (1897), A. C. 

556 ... 132, 935n. 
Boulton (1833), 5 C. & P. 537 672 

— (1849), 1 Den. 508 708,712 



Ix 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Boulton (1871), 12 Cox, 87 ... 1050, 1427 
Bourdon (1847), 2 C. & K. 366... 421, 423 
Bourke (1900), 19 N. Z. L. R. 

335 ... 189n. 191n 

— V. Davis (1890), 44 Ch. D. 

110... 1361 

— V. Mealy (1879), 14 Cox, ■ 

329...1210n. 
Bourne (1831), 5 C. & P. 120 ... 878, 882 
Bourtzeft (1898), 129 Cent. Cr. Ct. 

Sess. Pap. 284. ..907, 1247 

Bowden (1843), 1 C. & K. 147 677 

Bowen (1840), 9 C. & P. 509 93,103 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 149 939 

' — (1844), 1 Den. 22 844,845 

— (1844), 1 C. & K. 501 163 

— (1846), 2 C. & K. 227 1294 

Bower (1823), 1 B. & C. 585 1386 

Bowerman [1891] 1 Q. B. 112 570 

Bowers (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

41 ... 613 
Bowes (1787), 4 East, 171, cit... 355, 1427 
Bowler (1812), Coll. Lun. 673 15 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 559 ..1205, 1399 

Bowles (1861), 2 F. & F. 371 1355 

Bowman (1833), 6 C. & P. 101, 

337 159 

— (1912), 76 J. P. 271 ...... 1134 

Bowray (1846), 10 Jur. 211 954 

Bowyer (1831), 4 C. & P. 559 750, 

773, 775 

— u. Morgan (1906), 70 J. P. 

253 791 

Box (1815), R. & R. 300 810 

Boxall (1836), 4 A. & E. 513 ... 112, 116 

Boyall (1759), 2 Burr. 832 5 

Boyce (1824), 1 Mood. 29 938, 940 

Boyes (1860), 2 F. & F. 157 1205 

— (1861), 1 B. & S. 311 ...469,470 
Boyle (1857), 7 Cox, 428 (Jr.) 1234 

— (1904), 20 T. L. R. 192 382 

— (1914), 83 L. J. (K. B.) 

1801 ... 684 

— V. Wiseman (1855), 10 Ex. 

647... 470 

Boynes (1843), 1 C. & K. 65 1198 

Braclcenbury (1893), 17 Cox, 628... 392 
Bradbury and Edlin [1921] 1 K. B. 

562... 1194 
Bradford (1840), 2 Cr. & Dix. (C. C. 

Ir.) 41 ... 1089 

— (1860), Bell, 268 786 

— (1912), 76 J. P. 46 ..248, 304, 339 

— V. Dawson [1897] 1 Q. B. 

307... 1341 
Bradlaugh (1877-8), 3 Q. B. D. 

607 ...60,1321 

— (1882), 15 Cox, 156 71 

— (1883), 15 Cox, 217 

60, 200, 461, 1162, 1163, 1252 

— (1883), 15 Cox, 222n. ... 449 

— Ex parte (1878), 3 Q. B. 

D. 509... 1321 

— V. Newdigate (1883), 

11 Q. B. D. 1 ... 1204 
Bradley (1908), 1 Cr. App. R. 146.. 1342 



PAGE 

Bradley (1910), 74 J. P. 247; 4 Cr. 

App. R. 225... 1019 
Bradshaw (1597), Poph. 122 1070 

— (1835), 7 C. & P. 233 ... 1234 

— (1878), 14 Cox, 83 ...879, 888 

— V. Murphy (1836), 7 C. 

& P. 612... 474 
Brailsford [1905] 2 K. B. 730 

720, 1420, 1422n. 
Brain (1832), 3 B. & Ad. 614 1386 

— V. Preece (1843), 11 M. & 

W. 773 ... 374 
Braithwaite (1859), 1 F. & F. 638 .. 1191 
Bramley (1795), 6 T. R. 330 472 

— (1822), R. & R. 478 540 

— (1861), L. & C. 21 524 

Brampton (1808), 10 East, 282 

1295, 1299 
Brandreth (1817), 32 St. Tr. 755 

189n. 195 

Brannan (1834), 6 C. & P. 326 837 

Brasier (1777), 1 Leach, 199 453 

Brawn (1843), 1 C. & K. 144 1303 

Bray (1862), 3 B. & S. 255 69,70 

Braynell (1850), 4 Cox, 404 686 

Brazier (1779), 1 Leach, 199 372 

— (1899) (unreported) 168 

Breconshire (1849), 15 Q. B. 813 ... 1375 

Bren (1863), L. & C. 346 609 

Brenan (1854), 6 Cox, 381 {Ir.) 1234 

Brenton (1890), 111 Cent. Cr. Ct. 

Sess. Pap. 309... 997 
Brereton (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 201 

337 519 
Brett 0. Beales (1829), M. & M. ' 

416 ... 405 

— Ex parte, Re Hodgson (1875), 

1 Ch. D. 151 ... 1265 
Brewer (1834), 6 C. & P. 363 471 

— (1863), 9 Cox, 409 494 

Brewster v. Sewell (1820), 3 B. & 

Aid. 296 ... 443 
Brice (1821), R. & R. 450 ... 665, 666, 667 

— (1824), 2 B. & Aid. 606 200 

Bridges (1845), 1 Cox, 261 661 

Bridgman (1841), C. & Mar. 271 ... 103 
Bridgwater (1905), 1 K. B. 131 463 

— 0. Bythway (1683), 3 

Lev. 113 ... 935 
Bridgwater Trustees v. Bootle 

(1866), L. R. 2 Q. B. 4 ... 1360 

Brier (1850), 14 Q. B. 568 113 

Briggs (1831), 1 Mood. 318 910, 938 

— (1856), Dears. & B. 98 1304 

— [1909] 1 K. B. 381 338, 1477 

Bright [1916] 2 K. B. 441 226 

Brightside Bierlow (1849), 13 Q. B. 

933 ... 1364 
Brimilow (1840), 9 C. & P. 366.. .12, 1018 
Brinkley (1907), 12 Canada Cr. Cas. 

454 ... 1292n. 

— V. Att.-Gen. (1890), 15 

P. D. 76 ... 415, 1298 
Brinkman u. Matley [1904] 2 CK. 

313 ... 1362 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixi 



PACE 

Brintons, Ltd. v. Turvey [1905] 

A C 230 869 
Brisao (1803), 4 East, 164 ... 38, 1424, 1426 

Brisby (1849), 1 Den. 416 6 

Bristow (1795), 6 T. R. 168 283 

— V. Sequeville (1850), 5 Ex. 

275 ... 406 
British Casli and Parcels Con- 
veyors V. Lamson Store Service 

[1908] 1 K. B. 1006, 1014 ... 1204 

Briltain (1848), 3 Cox, 76 1426 

Brittleton (1884), 12 Q. B. D. 266 466 
Britton (1833), 1 M. & Rob. 297 ... 384 

— (1893), 17 Cox, 627 1196 

Brixton Prison (Governor) ; Ex 

parte Stallman [1912] 3 K. B. 464 720 
Brixton Prison (Governor); Ex 
parte Sjoland [1912] 3 K. B. 568 

690, 720 
Broad v. Pitt (1828), 3 C. & P. 518 472 

Broadfoot (1743), Fost. 154 900 

Brodribb (1816), 6 C. & P. 571 

1130, 1218, 1219 
Brbmage u. Prosser (1825), 4 B. & 

C. 247 ... 400, 741, 1120 
Bromhead (1907), 71 J. P. 103 

393, 731, 732 
Bromley R. D. C. v. Croydon 

(Mayor, etc.) [1908] 1 K. B. 353 1353 
Brompton County Court, Judge of 

[1893] 2 Q. B. 195 ... 1216 
Brook V. Broolf (1857), 9 H. L. C. 

193 ... 1301 
Broolje (1788), 2 T. R. 190 133, 139 

— (1819), 2 Stark. (N. P.) 472 491 

— (1894), 59 J. P. 6 95 

Brooke & Fremlin, Re [189'8] 1 Ch. 

647 ... 859 
Brookes (1842), C. & Mar. 543 212 

— (1902), 9 Brit. Columbia, 

13 ... 895n. 

— V. Tichborne (1850), 5. Ex. 

929 ... 447n. 
Brooks (1829), 4 C. & P. 131 545 

— (1843), 1 Cox, 6 375 

— (1847), 1 Den. 217 65 

— (1853), Dears. 184 22 

— V. Bagshaw [1904] 2 K. B. 

798 ... 63, 1289 

— V. Mason [1902] 2 K. B. 742 26 

— V. Warwick (18181, 2 Stark. 

(N. P.) 389 ... 823 
Broome (1851), 18 L. T. (O. S.) 19 

1211n., 1422n. 

Bros (1902), 66 J. P. 54 69 

— Ex parte Hardy [1911] 1 K. B. 

159 ... 437 
Brough V. Perkins (1703), 6 Mod. 81 350 
Broughton v. Wilkerson (1880), 44 

J. P. 781 ... 962, 965 
Brown (1674), 1 Vent. 243 1008 

— . (1776), 1 Leach, 148 ... 879, 889 

— (1780), 2 East, P. C. 731 ... 639 

— (1799), 2 East, P. C. 487 

658, 664 

— (1800), 2 East, P. C. 1007 ... 855 



PAGE 

Brown (1817), R. & R. 32n 592' 

— (1828), M. & M. 163 51, 1157 

— (1831), 4 C. & P. 588n 485 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 314. ..964, 1222 

— (1848), 1 Den. 291 152 

— (1848), 17 L. J. (M. C.) 145 

173 379 

— (1856), Dears. 616 ' 523 

— (1857), 8 Cox, 69 1424 

— (1858), 7 Cox, 442 127, 471, 

630, 1420, 1428 

— (1860), 2 F. & F. 559 835 

— (1863), 3 F. & F. 821 761 

— (1863), 9 Cox, 281 471 

— (1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 70 474 

— (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 244 921 

— (1878), 14 Cox, 144 ... 1444, 1450 

— (1883), 10 Q. B. D. 381 

915, 918, 941 

— (1890), 24 Q. B. D. 357 

215, 343, 534, 1432, 1433n. 

— [1895] 1 Q. B. 119 8, 70, 1341 

— (1898), 19 Cox, 33 269 

— (1899), 63 J. P. 790 ... 925, 1430, 

1433 

— (1902), 65 J. P. 136 1404 

— (1903), 68 J. P. 15 386 

— (1907), 9 Fraser (Just. Sc.) 

67 ... 17 

— (1907), 7 N. S. W. St. Rep. 

290 ... 78, 222n. 

— (1910), 6 Cr. App. R. 24 ... 1032 

— (1913), 17 C. L. R. 570 

371n., 86Sk. 

— (1914), 23 Cox, 615 ... 1474, 1475 

— V. Att.-Gen. for N. Z. 

[1898] A. C. 234 ... 21 

— V. Crashaw (1614), 2 Bulstr. 

154 ... 196 

— ■/. Foot (1892), 61 L. J. 

(M. C.) 110 ... 26 

— V. Patch [1899] 1 O. B. 892 

1339, 1340 

— V. Woodman (1834), 6 C. & 

P. 206 ... 460 
Browne (1829), M. & M. 315 1196 

— (1842), 6 Jur. 168 121 

— (1845), 13 Q. B. 654 1370 

— (1906), 70 J. P. 472 174 

— V. Dawson (1840), 12 A. & 

E. 624 ... 1231 
Brownell (1834), 1 A. & E. 598.. .482, 485 
Browning (1690), 1 East, P. C. 312 905 
Brownlow (1839), 11 A. & E. 119 ... 100 
— (1910), 74 J. P. 240 ... 1206, 
,1268, 1269 
Bruce (1812), R. & R, 243 32 

— (1847), 2 Cox, 262 888 

Brummit (1861), L. & C. 9 573 

Brummitt (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 192 1474 
Bruner c. Moore [1904] 1 Ch. 305 

64, 1227 

Brunlon (1821), R. & R. 454 455 

Bryan (1857), Dears. & B. 265 701 

— (1861), 2 F. & F. 567 714 

Bryant (1898), g63 J. P. 376 1269 



Ixii 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Bryant, Be (1863), 27 J. P. 277, 289 

1209 1212 

— (1917), 13 Cr. App. R. 49 ..'. 456 
Bubb (1851), 4 Cox, 455 77, 894 

— (1906), 70 J. P. 143 1454 

Buchanan (1846), 8 Q. B. 883 5 

— i;. Hardy (1887), 18 

Q. B. D. 486 ... 975 

Buck (1726), 2 Str, 679 5 

Buckley (1873), 13 Cox, 293 ... 358, 374 
Bucklugh (Duchess) (1704), 1 Salk. 

358 ... 1366 
Buckmaster (1888), 20 Q. B. D. 182 

518, 521, 522, 632 

Bucknell (1702), 7 Mod. 55 1366 

Bucks (1810), 12 East, 192 1374 

Budd V. Lucas [1891] 1 Q. B. 408 ... 1272 
Budge 0. Parsons (1863), 3 B. & S. 

382 ... 791 
Bulbrook v. Goodere (1765), 3 

Burr. 1768 ... 1309 
Bull (1797), 2 Leach, 841, cit 532 

— (1839), 9 C. & P. 22 486, 886 

— (1845), 1 Cox, 281 1435, 1445 

— (1860), 2 F. & F. 201 876 

— (1871), 12 Cox, 31 431 

— (1877), 13 Cox, 608 696 

— V. Tilt (1798), 1 B. & P. 199 164 

BuUard '(1872), 12 Cox, 353 75 

BulUvant v. Att.-Gen. for Victoria 

[1901] A. C. 196 ... 471 

Bullock (1825), 1 Mood. 324n 212 

— (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 115 790 

— V. Dodds (1819), 2 B. & 

Aid. 258 ... 164, 236 

— V. Dunlap (1876), 2 Ex. D. 

43 ... 294 

Bulmer (1864), L. & C. 476 709, 715 

Bunce (1859), 1 F. & F. 523 520 

Bunkall (1864), L. & C. 371 536 

Bunn (1872), 12 Cox, 316 1281, 1418 

Bunney (1894), 6 Queensland L. J. 

80 ... 891 

Bunts (1788), 2 T. R. 683 226 

Burbage (1763), 3 Burr. 1440 483 

Burbon (1816), 1 M. & G. 392 157 

Burch (1865), 4 F. & F. 407 

353, 630, 1418 

Burdett (1697), 1 Ld. Raym. 148 ... 353 

— (1820), 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1 

38, 127, 355, 367, 1117, 
ill8, 1119, 1120, 1125 

— (1855), Dears. 431 204, 491 

Burden v. Ricketts (1809), 2 Camp. 

121n. ... 368 
Burgess (1663), Kel. (J.) 27 662 

— (1862), L. & C. 258 

3, 108, 918, 1431 

— (1863), L. & C. 299 541 

— (1886), 16 Q. B. D. 141 

1208, 1213 

— u. Boeteteur (1844), 7 M. 

& G. 481 ... 230, 260 
Burgon (1856), Dears. & B. 11, ..700, 717 
Burke (1858), 8 Cox, 44 (Ir.) 474 

— (1S67), 10 Cox, 5J9 192, 1068 



PAGE 

Burkett (1738), Andr. 230 99 

Burley (1818), 1 Phill. Ev. (7th ed.) 

Ill ... 387, 390 
Burn V. Farrar (1819), 2 Hagg. 

(Consist. Rep.) 369 ... 1299 
Burnand u. Nerot (1824), 1 C. & 

P. 578 ... 368 
Burnby (1843), 5 Q. B. 29 100 

— Ex parte [1901] 2 K. B. 

458 ... 1328, 1331 
Burns (1886), 16 Cox, 355 ... 1118, 1126, 

1219 

— (1887), 16 Cox, 195 206 

— V. Nowell (1880), 5 Q. B. D. 

444 ... 24 

Burnsides (1860), Bell, 282 697 

Burr D. Harper (1816), Holt (N. P.) 

420 ... 446 

Burrell (1863), L. & C. 354 ... 346, 1008 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 462 1357 

Burridge (1735), 3 P. Wms. 439 

217, 1177, 1451, 1455 

— (1840), 2 M. & Rob. 296 1236 
Burrough (1677), 1 Vent. 305 50 

— V. Martin (1809), 2 

Camp. 112 ... 490 

Burrowes (1830), 1 Mood. 274 660 

Burrows (1823), R. & B. 529 1023 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 258 698 

Burt (1851), 5 Cox, 284 206 

— (1870), 11 Cox, 399 1356 

— V. Burt (1860), 29 L. J. 

(Matr.) 133 ... 1299 
Burton (1721), 1 Str. 481 896 

— (1829), 1 Mood. 237 610 

— (1854), Dears. 282 ... 399, 541, 868 

— (1863), 3 F. & F. 772 17 

— (1877), 13 Cox, 71 ... 68, 695, 1440, 

1444, 1457 

— (1886), 16 Cox, 62 714 

— V. Pinkerton (1867), L. R. 

2 Ex. 340 ... 1081 

— V. Plummer (1834), 2 A. & 

E. 341 ... 490 
Bury St. Edmunds (Corp.) i;. West 

Suffolk C.C. [1898] 2 O. B. 246 ... 1379 

Butcher (1783), 2 East, P. C. 658 ... 394 

— (1795), Peake, 226 (3rd ed.) 87 

— (1839), 2 M. & Rob. 228 ... 206 

— (1858), Bell, 6 707, 1435 

— (1900), 64 J. P. 808.. .431, 432, 439 

— (1908), 99 L. T. 622 ... 1273, 1278 
Butler (1834), 6 C. & P. 368 3, 1431 

— (1881), 14 Cox, 530 (Ir.) ... 87, 88 

— (1897), 18 N. S. W. Rep. 

(Law) 146 ... 174 

— u. Gregory (1902), 18 

T. L. R. 370 ... 996 

— II. Moore (1802), McNally 

Ev. 253 ... 473 

Butt (1884), 15 Cox, 564 735, 1435 

Buttcrfield (1843), 1 Cox, 39 1455 

— (1893), 17 Cox, 598 1234 

Butterworth (1823), R. & R. 520 

57, 125, 213, 668 
Buttery (1818), R. & R. 342 807 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixiii 



PAGE 

Buttery (1820), 4 B. & Aid. 179, cit. 708 
Buttle (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 248 385 
Button (1838), 8 C. & P. 660 715 

— (1848), 11 Q. B. 929 1428 

— [1900] 2 Q. B. 597 715 

Buxton V. Home (1690),' 1 Show. 

(K. B.) 174 ... 1005 

— u. Scott (1909), 73 J. P. 

133 ... 1340 

Byers (1907), 71 J. P. 205 1345, 1347 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 5 867 

Bykerdike (1832), 1 M. & Rob. 179 

213, 1280 

Byrne (1798), 27 St. Tr. 455 1075 

Byron (Lord) (1765), 19 St. Tr. 1177 877 

C. (1910), 74 J. P. 208 1036 

Cabbage (1815), R. & R. 292 ... 514, 547 

Cable [1906] 1 K. B. 719 53n., 790 

Cade [1914] 2 K. B. 209 343, 812, 824 

Cadman (1825), 1 Mood. 114 ... 909, 922 
Caldwell d. Leach (1913), 23 Cox, 

510 ... 1326 

Cale (1824), 1 Mood. 11 6 

Callahan (1837), 8 C. & P. 154 607 

Callan (1809), R. & R. 157 664 

Calthrop v. Axtel (1686), 3 Mod. 

168 ... 1011 

Calvert (1848), 3 C. & K. 201 911 

Calvin's Case (1608), 7 Co. Rep. 1 1054 
Calye's Case (1584), 8 Co. Rep. 33 543 
Cameron v. Lightfoot (1778), 2 

W. Bl. 1190 ... 1001 

— u. Wiggins [1901] 1 

K. B. 1 ... 1274 

Camfield (1824), 1 Mood. 42 662 

Camlnada v. Hulton (1891), 17 Cox, 

307 ... 1343 
Campbell (1792), 2 Leach, 564 ... 677 

— (1827), 1 Mood. 179 519 

— (1848), 11. Q. B. 799, 814 

58, 231, 347, 676 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 323 896 

— (1885), 14 Q. B. D. 32 1209n. 

— (1908), Victoria L. R. 

136 ... 4, 1428 

— (1911), 75 J. P. 216 ... 226 

Campion (1580), Savile, 3 1065 

Camplin (1845), 1 Den. 89 1019 

Canadian Pacific Rail. Co. v. 

Parke [1899] A. C. 535 ... 1313 
Cannan u. Abingdon (Earl) [1900] 

2 Q. B. 66 ... 954 

Canniff (1840), 9 C. & P. 359 879 

Canning (1754), 19 St. Tr. 370 ... 1120 

Cannon (1809), R. & R. 146 640 

— B. Rands (1870), 11 Cox, 

631 ... 1210n. 

— Re (1908), 14 Canada Cr. 

Cas. 186 ... 1205 
Canterbury (Archbishop of) [1902] 

2 K. B. 572 ... 129 
Capewell (1833), 5 C. & P. 549 ... 1384 
Capital and Counties Bank v. 

Henty (1880), 5 C. P. D. 539 1238 



PAGE 

Carden (1879), 5 Q. B. D. 1 1240 

Cardigan (Earl) (1841), 4 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 601 ... 169 
Carew (1616), 1 RoUe Rep. 407 ... 77 
Carew's Estate, In re (1858), 26 

Beav. 187 ... 1421 

Carey (1879), 14 Cox, 214 903, 965 

— V. Pitt (1797), Peake, Add. 

Cas. 130 ... 447, 835 

CargiU [1913] 2 K. B. 271 365, 474, 

1022, 1034 
Carlile (Mary) (1821), 1 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 1033 ... 127, 1124, 1160, 
1162, 1163 

— (Richard) (1819), 1 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 1387 ... 1160, 1162 

— (1819), 3 B. & Aid. 161 ... 5, 6, 

820, 1160 

— (1819), 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

1423 ... 130, 1162 

— (L.) (1834), 6 C. & P. 636 

1309, 1354 
Carlisle (1854), Dears. 337 ... 1419, 1420 
Carmarthen (Mayor) u. Evans 

(1842), 10 M. & W. 274 ... 193 

Caroubi (1912), 23 Cox, 177 22 

Carpenter (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

29 ... 607 

— (1912), 76 J. P. 158.. .352, 096, 

711, 1269 

Carr (1811), R. & R. 198 610, 611 

— (1819), R. & R. 377 911, 914 

— (1832), 8 C. & P. 163 897 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 564 1196 

— (1882), 10 Q. B. D. 76 33, 647 

— (1916), 12 Cr. App. R. 140 ... 710 

— V. Anderson [1903] 1 Ch. 90; 

2 Ch. 279 ... 265 

Carrell (1782), 1 Leach, 237 663 

Carroll (1825), 1 Mood. 89 677 

Carruthers (1844), 1 Cox, 138 684 

Carson (1815), R. & R. 303 353 

Carter (1774), 1 Cowp. 220 11 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 173 674 

— (1845), 1 Den. 65 ... 417, 814, 834 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 642 703 

— (1876), 13 Cox, 220 ...: 142 

— (1884), 12 Q. B. D. 522 ... 731 
Cartwright (1806), R. & R. 107n. 

3, 1431 
— V. Green (1802), 2 

Leach, 952 ... 528 
Caruchet, Re (1899), 9 Queensland 

L. J. 122 ... 30n. 

Casbolt (1869), 11 Cox, 385 66 

Case (1795), 1 Leach, 154n 1095 

— (1850), 1 Den. 580 ... 931, 1021, 1034 
Casement [1917] 1 K. B. 98... 30, 174, 190, 

1054, 1055, 1057, 

1064, 1068, 1074 

Casey (1874), Ir. Rep. 8 C. L. 408 1222 

— (1877), 13 Cox, 614 121 

Cass (1784), 1 Leach, 293n 386 

Cassidy (1858), 1 F. & F. 79 486 

Castiglioni (1912), 76 J. P. 351 

343, 1184 



Ixiv 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Castle (1623), Cro. Jac. 644 5 

— (1857), Dears. & B. 363 ... 849 
Castleton (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 74 351 
Caslrique v. Imrie (1870), L. R. 

4 H. L. 414 ... 405, 426 
Castro (1874), L. R. 9 Q. B. 350 

121 207 209 

— (1879), 5 Q. B. D. 490 ..'. 233, 239 

— (1883), 6 App. Cas. 229 ... 58, 59, 

220, 231, 233, 301 

— (alias Orton) (1873), Q. B. 174 
Cate and Tarry (1887), Q. B. D. 7 127 

Catesby (1824), 2 B. & C. 814 402 

Catherall (1875), 13 Cox, 109 ... 214, 1028 
Catherwood v. Caslon (1844), 13 

M. & W. 261 ... 1299 
Cater (1802), 4 Esp. 117 ... 446n., 447n., 

835 
— o. Hamilton (1889), 53 J. P. 

504 ... 412 
Catterall v. Catterall (1845), 1 Rob. 

Eccl. 304; 3 Rob. Eccl. 580 ... 1299 
Cavan u. Stewart (1816), 1 Stark. 

(N. P.) 525 ... 442 
Cavendish (1873), Ir. Rep. 8 C. L. 

178 ... 868 
Cavey v. Leadbetter (1863), 13 

C. B. (N. S.) 470 ... 1314 
Cawthron [1913] 3 K. B. 168 ... 246, 1024 
Caygill V. Thwaites (1885), 49 

J. P. 614 ... 555 
Central Criminal Court (1883), H 
Q. B. D. 

479 298 

— (1886-7), 17 

Q. B. D. 
598; 18 
Q. B. D. 

314 298 

Central Wingland (1877), 2 

Q. B. D. 349 ... 1371 
Chadwick (1833), 6 C. & P. 181 ... 710 

— (1847), 11 Q. B. 173 

334n., 1301 

— (1850), M. S 1446, 1449 

— (1917), 12 Cr. App. R. 

247 ... 337 
Chainey (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 175 

336, 348, 1027 

Chalker (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 2 ... 867 

Chalking (1817), R. & R. 334 680 

Chalkley (1813), R. & R. 258 789 

Chalmers (1867), 10 Cox, 450 684 

— u. Payne (1835), 2 Cr. M. 

& R. 156 ... 1124 
Chamberlain (1826), 1 Mood. 154 353 

— (1833), 6 C. & P. 93 159 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 486 ... 876 

Chamberlayn (1559) 1074 

Chambers (1848), 3 Cox, 92 497 

— (189B), 18 Cox, 401 

788, 1274, 1285, 1316, 
1327, 1333, 1335 

— Ex parte Klitz [1919] 

1 K. B. 638 ... 122 



PAGE 

Chambers v. Bernasconi (1834), 

1 Cr. M. & R. 347, 368 ... 374 
Chambers's Case (1738), Andr. 

353 ... I387n. 

Champney (1836), 2 Lew. 258 1191 

Champneys (1§37), 2 M. & Rob. 26 158 
Chandler (1855), Dears. 453 2, 871 

— [1913] 1 K. B. 125 ... 533, 665 

— V. Home (1842), 2 M. & 

Rob. 423 ... 485 
Chandra Dharma [1905] 2 K. B. 

335 ... 65, 1025 

Chapin (1910), 74 J. P. 71 942, 1400 

Chapman (1838),- 8 C. & P. 558 ... 88, 93, 
102, 103, 489 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 119 ... 619 
(1849), 1 Den. 432 ... 3, 1431 

— (1871), 12 Cox, 4 903, 965 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 54 20n. 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 296 712 

— (1912), 29 T. L. R. 117 382 

— Ex parte (1836), 4 A. & 

E. 773 ... 131, 1217 
Chappel (1834), 1 M. & Rob. 395 ... 394 
Chappie (1804), R. & R. 77 789 

— (1811), 3 Camp. 91 1387n. 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 355 

1452, 1455 

— (1892), 17 Cox, 455 101 

Charles (1861), L. & C. 90 ... 1328, 1332 

— (1892), 17 Cox, 499 ... 763, 1427 
Charlesworth (1851), 10 Q. B. 1012 

1356, 1358 

— (1860), 2 F. & F. 326 

223, 1004 

— (1861), 1 B. & S. 460 

127, 149, 222, 223 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. 

R. 167 ... 717 
Charlton (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 119 

336, 348 
Charnock (1698), 12 St. Tr. 1377; 

3 Salk. 81 ... 191, 1064, 
1065, 1066 

— V. Court [1899] 2 Ch. 35 1284 

— V. Merchant [1900] 1 

Q. B. 474 ... 459, 998 
Chart and Longbridge (1870), 

L. R. 1 C. C, R. 237 ... 1379 

Chater (1861), 9 Cox, 1 606 

Chatway (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 151 1474 

Cheafor (1851), 2 Den. 361 545 

Cheeseman (1836), 7 C. & P. 455 ... 886 

— (1862), L. & C. 140 ... 3, 534, 

1431, 1432, 1433 
Chelsea Waterworks v. Cowper 

(1795), 1 Esp. 275 ... 444 
Cherry (1781), 2 East, P. C. 556 ... 5.35 

— (1871), 12 Cox, 32 383, 1265 

Chesney o. Newsholme [1908] P. 

301 ... 373, 1051 
Chetwynd (1743), 18 SI. Tr. 289 ... 883 

— (1908), 72 J. P. 250 1418 

Cheverton (1862), 2 F. & F. 833 ... 868 
Chichester (1851), 2 Den. 458 226 

— (1851), 17 Q. B. 504n. 260 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixv 



PAGE 

Chichester ,.. Hill (1883), 52 L. J. 

(Q. B.) 150 ... 296, 297 

Chidley (1860), 8 Cox, 365 382 

Child (1830)^ 4 C. & P. 442 1227 

— (1846), 2 Cox, 102 1231 

— (1851), 5 Cox. 197 1196 

— (1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 307 

741, 742 
Chipchase (1795), 1 East, P. C. 567 531 
Chisholm (1815), R. & R. 297 810 

— D. Doulton (1889), 22 

Q. B. D. 736 ... 25, 1314, 1359 

Chitson [1909] 2 K. B. 945 .: 356 

Chittenden (1885), 15 Cox, 725 ... 1356 
Cholmley (1636), Cro. Car. 464 ... 77 
Chorley (1848), 12 Q. B. 515 ... 1361, 1373 
Chorley Corporation v. Night- 
ingale [1907] 2 K. B. 637 ... 1365 
Chowne v. Baylis (1862), 31 L. J. 

(Ch.) 757 ... 292 
Christian (1842), C. & Mar. 388 ... 403 

— (1916), 78 J. P. 112 1036 

Christie (1821), Carr. Supp. ... 262, 375 

— (1858), 7 Cox, 506 207n. 

— [1914] A. C. 545 393, 456, 

1028 

— u. Cooper [1900] 2 Q. B. 

522 26 1273 

— V. Davey [1893] 1 Ch. 316 1312 
Christopher (1850), 1 Den. 536 ... 496 

— (1858), Bell, 27 ... 527, 528 

Chubb (1831), 2 Deac. Cr. L. 1517, 

1518 ... 769 

— V. Westley (1834), 6 C. & 

P. 436 ... 1121 
Church, Ex parte (1822), 1 D. & 

R. 324 ... 416 
Chuter v. Freeth & Pocock [1911] 

2 K. B. 832 ... 1290 
Clapham <1S29), 4 C. & P. 29 ... 374 

Clapton (1848), 3 Cox, 126 606 

Clarence (1889), 22 Q. B. D. 23 

932, 943, 1019 
Clark (1810), R. & R. 181 570 

— (1818), 1 Mood. 376n 538 

— (1853), Dears. 198 1467 

— (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 54 343 

— (1883), 15 Cox, 171 ... 921, 1320, 

1345 

— (1884), 14 Q. B. D. 92 1338 

— (1918), 82 J. P. 295 179, 852 

— V. Molyneiix (1877), 3 

Q. B. D. 237 ... 1251 
Clarke (1787), 1 T. R. 679 1387n. 

— (1817), 2 Stark. (N. P.) 241 

365, 372n., 1022 

— (1854), Dears. 397 1021 

— (1859), 1 F. & F. 654 1398 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 1040 921 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 474 1300 

— (1895), 59 J. P. 248 71, 1037 

— [1900] 2 Jr. Rep. 304 1389, 

1402, 1408 

— (1905), 69 J. P. 150 620 

— V. Newsam (1847), 1 Ex. 

131 ... 815 

A.C.P. 



PAGE 

Clarke u. Periam (1742), 2 Atk. 

337 ... 1328 

— V. Saftery (1824), Ry. & M. 

126 ... 489 

Clarkson (1892), 17 Cox, 483 1219 

Claxby (1853), 24 L. J. (Q. B.) 223 1349 

Clay (1819), R. & R. 387 548 

— (1851), 5 Cox, 146 365 

— (1909), 74 J. P. 55 335 

Clavburn (1818), R. & R. 360 680 

Clayton (1843), 1 C. & K. 128 

1444, 1457 
Cleary (1862), 2 F. & F. 850 ... 376, 377 

— V. Booth [1893] 1 Q. B. 465 

885 990 
Clegg (1848), 3 Cox, 295 ' 768 

— (1869), Ir. Rep. 3 C. L. 166 536 
Clemens [1898] 1 Q. B. 556 ... 765, 771, 

796, 800 
Clement v. Fisher (1827), 7 B. & 

C. 459 ... 1248 

Clements (1851), 2 Den. 251 75 

Clendon (1731), 2 Str. 870, 911 

54, 1162 
Clerk (1702), cas. temp. Holt, 167 1345n 

— (1861), 9 H. L. C. 184 121 

Clerk of Assize of Oxford Circuit 

[1897] 1 Q. B. 370 ... 148, 1315 

Clewes (1830), 4 C. & P. 228 ... 358, 387, 

390, 396, 868 

— I/. Bathurst (1734), 2 Str. 

960 ... 426 

Cliburn (1898), 62 J. P. 232 487 

Clifford (1845), 2 C. & K. 202 1435 

— (1895), 16 N. S. W. Rep. 

Law, 12 ... 106 

Clifton (1794), 5 T. R. 498 1360 

Clinch (1791), 2 East, P. C. 938 ... 813 

Clinton (1869), Ir. Rep. 4 C. L. 6 542 

— (1917), 12 Cr. App. R. 215 885 

Cliviger (1788), 2 T. R. 263 467 

Closs (1858), Dears. & B. 460 ... 720, 721, 

802, 803 

Clouter (1859), 8 Cox, 237 173 

Clubb V. Hutson (1865), 18 C. B. 

(N. S.) 414 ... 1210n. 
Clube (1857), 3 Jur. (N. S.) 698 ... 369 

Cluderay (1849), 1 Den. 514 909 

Clutton 0. Attenborough [1895] 

2 Q. B. 707 ... 810 
Clyncard's Case (1599), Cro. Eliz. 

654 ... 76 
Coalheaver's Case (1768), 1 Leach, 

64 ... 1436, 1443n. 
Coates (1834), 6 C. & P. 394 913 

— V. Birch (1841), 2 Q. B. 252 471 
Coats V. Herefordshire C. C. [1909] 

2 Ch. 579 ... 1363 
Cobbett (1804), 29 St. Tr. 1, 49 ... 1118 

— (1831), 2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

789, 903 ... 221 

— c. Hudson (1852), 1 E. & 

B. 14 ... 485 

Cobden (1862), 3 F. & F. 833 356 

Cochlan u. Williamson (1779), 

1 Doug. 93 ... 445 

e 



Ixvi 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Cock (1815), 4 M. & Sel. 71 1156 

Cockburn (1849), 3 Cox, 543 1024 

— (1857), Dears. & B. 203 430 
Cockcroft (1870), 11 Cox, 410 ... 365, 1022 

— V. Smith (1706), 2 Salk. 

642 ... 933 
Cockshott [1898] 1 Q. B. 582 ... 8, 1273, 

1477 
Codd u. Cabe (1876), 1 Ex. D. 352 

903, 965, 1002 
Codere (1916), 12 Cr. App. R. 18 ... 21 
Codrington (1825), 1 C. & P. 661 ... 700 

Coe (1834), 6 C. & P. 403 923 

Coelho (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 210 17 

Coggins (1873), 12 Cox, 517 728 

Coghlan (1865), 4 F. & F. 316 124C 

Cohen (1851), 2 Den. 249 519 

— (1858), 8 Cox, 41 1140 

— (1868), 11 Cox, 99 22 

— (1907), 71 J. P. 190 83, 296 

— (1909), 73 J. P. 352 336, 337 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 180 56 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 234 ... 1038 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 91 ... 463 
Colclough (1882), 15 Cox, 92 (Jr.) 

363, 834 
Cole (1810), 2 Russ. Cr. (7th ed.) 

977, 2116 ... 354, 1047 

— (1813), 3 Camp. 371 140, 920 

— V. Pendleton (1896), 60 J. P. 

359 996 997 

— V. Turner (1705), 6 Mod. 149* 931 
Coleman (1785), 2 East, P. C. 672 

516, 696 

— (1920), 84 J. P. 112 ... 872, 942 
Coley (1868), 10 Cox, 536 300 

— (1887), 16 Cox, 226 607 

College of Christ (Brecon) & 

Martin, lie (1877), 3 Q. B. D. 16 136 

Collet (1823), R. & R. 498 660 

Colley (1829), M. & M. 329 485" 

ColUcott (1812), R. R. 212, 229 

824, 837, 850 

Collier (1831), 5 C. & P. 160 802 

Colling (1847), 2 Cox, 184 99, 123 

Collins (1839), 9 C. & P. 456 1117 

— (1844), 1 Cox, 57 802 

— (1864), L. & C. 471 ... 534, 1433 

— Ex parte (1899), 34 L. J. 

N. 132 ... 79, 113, 170 

— V. Blantern, 1 Smith, 

L. C. (11th ed.) 369 ... 1209n. 

— u. Carnegie (1834), 1 A. & 

E. 695 ... 416, 1231, 1249 

— V. Thomas (1859), ,1 F. & 

F. 416 ... 1231 

Colmer (1864), 9 Cox, 506 920 

Colpus [1917] 1 K. B. 574 ... 382, 385, 380 
Colwell 0. St. Pancras (Mayor, 

etc.) [1904] 1 Ch. 707 ... 1312, 1313 
Commissioner of Police v. Dono- 
van [1903] 1 K. B. 895. ..423, 1466, 1477 
Commonwealth v. Bowen (1816), 

13 Mass. 356 ... 867 
— V. Feeley, 2 Virg. 

Cas. 1 ... 485, 1202 



PAGE 

Compagnon v. Martin (1772), 2 

W. Bl. 790 ... 351 
Compton (1783), Cald. 246 133, 134 

— (1828), 3 C. & P. 418. ..212, 668 
Comptroller of Patents [1899] 

1 Q. B. 906 ... 123 

CondS (1868), 10 Cox, 547 374, 894 

Condon (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 109 1475 

Coney (1882), 8 Q. B. D. 534 ... 879, 931, 

932, 1219, 1220, 

1438, 1439 

Connell (1853), 6 Cox, 178 ... 213, 1432n. 

Conner (1835), 7 C. & P. 438 886 

Conning (1868), 11 Cox, 134 441 

Connolly (1829), 2 Lew. 229 22 

— (1909), 79 L. J. K. B. 90 

1417, 1420 
Connor (1845), 1 Cox, 233 486 

— (1846), 2 Cox, 65 743 

— (1913), 77 J. P. 247 305 

Consolidated Exploration and 

Finance Co. v.' Musgrave [1900] 

1 Ch. 37 ... 88, 1211 
Constable (1826), 7 D. & R. 663 ... 225 
Constable's Case (1601), 5 Co. 

Rep. 107 ... 32 
Constantino (1848), 7 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 1127 ... 1078 
Conway (1845), 7 Ir. L. R. 149.. .221, 347 
Conybeare v. London School 

Board [1891] 1 Q. B. 118 ... 265 
Coogan (1787), 1 Leach, 448 ... 158, 160, 

802 

Cook (1660), 2 St. Tr. 1077 1065 

Cook (Peter) (1696), 13 St. Tr. 311 

195, 196, 197, 485, 1065 

— (1870), 11 Cox, 542 ... 921 

— (1899), 20 N. S. W. 

Rep. (Law) 264 ... 215n., 
1432n. 

— (1903), 5 West. Austr. 

Rep. 84...345n. 

— (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 

91 ... 728, 729, 730 

— (1918), 34 T. L. R. 

515 392 

— u. Nethercote (1834)1 

6 C. & P. 741 ... 485, 1002 
Cooke (1824), 1 C. & P. 321 ...482,485 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 582 

352, 401, 806, 824, 834, 835 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 64 708 

— (1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

295 ...530, 697 

— u. Hughes (1824), Ry. & M. 

112... 1162 

— V. Stratford (1844), 13 M. 

W. 379... 720 
Coombes (1785), 1 Leach, 388 31, 32 

— (1895), Wood - Ronton, 

Lunacy, 913... 1439 
Cooper (1639), Cro. Car. 544 886 

— (1833), 5 C. & P. 535.. .1444, 1445 

— (1843), 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

1249... 1418 

— (1846), 8 Q. B. 533 1246 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixvii 



PAGE 

Cooper (1847), 2 C. & K. 586 816 

— (1849), 3 Cox, 547 685,686, 

687 

— (1849), 1 Den. 459 871 

— (1850), 1 Russ. Cr. (7th 

ed.) 431 ... 1223 

— (1852), 3 C. & K. 318 397 

— (1874), 12 Cox, 600 632 

— (1875), 1 Q. B. D. 19. ..361, 717 

— (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 510 

694, 700, 703, 705, 706 

— (1908), 24 T. L. R. 867.. 304, 727 

— Be (1882), 20 Ch. D. 611 ... SOS 

— V. Crane [1898] Prob. 369.. 467 

— V. Marsden (1793), 1 Esp. 

1 ... 445 

— u. Slade (1858), 6 H. L. C. 

746 ...1397 
Coote (1873), L. R. 4 P. C. 599 

382, 385, 469 
Copeland (1842), C. & Mar. 516... 699 

Copley (1865), 4 F. & F. 1097 204 

Coppen i^. Moore, No. 1 [1898] 2 

Q. B. 300 ... 1272, 1274 

— 0. — No. 2 [1898] 2 

O. B: 306... 26, 1273 
Coppock u. Bower (1838), 4 M. & 

W. 361 ... 1210n. 
Corbett (1803), Queensland State 

Rep. 246 ... 20n., 378n. 

Corfell (1844), 1 Cox, 123 206 

Cornforth (1742), 2 Str. 1162 1011 

Cornish v. Searell (1828), 8 B. & 

C. 471 ... 412 

Cornwall (1731), 2 Str. 881 665, 1437 

— (1817), R. & R. 336 920 

Corrie (1904), 68 J. P. 294 461, 1342 

Corrigan (1912), 8 Cr. App. R.4... 337 
Corsellis u. L. C. C. (1907), 1 Ch. 

704... 1362 
Corsen v. Dubois (1816), Holt 

(N. P.) 239 ... 482 
Corven's Case (1604), 12 Co. Rep. 

105... 796 

Cory (18641, 10 Cox, 23 545 

Cosans (1785), 1 Leach, 342, 

343n. ... 115? 

Cosnett (1901), 20 Cox, 6 704,1263 

Cosser (1S76), 13 Cox, 187 538 

Costar V. Hetherington (1859), 1 

E. & E. 802... 161 

Costello [1910] 1 K. B. 28 242 

Cotesworth (1705), 6 Mod. 172 931 

Cotton (1813), 3 Camp. 444 1366 

— (1873), 12 Cox, 400 358 

Coulson (1850), 1 Den. 592 50,705 

— (1891), 55 J. P. 202 142 

— V. Disborough (1894), 2 

Q. B. 316... 487 

Coulter (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 147... 354 

Court (1853), 6 Cox, 202 953 

— (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 127... 23 
Courteen o. Touse (1807), 1 Camp. 

43 ... 4S9 
Courtenay (1850), 5 Cox, 218 (Ir.) 662 



PAGE 

Courtivron o. Meunier (1851), 6 

Ex. 74 ... 1263 
Courvoisier (1840), 9 C. & P. 362 ... 201 

Coveney (1837), 7 C. & P. 667 438 

Cowan u. Milbourn (1867), L. R. 

. 2 Ex. 230... 1162 
Coward v. Baddeley (1859), 4 H. 

& N. 478 ... 930 

Cowle (1907), 71 J. P. 152 148,439 

Cowles V. Dunbar (1827), 2 C. & 

P. 565... 1002 
Cowley u. Newmarltet L. B. [1892] 

A. C. 345 ... 1347 
Cox (1818), R. & R. 362 939,940 

— (1831), 4 C. & P. 538, 540 226 

— (1832), 5 C. & P. 297 1023 

— (1863), 9 Cox, 301 1198 

— [1S9S].1 Q. B. 179 

414, 996, 1029, 1031 

— (1898), 62 J. P. 89 103,453 

— V. Coleridge (1822), 1 B. & 

C 37 935 
Cox and Railton (1885), 14 Q. B.' 

D. 153; 15 Cox, 611 ... 471, 1270, 1420 

Coyle (1855), 7 Cox, 74 206 

Coyne (1905), 69 J. P. 151 ... 69, 71, 1267 

Cozens (1780), 2 Doug. 426 134 

Crab (1868), 11 Cox, 85 699 

Crabbe (1895), 59 J. P. 247 71 

Craclmell (1866), 10 Cox, 408 ... 474, 687 

Craddock (1850), 2 Den. 31 343 

Cradock (1863), 3 F. & F. 837 1297 

Cramp (1817), R. & R. 327 855 

— (1880), 14 Cox, 390 456,924 

— (1880), 5 Q. B. D. 307 

924 926 947 
Crane (1911), 75 J. P. 415 '. 728', 729 

— [1921] 2 A. C. 299 344,348 

Cranston (1892), 9 Morrell, Bank- 
ruptcy, Rep. 160 ... 1271 

Cratchley (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 

232... 12, 456, 1047, 1050 

Crawford (1845), 1 Den. 100 960 

— (1854), 6 Cox, 4S1 84 

Crawshaw (1860), Bell, 303 

5, 24, 1335, 1342 
Crawshay, Ex parte (I860), 8 Cox, 

356 ... 130, 1080 
Creagh u. Gamble (1888), 24L. R. 

Ir. 458 ... 1002 
Cream (Neill) (1891), 116 C. C. C. 

Sess. P. 1451 ... 358 

Creamer [1919] 1 K. B. 564 540 

Creau (1861), 8 Cox, 509 .201 

Creed (1843), 1 C. & K. 63 618 

Creese (1874), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

105... 1264 
Creevey (1813), 1 M. & Sel. 273 

400, 1120, 1123, 1124 
Creevey u. Carr (1835), 7 C. & P. 

64... 491 
Creighton (1908), 14 Canada Cr. 

Cas. 349 ... 874n. 

Crespigny (1795), 1 Esp. 280 11S7 

Cresswell (1876), 1 Q. B. D. 446 

402, 1294 



Ixviii 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PACE 

Crew u. Saunders (1735), 2 Str. 

1005... 418 

Crick (1858), 1 F. & F. 519 876 

Cricklade (1849), 3 E. & B. 947n. ... 1373 
Crippen [1911] 1 K. B. 149 

206, 207, 208, 336, 338 
Crisham (1841), C. & Mar. 187 

1018, 1440, 1443 
Crisp (1818), 1 B. & Aid. 282 

1212, 1215 

— (1912), 76 J. P. 304 220 

— and Home-wood (1919), 83 

J, P. 121 ... 1142 
Critchley, Ex parte (1845), 15 L. J. 

(Q. B.) 124... 1210n. 
Crocker v. Raymond (1886), 3 C. 

L. R. 181 ... 927 

Crockett (1831), 4 C. & P. 544 375 

Crofts (1840), 9 C. & P. 219 1469 

Crohagan (1633), Cro. Car. 332... 1065 
Crompton v. Bearcroft (1768), 2 

Hagg. Consist. Rep. 376... 1300 
Crompton U. D. C. (1902), 20 Cox, 

243 ... 1351 
Cromwell (Lord) (1602), Yelv. 15 .. 77 
Cronk d. Frithi (1839), 9 C. & P. 

197... 445 
Crook (1859), 1 F. & F. 521 876 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 60... 337 

— V. Dowling (1782), 3 Dougl. 

75... 421 

Crooke (1731), 2 Str. 901 833 

— V. Powerscourt (Lord) 

.(1868), 16 W. R. 969 ... 1210n. 

Crookes (1766), 3 Burr. 1841 100 

Cropper (1837), 2 Mood. 18 198 

— V. Horton (1826), 8 D. & 

R. 166... 1004 
Crosby (1843), 1 Cox, 10 706,713 

— V. Leng (1810), 12 East, 

409 ... 291, 292 

— B. Percy (1808), 1 Camp. 

303... 445 
Cross (1702), 1 Ld. Raym. 711 

6, 722, 1452 

— (1812), 3 Camp. 227 ... 1309, 1355 

— (1826), 2 C. & P. 483 1312 

— (1856), Dears. & B. 68 383 

— (1859), 1 F. & F. 510 1304 

Crossfield (1796), 26 St. Tr. 1, 57 ... 1067 
Crossley (1797), 7 T. R. 315 1184 

— (1837), 2 M. & Rob. 17 

706, 707 

— (1839), 10 A. & E. 132 ... 7 
Grossman (1908), 24 T. L. R. 517 ... 1418 
Crouch (1844), 1 Cox, 94 19 

— (1850), 4 Cox, 163 447 

Croucher (1862), 3 F. & F. 285... 431 
Crouther (1600), Cro. Eliz. 654 ... 1208 

Crowe (1848), 3 Cox, 123 351 

Crowe and Myerscough (1917), 81 

J. P. 288 ... 392 

Crowhurst (1844), 1 C. & K. 370 ... 397 

Crowley (1914), 78 J. P. 142 1472 

Crowther (1832), 5 C. & P. 316 ... 834 



Croydon R. D. C. v. Cowley (1909), 

73 J. P. 205 ... 800 
Crump (1825), 1 C. & P. 658 .513, 547 
Crumpton (1842), C. & Mar. 597 ... 871 

Crunden (1809), 2 Camp. 89 1318 

Cruse (1838), 8 C. & P. 541 ....^.... 22 
Crutchley (1831), 5 C. & P. 133... 769 

— (1837), 7 C. & P. 814 ... 874 

■Crystal, The [1894] A. C. 508 1352 

Cubitt V. Maxse (1873), L. R. 8 

C. P. 715 ... 1362 
Cuckfield U. D. C. u. Goring [1898] 

1 O. B. 865... 1352 
Cuddy (1843), 1 C. & K. 210 ... 878, 1438 
Cuffey (1848), 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

' ^ 467... 197, 1078 

CuUen (1840), 9 C. & P. 681 1304 

Culling V. Culling [1896] Prob. 116.. 1298 
CuUum (1873), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

28 ... 616, 617 
Cumberland (1795), 6 T. R. 194' 

112, 1377 
Cumming (1848), 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

485 ... 1078 
Cumpton (1880), 5 Q. B. D. 341 

82,902,905 
Cundell (1812) 1074 

— i;. Pratt (1827), M. & W. 

108 ... 474, 1022 
Cundick (1822), Doul. & Ry. 

(N. P.) 13 ... 1346 
Cundy u. Lecocq (1884), 13 Q. B. 

D. 207 ...25, 26 
— 0. Lindsay (1878), 3 App. 

Cas. 459 ... 298, 524, 525, 716 
Cunliffe i/. Sefton (1801), 2 East, 

183... 445 

Cunningham (1858), Bell, 72 32,911 

Cureton (1861), 1 B. & S. 208.. 1383, 1384 
Curgerwen (1865), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

1 ... 1305 
Curl (1727), 17 St. Tr. 153; 2 Str. 

788 ... 130, 1162 

Curley (1909), 2 Cr., App. R 872 

Curling (1807), R. & R. 123 646 

Curran (1828), 3 C. & P. 397 899 

— u. Treleaven (1891), 2 Q. B. 

545 ... 1283 
Currie v. Child (1813), 3 Camp. 

283 445 
Curtis (1756), Fost. 135 904 

— (1848), 2 C. & K. 763 495 

— (1885), 15 Cox, 746 872 

— (1904), 21 T. L. R. 87 437 

— V. Curtis (1834), 10 Bing. 477 1248 

— V. Marsh (1858), 28 L. J. 

Ex. 36 ... 655, 1382 

Curvan (1826), 1 Mood. 132 : 882,899 

Cutbush (1867), L. R. 2 Q. B. 379... 233 



DADE (1831), 1 Mood. 307 ... 838, 1437 
Dadson (1850), 2 Den. 35... 887, 905, 1173 
Dakhyl o. Labouchere (1908), 2 

K. B. 325n. ... 1250 
Dale (1836), 7 C. & P. 352 709 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixix 



PAGE 

Dale (1852), 6 Cox, 14 909, 912 

— (1889), 16 Cox, 703 925 

Dalloway (1847), 2 Cox, 273 893 

Dalloz (1908), 1 Cr. App. R. 258... 893 

Dalmas (1844), 1 Cox, 95 375 

Dalrymple o. Dalrymple (1811), 2 
Hagg. Consist. Rep. 54 

405, 1298, 1300, 1306 

Daly (1840), 9 C. & P. 342 1209 

Dammaree (1710), 15 St. Tr. 521, 

605 ... 1069, 1070 

Dane (1858), 1 F. & F. 323 1304 

Daniel (1704), 1 Salk. 380 7 

— c. Janes (1877), 2 C. P. D. 

351 ... 788 

Dann (1835), 1 Mood. 424 157 

Dannelly (1816), R. & R. 310 

514, 1435, 1446 

Dant (1865), L. & C. 567 891 

Darby o. Ouseley (1856), 1 H. & N. 

1 ... 1250 
Dargue (19li), 6 Cr. App. R. 261 ... 305 

Dark (1847), 1 Den. 276 700 

Darley (1803), 4 East, 174 62 

— (1826), 1 Stark. (N. P.) 

359 720 

Darrel (1715), 10 Mod. 321 1065 

Dart (1878), 14 Cox, 143 ...'. 18 

Dartnell (1869), 20 L. T. 1020 605 

Daubney u. Cooper (1829), 10 B. 

& C. 237 ... 935 
Daunt (1830), 1 Crawf. & Dix. (Ir. 

Circ. Rep.) 166 ... 904 
Davenport (1826), M. S. 1 Arch- 

bold's Peel's Acts (3rd ed.)271.. 518 
Daventry R. D. C. b. Parker [1900] 

1 Ch. 1 ... 1352, 1369 

Davie (1781), 2 Doug. 588 133 

Davies (1712), 2 East, P. C. 709... 639 

— (1794), 5 T. R. 626 ... 1328, 1332 

— (1800), 2 Leach, 876 659 

— (1853), 6 Cox, 326 170, 171 

— (1856), Dears. 640 594 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 69 741 

— (1866), 10 Cox, 239 536 

— [1897] 2 Q. B. 199 1334 

— [1906] 1 K. B. 32.. .3, 104, 131, 1217 

— [1909] 1 K. B. 892 261,312 

— [1913] 1 K. B. 573 632 

— (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 254 

227, 339, 340 

— (1913), 29 T. L. R. 350 ... 352 

— (1916), 85 L. J. (K. B.) 

208 ... 336, 989 

— u. London, etc.. Marine 

Ins. Co. (187S), 8 Ch. D. 

469 ... 1210n. 

— V. Stephenson (1890), 24 

Q. B. D. 529 ... 1341 
Davis (1754), Sayer, 163 5 

— (1762), 3 Burr. 1317 132 

— (1772), Loftt, 62 132 

— (1783), 1 Leach, 271 6 

— (1806), R. & R. 113 ... 813, 1436 

— (1817), R. & R. 322 666,681 

— (1823), R. & R. 499 666 



PAGE 

Davis (1824), 1 C. & P. 470 62 

— (1837), 7 C. & P. 785 

, 201, 901, 967 

— (1839), 8 C. & P. 759 ... 967, 1386 

— (1861),- L. & C. 64 898 

— (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

272 731 

— (1881), 14 Cox, 563 ....■ 21 

— (1883), 15 Cox, 174 869 

— (1901), 17 T. L. R. 164 206 

— (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 66... 335 

— [1917] 2 K. B. 855 1475 

— II. Black (1841), 1 Q. B. 

900... 1306 

— /D. Capper (1829), 10 B. & 

C. 28... 1005- 

— V. Dale (1830), M. & M. 

• 514... 479 

— V. Dinwoody (1792), 4 T. R. 

678... 467 

— V. Living (1816), Holt (N. P.) 

275 ... 460 

— u. Williams (1811), 13 East, 

232 ... 426 
Davison (1808), 31 St. Tr. 99 1154 

— (1820), 4 B. & Aid. 329 ... 1215 

— (1860), 8 Cox, 360 ...221,223 

— D. Duncan (1857), 7 E. 

& B. 229... 1125 

— Ex parte (1896), 60 J. P. 

808 ... 295, 297 

Davitt (1870), 11 Cox, 676 1418 

Davy (1844), 1 Cox, 60 754 

— Ex parte (1842), 2 Dowl. 

(N. S.) 24 ... 1230 
Dawkins v. Rokeby (Lord) (1876), 

L. R. 7 H. L. 744i ... 1251 
Dawson (1696), 13 St. Tr. 451 ... 646, 649 

— (1717), 1 Str. 19 216 

— (1821), 3 Stark. (N. P.) 

62 353 

— (1851), 2 Den. 75 '.'.'. 812 

Day (1755), Sayer, 202 347 

— (1841), 9 C. & P. 722 931 

— (1845), 1 Cox, 207 938 

— (1852), 6 Cox, 55 430 

— (1870), 11 Cox, 505 212 

Daye [1908] 2 K. B. 333 482, 484 

Deacon (1746), 18 St. Tr. 365 

38, 354, 1066, 1067 
Deakin (1800), 2 East, P. C. 653 ... 48 
Deana (Carmen) (1909), 73 J. P. 

255 ... 880, 887, 934 
Deane (1851), 5 Cox, 501 222 

— (1877), 46 L. J. M. C. 155... 1467 

— V. Thomas (1829), M. & M. 

361 ... 1296 
Deasy (1883), 15 Cox, 334 

1069, 1078, 1418 

Deaves (1869), 11 Cox, 227 528 

Deaville/ [1903] 1 K. B. 468 1340 

De Banks (1884), 13 Q. B. D. 29 ... 536 
De Berenger (1814), 3 M. & Sel. 

67... 1419 
— (1814), Stark. Ev. 

(4th ed.) 167 ... 488 



Ixx 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

De Bode (Baron) (1845), 8 Q. B. 

208... 405 

Dee (1884), 15 Cox, 579 1016, 1021 

Deer (1862), L. & C. 240 539,732 

Deering (1869), 11 Cox, 298 515 

De Jager v. Att.-Gen. for Natal 

[1907] A. C. 326 ... 10, 1054 
De Kromme (1892), 17 Cox, 492... 1429 
De la Motte (1781), 21 St. Tr. 687 

1054, 1075 
Delaval (1763), 3 Burr. 1434 ... 130, 1419 
De Londo (1765), 2 East, P. C. 

1098... 774 
De Marny [1907] 1 K. B. 288 

38, 1319, 1322 
De Mattos (1836), 7 C. & P. 458 

34, 863 

De Murck [1918] 1 K. B. 635 1037 

Denison (1758), 2 Ld. Kenyon, 259.. 1386 

Denmour (1861), 8 Cox, 440 538 

Dennis [1894] 2 Q. B. 458 1288 

— (1905), 69 J. P. 256 25,939 

Dennison (1773), Loftt. 148 131 

Denny (1845), 1 Cox, 178 814 

Denoel (1914), 114 L. T. 1215 202 

Dent (1843), 1 C. & K. 249 707 

Dent's Case (1874), Wood-Renton, 

Lunacy, 682 ... 974 
Denton (1852), 18 Q. B. 761 

8, 225, 1349, 1368 
D'Eon (Chevalier) (1764), 3 Burr. 

1513 ... 102, 1247 
Depardo (1807), R. & R. 134 ...34, 807 
Derby v. Bloomfield (1904), 20 Cox, 

674 ... 1334 
Derbyshire (1831), 3 B. & Ad. 

147... 1378 

— (1842), 2 Q. B. 745 

781, 1375, 1378 

— JJ. (1909), 1 K. B. 

449 ...1387n. 
Derrington (1826), 2 C. & P. 418 ... 390 
Designy (1682), Sir T. Raym. 474 ,. 1000 

Desmond (1868), 11 Cox, 146 1427 

Dettmer, Ex parte (1908), 72 J. P. 

513 298 299 
De Veaux (1793), 2 Leach, 585' " . ' 296 

Devett (1838), 8 C. & P. 639 53 

De-von (1811), 14 East, 477 1374 

— (1824), Ry. & M. 144 1374 

— (1825), 4 B. & C. 670 1375 

— (1833), 5 B. & Ad. 383 1375 

Dewdney v. Palmer (1839), 4 M. & 

W. 664 ... 452 
Dewell u. Saunders (1618), Cro. 

Jac. 490... 1309, 1312 
Dewhurst (1820), 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

529... 1218 
De Wilton, Re [1900] 2 Ch. 481 

1296, 1301 

Dewitt (1849), 2 C. & K. 905 845 

Dexter (1899), 19 Cox, 360 ... 69, 122, 635 
D'Eyncourt (1888), 21 Q. B. D. 

109... 295 
Dharma (Chandra) [1905] 2 K. B. 

335 ... 1025 



PAGE 

Dibble (1908), 72 J. P. 498 489 

Dibden v. Skirrow [1908] 1 Ch. 41.. 1375 

Dicken (1877), 14 Cox, 8 1028 

Dickenson (1879), Roscoe Cr. Ev. 

(13th ed.) 408... 715 

— [1910] 1 K. B. 469 1033 

Dickeson v. Hilliard (1873), 43 L. J. 

Ex. 37... 1251 
Dickins v. Gill [1896] 2 Q. B. 

310... 792, 851, 1111 

Dickinson (1819), R. & R. 401 73 

— (1820), R. & R. 420 513 

— Ex parte Grandolini 

[1917] 2 K. B. 393 ... 1040 
Dickman (1910), 74 J. P. 449 

202, 338, 461 
Dicks (1817), 1 Russ. Cr. (7th ed.) 

97 ... 22 

Dignam (1837), 7 A. & E. 593 226 

Dillon (1817), 2 Chit. (K. B.) 314 ... 1232 

— (1877), 14 Cox, 4 1197 

— V. O'Brien (1887), 16 Cox, 

245-... 295, 1211 

Dilmore (1852), 6 Cox, 52 433 

Dilworth (1843), 2 M. & Rob. 531 

930, 945 

Dimes (1912), 76 J. P. 47 456, 1045 

Dingier (1791), 2 Leach, 561 ... 377, 435 
Dingley (1845), 1 C. & K. 637 ... 387, 390 

Dinnick (1910), 74 J. P. 32 237, 1167 

Diprose (1868), 11 Cox, 185 609 

Director of Public Prosecutions u. 

Beard [1920] A. C. 479 ... 19, 20, 
352, 874, 888 

— u. Blady [1912] 2 K. B. 89 

468, 1041 

— V. Witkowski (1911), 104 

L. T. 453 ... 1337 
Ditcheat (Inhabs.) (1829), 9 B. & 

C. 176 ... 660 
Dixon (1716), 10 Mod. 335 ... 22, 1328, 

1332 

— (1756), 1 East, P. C. 313 ... 905 

— (1765), 3 Burr. 1687 482 

— (1803), R. & R. 53 577 

— (1814), 3 M. & Sel. 11 ... 2, 352, 

401, 720, 1141, 1287 

— (1834) 6 C. & P. 601 ... 1128, 1219 

— (1856), Dears. 580 527, 529 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 178 612 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 341 18 

— V. Farrer (1886), 17 Q. B. D. 

667; 18 Q. B. D. 43 ... 40, 121 

— V. Lee (1834), 1 Cr. M. & R. 

645 ... 484 

Dobson (1806), 7 East, 218 712 

Dodd (1777), 1 Leach, 155 455 

— (1808), 9 East, 516 134 

— (1877) (unreported) 343 

Doddridge (1860), 8 Cox, 335 ... 967, 1438 

Dodson (1898), 62 J. P. 729 606 

Dodwell V. BurfoTd (1670), 1 Mod. 

24 ... 931 
Doe (d.) V. Andrews (1778), 2 

Cowp. 845 ... 472 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixxi 



PAGE 

Doe (d.) 0. — (1850), 15 Q. B. 

756 ... 413 

— .;. Anglesea (1743), 17 

St. Tr. 712 ... 354 

— V. Barnes (1834), 1 M. 

& Rob. 386 ... 413 
-^ V. Fowler (1850), 14 

Q. B. 700 ... 413, 1294 

— D. Griffin (1812), 15 

East, 295 ... 370 

— u. Newton (1836), 5 A. 

& E. 514 ... 447n. 

— V. Perkins (1790), 3 

T. R. 749 ... 490 

— u. Powell (1836), 7 C. & 

P. 617 ... 445 

— V. Roe (1809), 2 Camp. 

280 ... 489 

— V. — (1838), 2 Dowl. 

518 ... 472 

— 0. Ross (1840), 7 M. & 

W. 102 ... 450 

— u. Sisson (1810), 12 

East, 62 ... 370 

— c. Suckermore (1835), 

5 A. & E. 703 ... 446, 447 

— u. Turford (1832), 3 B. 

Ad. 890 ... 374 

— u. Woolley (1828), 8 B. 

C. 22 ... 444 
Doggett V. Waterloo Taxicab Co., 

Ltd., [1910] 2 K. B. 336 633 
Doherty (1874), 13 Cox, 23 387 

— (1874), 13 Cox, 24 387 

— (1887), 16 Cox, 306 ... 205, 874, 

890 

Dolan (1855), Dears. 436 732 

Dolby (1823), 2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

939 ... 188, 189, 192, 
194, 196, 197 
Donaghy v. Walsh [1914] 2 Ir. R. 

261 ... 1334 
• Doncaster (Mayor) v. Day (1810), 

3 Taunt. 262 ... 425 
Donnovan (1770), 1 Leach, 69 ... 737, 743 
Donnally (1779), 1 Leach, 193 ... 639, 640 

Donnelly a835), 1 Mood. 438 813 

[And see Dannelly.) 

Donovan (1850), 4 Cox, 401 918, 942 

Doodeward v. Spence (1908), 6 

Austr. Com. L. R. 406 1345n. 

Doody (1854), 6 Cox, 463 3, 1431 

Doolubdass v. Ram Loll (1850), 

5 Moore (Ind. App.) 109 ... 1420 
Doran (1791), 1 Esp. 127 744 

— (1838), 2 Mood. 37 478 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 67 ... 102 
Dorrington (1910), 74 J. P. 392 ... 234 

Dorset (1881), 45 L. T. 308 1379 

Dorset County Council (1902), 67 

J. P. 19 .. 1351 
Dossett (1846), 2 C. & K. 306, 310 

359, 741, 743 
Dossi (1918), 13 Cr. App. R. 158 

51, 56, 1032 
Douglas (1836), 1 Mood. 480 920 



PAGE 

Douglas (1841), C. & Mar. 193 ... 173 

— .(1845), 1 C. & K. 670 ... 440 

— (1846), 13 Q. B. 42 ... 1154, 1206 
Douglass (1808), 1 Camp. 212 

694, 709 
Dover (1835), 1 Cr. M. & R. 726 ... 98 

— V. Child (1875), 1 Ch. D. 172 295 

Dovey (1851), 2 Den. 86 213 

Dowdale's Case (1605), 6 Co. Rep. 

47 ... 216 
Dowdle (1900), 26 Vict. L. R. 637 889 
Dowey (1868), 37 L. J. (M. C.) 52 704 

Dowlin (1793), 5 T. R. 311 1196 

Dowling (1848), 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

381 ... 188, 197, 201, 1078 

Downer (1880), 14 Cox, 486 472 

Downes (1789), 2 East, P. C. 997... 836 

— (1875), 1 Q. B. D. 25 895n. 

— V. Johnson [1895] 2 Q. B. 

203 ... 1341 
Downey (1845), 7 Q. B. 281 85 

— (1845), 3 Cr. & D. (Ir.) 

314 ... 103 
Downing (1844), 1 Den. 52 ... 1440, 1443 
Downshire (Marchioness) (1835), 

4 A. & E. 232 ... 1359 
— (Marquis) (1836), 4 A. 

& E. 698 ... 1361 

Dowse (1865), 4 F. & F. 492 206 

Dowsell (1834), 6 C. & P. 398 1385 

Dowsey (1904), 29 Vict. L. R. 453 727n. 

Doyen (1899), 34 L. J. N. 645 96 

Doyle (1768), 1 Leach, 67 866 

Drage (1878), 14 Cox, 85 731 

— V. Ibberson (1798), 2 Esp. 

643 ... 1210n. 
Drake (1903), 22 N. Z. L. R. 762 ... 885 

— V. Footitt : Drake v. Hankin 

(1881), 7 Q. B. D. 201 ... 765 

Dredge (1845), 1 Cox; 235 399 

Drew (1837), 8 C. & P. 140 392 

— V. Harlow (1875), 39 J. P. 

420 ... 419 

Drewett (1904), 69 J. P. 37 735 

Dreyer v. Illinois (1903), 167 U. S. 

71 ... 221 

Dring (1857), Dears. & B. 329 729 

Dripps (1874), 13 Cox, 25 102 

DriscoU (1841), C. & Mar. 214 934 

Druitt (1867), 10 Cox, 592 1280,1281 

Drummond (1784), 1 Leach, 337 ... 377 
Drury (1848), 3 C. & K. 193 ... 149, 156, 
157, 158, 159, 160, 459 
Du Barr6 u. Livette (1791), Peake, 

108 (3rd ed.) ... 471 
Duckwortfi [1892] 2 Q. B. 83 ... 3, 915, 
918, 941, 1431, 1433 
Du Cros V. Lambourne [1907] 

1 K. B. 40 ... 1444, 1456, 1457 
Dudley (1884), 14 Q. B. D. 273, 560 

34, 36, 104, 109, 216, 217, 
230, 427, 881, 888 
Dudley, etc.. Banking Co. u. 

Spittle (1860), 1 J. & H. 14 ... 292 
Duffield (1851), 5 Cox, 404 ... 1230,1427 
Duffin (1818), R. & R. 365 938 



Ixxii 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Duffy (1846), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 303 

1119, 1125, 1163 

— (1848), 4 Cox, 172 73n. 

— (1848), 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 795 

152, 154, 173, 192, 201, 1078 
Dugdale (1852), Dears. 64 1109 

— (1853), 1 E. & B. 435 

1319, 1321, 1431 

— (1853), Dears. 64 3 

Duggan (1873), Ir. Rep. 7 C. L. 94 121 

Duguid (1906), 75 L. J. K. B. 470... 1418 
Du Moulin v. Druitt (1860), 13 Ir. 

C. L. Rep. 212 ... 1298 
Duncan (1881), 7 Q. B. D. 198 ... 1373 

— (1890), Wood - Renton, 

Lunacy, 901, 908 ... 17 

— u. Scott (1807), 1 Camp. 

100 ... 420 

— V. Thwaites (1824), 3 B. & 

C. 583 ... 1125 
Buncombe (1838), 8 C. & P. 369 ... 493 

Dundas (1854), 6 Cox, 380 702 

Dungey (1864), 4 F. & F. 99 ... 962, 1023 

Dunleavey (1909), 1 K. B. 200 308 

Dunn (1765), 2 East P. C. 962, 970.. 805 

— (1800), 8 T. R. 217 116, 118 

-i- (1822), 1 D. & R. 10 1184 

— (1826), 1 Mood. 146 676,731 

— (1831), 4 C. & P. 543 386, .388 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 730 100, 123 

— (1847), 11 .Tur. 287 121 

— (1847-8), ,12 Q. B. 1026 

247, 1184, 1195 

— Re (1906) Vict. L. R. 493 

1201n., 1215/1. 

Dunne (1852), 5 Cox, 507 (Ir) 455 

Dunnett (1844), 1 C. & K. 425 960 

Dunning (1851), 5 Cox, 142 ... 287,289 

— V. Sweetman (1909), 25 

T. L. R. 302 ... 1338 
Dunston (1824), Rv. & M. 109 

1185, 1187 
Dupays u. Sliepherd (1699), 12 

Mod. 216 ... 411 
Durham (Earl) v. Durham 
(Countess) (1887), 10 P. D. 80 ... 1302 

Durkin (1837), 2 Lew. 163 287 

Durose v. Wilson (1907), 21 Cox, 

421 ... 1326 

Dutt (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 51 711 

Button, In re [1892] 1 Q. B. 486 

180, 182 
Dwerryhouse (1847), 2 Cox, 446 ... 170 
Dyer (1703), 6 Mod. 96 100 

— (1704), 6 Mod. 41 350 

— (1801), 2 East, P. C. 767 

729, 1436 

Dykes (1885), 15 Cox, 771 23 

Dymond [1920] 2 K. B. 260 684 

Dyson (1823), R. & R. 523 875, 1437 

— (1831), 7 C. & P. 305n. ... 13, 171 

— [1894] 2 Q. B. 17fi 1266 

— [1908] 2 K. B. 454 ... 163, 214, 304, 

349, 350, 866, 869, 991 
Dytche (1890), 17 Cox, 39 357 



PAGE 

EADON (1913), 31 St. Tr. 1064 ... 1130 

Eagle (1861), 2 F. & F. 827 884 

Eagleton (1855), Dears. 376, 515 

3, 701, 718, 1431, 1432, 1433 
— V. Kingston (1803), 8 

Ves. 438, 475 ... 446 
Eardisland (1810), 2 Camp. 494 ... 13G7 
Eastall (1822), 2 Russ. Cr. (7th ed.) 

1288, 1360 ... 531 
"Eastern Counties Rail. Co. v. 

Broom (1851), 6 Ex. 314 ... 10 
East Hagbourne (1859), Bell, 135... 1362 
East Mark (1848), 11 Q. B. 877 ... 1361 
Easton v. Richmond Highway 

Board (1871), L. R. 7 Q. B. 69 ... 1356 
Eastrington (1836), 5 A. & E. 765.. 1367 
East Stoke (1865), 6 B. & S. 536 ... 120 
Eaton (1812), 31 St. Tr. 927 1162 

— (1799), 2 T. R. 89 Ill 

— V. Best [1909] 1 K. B. 632 

21, 1476 

Eayres (1900), 64 J, P. 217 69 

Eccles (1784), 1 Leach, 274 ... 1423, 1424 
Ecclestield (1818), 1 B. & Aid. 348 

1366, 1367, 1368 

Eddols (1910), (unreported) 1198 

Edgar (1817), 33 St. Tr. 145 ... 1130, 1132 

— (1913), 77 J. P. 356 247, 1244 

Edgcombe v. Rodd (1804), 5 East, 

294 ... 1209n., 1212 

Edgell (1867), 11 Cox, 132 743 

Edgington v. Fitzmaurice (1885), 

29 Oh. D. 459 ... 706 
Edmonds (1821), 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

785 ... 188, 189, 192, 193, 194, 197, 347 
Edmondson v. Stevenson (1766), 

1 B. & P. 527, cit. ... 1250 
Edmonton (1831), 1 M. & Rob. 24.. 1365 
Edmunds (1909), 2 Cr. App. R. 257 432 
Edmundson (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 

107 ... 520 
Edward (1833), 1 M. & Rob. 257 ... 201 
Edwards (1791), 4 T. R. 440 88 

— (1812), R. & R. 224 ... 209, 221 

— (1814), R. & R. 283 1304 

— (1822), R. & R. 497 511 

— (1834), 6 C. & P. 515, 521 

* 569, 645 

— (1837), 8 C. & P. 26 ... 494, 495 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 611 871 

— (1843), 1 Cox, 32 638 

— (1847), 11 J. P. 602 1361 

— (1848), 3 Cox, 82 486 

— (1872), 12 Cox, 230 371 

— (1877), 13 Cox, 384 .... 543, 545 

— and Gilbert [1913] 1 K. B. 

287 ... 335, 503 

— V. Buchanan (1832), 3 B. 

& Ad. 788 ... 834 

— V. Vesey (1735), Cas. 

(K. B.) temp. Hardw. 128 ... 418 
Edwiok V. Hawkes (1881), 18 Ch. 

D. 199 1232 
Egan (1897), 23 Vict. t. R.' 159 ..." 20n. 
Egerton (1819), R. & R. 375 ... 356, -640 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixxiii 



PAGE 

Egginton (1801), 2 B. & P. 508 

533, 659, 680 
Elden v. Keddell (1807), 8 East, 

187 ... 426 
Eldershaw (1828), 3 C. & P. 396 

12, 962, 1019, 1023, 1436 

Eldridge (1821), R. & R. 440 395 

Elken v. Janson (1844), 13 M. & 

W. 655, 661 ... 352 

EUey (1921), 85 J. P. 144 226 

EUicombe (1833), 1 m: & Rob. 260 

369, 744 

EUins (1810), R. & R. 188 353 

Elliott (1777), 1 Leach, 175; 2 

Leach, 987 ... 837 

— (1844), 1 Cox, 36 911 

— (1861), L. & C. 103 1317 

— (1889), 16 Cox, 710 (Ir.) ... 893 

— (1908), 1 Cr. App. R. 15, 16 58 

— [1908] 2 K. B. 452 306,334 

— (1909), 2 Cr. App. R. 171 

200, 310 

— Ex parte (1837), 3 Mont. 

& A. 110 ... 291 

EUis (1826), 6 B. & C. 145 356 

— (1826), Ry. & M. 432 380n. 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 564 1399 

— (1846), 2 C. & K. 470 876 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 309 1303 

— [1899] 1 Q. B. 230 ... 29, 38, 695, 

708; 1120, 1266, 1269, 1427 

— [1910] 2 K. B. 746 ... 335, 354, 362, 

366, 462, 716 

EUcr (1784), 1 Leach, 323 813 

— (1921), 85 J. P. 107 884 

EUsom (1912), 76 J. P. 38 , 337 

Elmsly (1834), 2 Lew. 126 790 

Elmstead (1802), 2 Russ. Cr. 

(7th ed.) 1149 ... 640 
Elrington (1861), 1 B. & S. 688 

156, 161, 163 

Else (1808), R. & R. 142 1436 

Elsee V. Smith (1822), 1 D. & R. 97 505 
Elsworth (1780), 2 East, P. C. 986, 

989 ... 802, 805 
Elwood u. Bullock (1844), 6 Q. B. 

383 ... 1362 
Elworthy (1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

103 ... 369, 1197 

— u. Bird (1824), 2 Bing. 

258 ... 1210n. 
Embleton c. Brown (1860), 3 E. & 

E. 234 ... 647 

Emden (1808), 9 East, 437 156 

Emmens v. Pottle (1885), 16 

Q. B. D. 354 ... 1249, 12,i0 
Emmett (1905), Vict. L. R. 718 ...364n. 
Emmons (1840), 2 M. & Rob. 279 

289 1182 
England (1801), 2 Leach, 767 '. 440 

— V. Roper (1826), 1 Stark. 

(N. P.) 304 ... 444 

English (1872), 12 Cox, 17J 710 

Enoch (1830), 5 C. & P. 539 ... 388, 874 
Enoch & Zaretsky, Re [1910] 1 

K. B. 327 ... 487 



PAGE 

Entick u. Carrington (1765), 19 

St. Tr. 1029, 1067 ... 505 
Entrehman (1841), C. & Mar. 248 

454, 477 

Entwistle [1899] 1 Q. B. 846 699 

Epps (1864), 4 F. & F. 81 810 

Erdheim [1896] 2 Q. B. 260 

383, 385, 1265 
Eriswell (1790), 3 T. R. 713 ... 433, 439 

Errington (1838), 2 Lew. 148 376 

Esdaile (1857), 8 Cox, 69 1424 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 213 ... 127, 203, 

471, 630, 1420, 1428 
Esher U. D. C. v. Marks (1902), 

71 L. J. (K. B.) 309.. .1352, 1366, 1368n. 
Esop (1836), 7 C. & P. 456 ... 10, 24, 871 
Esser (1767), 2 East, P. C. 1125 ... 38 
Essex (1857), Dears. & B. 371 

517, 697, 715 
Essex and Southampton (Earls) 

(1600). 1 St. Tr. 1333 ... 1069, 1070 
Etheridge (1901), 19 Cox, 676 

803, 808, 849 
ElUerington (1801), 2 Leach, 671 ... 675 

Ellridge [1909] 2 K. B. 24 304 

Evans (1782), 2 East, P. C. 798 

32, 648 
— ■ (1812), 1 Russ. Cr. (7th ed.) 

665 ... 872 

— (1821), 2 Stark. (N. P.) 35 353 

— (1833), 5 C. & P. 553 ... 704,705 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 298 672 

— M856), 7 Cox, 151 (Ir.) ... 3l7 

— (1859), Bell, 137 704 

— (1862), L. & C. 252 703 

— (1916), 12 Cr. App. R. 8 ... 305 

— Ex parte (1846), 9 Q. B. 279 175 

— and Connor (1914), 10 Cr. 

App. R. 53 ... 8 

— V. Rees (1840), 12 A. & E. 

55 ... 481 

Eve (1836), 5 A. & E. 780 136 

Everett (1883), 97 Cent. Cr. Ct. 

Sess. Pap. 335 ... 204 
Everingham v. Roundell (1838), 

2 M. & Rob. 138 ... 450 
Everitt (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 267... 1474 

Evett (1827), 6 B. & C. 247 145 

Ewer t>. Ambrose (1825), 3 B. & 

C. 746 ... 425, 489 

Exall (1866), 4 F. & F. 922 399 

Exeter (Treasurer) (1829), 5 Man. 

, & Ry. 617 ... 283, 286 
Eyre (1868), L. R. 3 Q. B. 487 ... 31, 104 
— V. New Forest Highway 
Board (1892), 56 J. P. 518 ... 1361 
Eyres (1733), 2 Barnard (K. B.) 

250 ... 133 



F. (1910), 74 J. P. 384 1020 

Fabian (1664), Kel. (J.) 39 721 

Fadermann (or Faderman) (1850), 

1 Den. 565 ... 172n., 154, 343 
Fagent (1835), 7 C. & P. 238 ... 376, 378 



Ixxiv 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PACE 

Fairman v. Ives (1822), 5 B. & 

Ad. 642 ... 1124, 1251 

Fairrie (1857), 8 Cox, 66 1314 

Fairtlough v. Whitmore (1865), 64 

L. J. (Ch.) 386 ... 1334 
Falkingham (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

222 978 

Falkner (1822), R. & R. 481 '.'. 395 

Fallon (1862), L. & C. 217 ... 1452, 14.54 
Fallows (1832), 5 C. & P. 508 641 

— V. Taylor (1798), 7 T. R. 

475 ... 1210n. 
Falmouth (Earl) v. Roberts (1842), 

9 M. & W. 469 ... 445 
Fanning (1866), 10 Cox, 411 

1301, 1303n. 

Farler (1837), 8 C. & P. 106 455 

Farley (1846^ 1 Den. 197 471 

Farmer v. Wilson (1900), 69 L. J. 

(Q. B.) 496 ... 1284 
Farmer's Case, Tremaine (PI. Cr.) 

197 722 
Farnhorough (1895), 2 Q. B. 484 ... 512 

Farnham (1845), 1 Cox, 349 920 

Farquhar u. Newbury R. D. C. 

[1909] 1 Ch. 12 ... 1361 
Farquharson v. King [1902] A. C. 

325 ''97 ^31 

Farr (1839), 8 C. & P. 768 ' 489 

— (1864), 4 F. & F. 336 370 

Farre (1665), Kel. (J.) 43 523, 661 

Farrell (1787), 1 Leach, 322n. (b) 642 

— (1862), 9 Cox, 446 1317 

— (1874), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 116 431 
Farrer (1866), L. R. 1 Q. B. 558 ... 1348 
Farrington (1811), R. & R. 207 

362, 401, 744, 1141 
Farrow (1857), Dears. & B. 164 ... 923 
Faulkes (1903), 19 T. L. R. 250 ... 1305 
Faulkner (1670), 1 Wms. Saund. 

248 (6th ed.) ... 62 

— (1877), 13 Cox, 550 {Ir.) 

741, 750 

— [1905] 2 K. B. 76 ... 173, 1466 

Fauntleroy (1824), 1 Mood. 52 807 

Fawcett (1793), 2 East, P. C. 862 802 

— (1910), 74 J. P. 444 1474 

Fawie (1726), 2 Ld. Raym. 1452 ... 112 
Fay (1872), Ir. Rep. 6 C. L. 436 ... 121 
Fearnley (1786), 1 Leach, 425 

62, 150, 153 
Featherstone (1854), Dears, 369 

345, 538 

Feigenbaum [1919] 1 K. B. 431 456 

Feist (1858), Dears. & B. .590 1346 

Fellows (1836), 1 Har. & Wol. 648 112 

Felstead [1914] A. C. 534 218, 231, 

334, 1469 

Fenley (1902), 20 Cox, 252 42, 511 

Fenn u. Grafton (1836), 2 Bing. 

(N. C.) 617 ... 658, 660 

Fennell (1881), 7 Q. B. D. 147 386 

Fentiman, Bx pane (1834), 2 A. & 

E. 127 ... 133 
Fenton (1830), 1 Lew. 179 890 



PAGE 

Ferens ^. O'Brien (1883), 11 

Q. B. D. 21 ... 545 
Ferguson (1830), 1 Lew. 181 876 

— (1845), 1 Cox, 241 814 ^- 

— (1909), 2 Cr. App. R. 

250 ... 366 

— (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 

113 ... 337, 352, 710 
Kernandez (1861), 2 F. & F. 862n. 208 
— Ex parte (1861), 10 

C. B. (N. S.) 3 ... 469, 1004 
Ferrand (1819), 3 B. & Aid. 260 

141, 145 
Ferrers (Earl) (1760), 19 St. Tr. 885 14 

Ferrystone (1801), 2 East, 54 433 

Fetzer (1900), 19 N. Z. L. R. 438 ... 790 
Fidler (1831), 4 C. & P. 449 769 

— (1914), 78 J. P. 149 245 

Field (1785), 1 Leach, 383 850 

— (1892), Cent. Crim. Ct 1037 

— V. Receiver of Metropolitan 
Police [1907] 2 K. B. 853 ... 1221 

Fieldhouse (1775), 1 Cowp. 325 ... 77 
Fielding (1759), 2 Burr. 719 ... 124, 133 

— (1818), 2 C. & K. 621 ... 901, 967 

— V. Turner [1903] 1 K. B. 

867 ... 1334 

Filewood (1787), 2 Tr. 145 138 

Finacane (1833), 5 C. & P. 551 ... 966 
Finch (1834), 1 Mood. 418 ....:. 574 

— (1916), 85 L. J. (K. B.) 1575 

209, 337 
Fineux v. Hoveuden (1599), Cro. 

El. 664 ... 7 

Finkelstein (1886), 16 Cox, 107 823 

Finlayson (1912), 14 C. L. R. 675 356n. 

Finmore (1799), 8 T. R. 409 119 

Finnerty (18.30), 1 Crawf. & Dix. 

(Ir. Circ. Rep.) 165n. ... 905 

— e. Tipper (1809), 2 Camp. 

72 ... 357, 1121, 1250 
Finney (1849), 2 C. & K. 774 1182 

— (1874), 12 Cox, 625 890 

Firth (1869), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 172 

356, 541, 545 

Fish (1900), 64 J. P. 137 593, 596 

Fisher (1811), 2 Camp. 563 ... 131, 1125, 
1217, 1422 

— (1837), 8 C. & P. 182 882 

— (1848), 3 Cox, 68 192 

— (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 7 

768, 770 

— (1899), 34 L. J. N. 100... 463, 1022 

— [1910] 1 K. B. 149 ... 335, 349, 

354, 356, 361, 716 

— (1910), § Cr. App. R. 269 

234 305 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 102* 

305, 516, 522, 525 

— (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 167... 1340 

— V. ApoUinaris Co. (1874), 

L. R. 10 Ch. App. 297 ... 1210n. 
Fitch (1857), Dears. & B. 187 539 

— (1862), L. & C. 159 815 

— (1897), 61 J. P. 233 1250 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixxv 



PAGE 

Fitchie (1857), Dears. & B. 175 

815 823 

Fitt [1919] 2 Ir. R. 35 248^ 249 

Fitzgerald (1843), 1 C. & K. 201 ... 103 
FitzSimons (1869), Ir. Rep. 4 

C. L. 1 ... 837 
FitzWalter Peerage Claim (1843), 

10 CI. & F. 198 ... 447 
Fivaz ■>. Nicholls (1846), 2 C. B. 

501 ... 1210n. 
Flaherty (1847), 2 C. & K. 282 ... 1298 

Flanagan (1867), 10 Cox, 561 611 

Flannagan (1810), R. & R. 187 ... 669 
— (1884), 15 Cox, 403 

103, 358, 486 
Flatman (1880), 14 Cox, 396 538 

— (1913), 8 Cr. App. R. 256 729 
Flattery (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 410 

931, 1021 
Fleet (1818), 1 B. & Aid. 379 ... 131, 1125 
Flemming (1799), 2 Leach, 854 ... 440 
Fletcher (1742), 1 Leach, 23 1158 

— (1845), 2 C. & K. 215 ... 746 

— (1859), Bell, 63 1020 

— (1862), L. & C. 180 635 

— (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

39 ... 1020 

— Ex parte (1844), 13 L. J. 

(M. C.) 67 ... 437 

— V. Calthrop (1845), 6 

Q. B. 880 ... 1383, 1384 

— (P. O.) V. Crosbie (1842), 

2 M. & Rob. 417 ... 203 
Flewster u. Royle (1808), 1 Camp. 

187 ... 1006 
Flicker (1910), 26 T. L. R. 540 ... 1471 
Flindt V. Atkins (1811), 3 Camp. 

215n. ... 442 

Flint (1821), R. & R. 460 703, 704 

Flower v. Sadler (1881), 9 Q. B. D. 

83 ... 1210n. 

— u. Shaw (1848), 2 C. & K. 

703 ... 806 

Flowers (1868), 16 Q. B. D. 643 ... 527 
Floyd V. Barker (1607), 12 Co. Rep. 

23 78 

Flynn (1868), 16 W. R. 319 (7r.) '.'.'. 869 
Foakes v. Webb (1885), 28 Ch. D. 

287 ... 472 

Fogarly (1850), 5 Cox, 161 175 

Foley (1889), 17 Cox, 142 (Ir.) 542 

Folkes (1832), 1 Mood. 354 ... 1018, 1440 

FoUey (1896), 60 J. P. 569 372 

Fontaine-Moreau (1848), 11 Q. B. 

1028 ... 1191 

Foote (1883), 10 Q. B. iJ. 378 94 

— V. Hayne (1824), By. & M. 

165 ... 471 

Forbes (1814), Holt (N. P.) 599n. 434 

— (1823), 2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

939, 959 ... 1221 

— (1835), 7 C. & P. 224 806 

— (1865), 10 Cox, 362 25, 965 

— Re (1887), 8 N. S. W. Rep. 

(Law) 68 ... 239, 246 



PAGE 

Forbes v. Wale (1765), 1 W. BI. 

532 444 
Ford (1606), Yelv. 99 76, 77 

— ( ), Kel. (J.) 51 886 

— (1817), R. & R. 329 899, 1002 

— (1851), 2 Den. 245 494 

— (1907), 12 Canada Cr. Cas. 555 512 

— V. Receiver 'for Metropolitan 

Police District [1921] 

2 K. B. 344 ... 1221 
Forde v. Skinner (1830), 4 C. & P. 

239 932 
Foreman (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 216 728 

Forester (1866), 10 Cox, 368 375 

Forester's Case (1338), Y. B. 11 & 

12 Edw. 3, f. 641... 542 
Forster (1825), 1 Lew. 187 ... 904, 905, 

1173 

Forsyth (1814), R. & R. 274 ... 52, 410, 

545, 800, 1263 

— (1899), Chester Summer 

Assizes ... 872, 991 

— V. Ross [1919] 2 Ir. R. 335 1334 
Fortuin (1883), 1 Buchanan (Cape), 

290 513 
Foster (1834), 6 C. & P. 325 371 

— (1835), 7 C. & P. 148 394 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 495 ... 209, 487, 

1111 

— (1848), 3 C. & K. 201 208 

— (1852), 6 Cox, 25 769 

— (1855), Dears. 456 835, 1104 

— (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 301 702 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 173 

1473, 1474 

— (1916), 12 Cr. App. R. 164 248 

— V. Warblington D. C. [1906] 

1 K. B. 665 ... 1309, 1312 
Foulkes (1851), 20 L. J. (M. C.) 

196 ... 112 

— (1875), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

150 ... 607, 615 

Fountain (1664), 1 Sid. 152 138 

Fountaine, Re [1909] 2 Ch. 382 ... 374 
Fowle V. Fowie (1896), 18 Cox, 462 1287 
Fowler (1821), 4 B. & Aid. 273 ... 347 

— (1894), 64 L. J. (M. C.) 9 8 

— (1913), 77 J. P. 379 .-1474 

Fox (1841), 2 Q. B. 246 1207 

— (1870), 19 W. R. 109 (Ir.) ... 907 

— (1887), 16 Cox, 166 1399, 1400 

Frampton (1858), Dears. & B. 585 727 

— (1917), 12 Cr. App. R. 

202 ... 209 

France (1839), 2 M. & Rob. 207 ... 434 

Frances (1849), 4 Cox, 57 19 

Francia (1717), 15 St. Tr. 897., .395, 1065 
Francis (1735), 2 Str. 1015 216, 641 

— (1811), R. & R. 209 805 

— (1874), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

128 ... 361, 362, 370, 716, 834 
Francklin (1731), 17 St. Tr. 625 ... 406 
Frankland (1863), L. & C. 276 ... 610 
Franklin (1883), 15 Cox, 163 890 

— (1909), 74 J. P. 24 1474 

Franks (1794), 2 Leach, 644 1103 



Ixxvi 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Franz (1861), 2 F. & F. 580 865 

Fraser (1834), 1 Mood. 419 1003 

Fray (1785), 1 East, P. C. 236 885 

Frazer (1797), M'Nally, Ev. 56 {Ir.) 460 

Freakley (1852), 6 Cox, 75 123 

Freeman (1833), 5 C. & P. 534 ... 610 

— (1875), Ir. Rep. 9 C. L. 

527 ... 1388 

— (1895), 5 Queensland 

L. J. 281 ... 189n., 487n. 

— V. Arkell (1823-4), 2 B. & 

C. 494 ... 442 
Freeman-Metford, Ex parte (1914), 

3D T. L. R. 693 ... 131 
Freeman's Journal (1902), 2 Ir. 

Rep. 82 ... 131, 1217 

Freeth (1807), R. & R. 127 705 

Freind (1698), 13 St. Tr. 1 1065 

French (1822), R. & R. 491 48, 661 

— (1859), 8 Cox, 252 37 

— (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

217 ... 816 

— (1879), 14 Cox, 328 865 

— (1902), 20 Cox, 200 927 

Freston, Re (1883), 11 Q. B. D. 545 484 
Fretwell (1862), L. & C. 161 ... 875, 1437 

— (1864), L. & C. 443 938 

Friar (1819), 1 Chit. (K. B.) 702 ... 133 

Friel (1890), 17 Cox, 325 163 

Friend (1802), R. & R. 20 2, 871 

Frith V. Frith [1896] Prob. 74 1294 

Fritz V. Hobson (1880), 14 Ch. D. 

542 ... 1355 
Froggatt (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 115 207 
Frost (1839), 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 85 

174, 189, 208, 354, 
355, 1067, 1068, 
1069, 1070, 1221 

— (1855), Dears. 474 50 

— Re (1888), 4 T. L. R. 757 ... 87 

Froud (1819), R. & R, 389 813, 837 

Frowen (1850), 4 Cox, 266 664 

Fry (1822), R. & R. 482 52 

— (1837), 2 M. & Rob. 42 1385 

— (1858), Dears. & B. 449 098 

Fryer (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 183 ... 1269 

— (1914), 24 Cox, 403 17 

Fuentes o. Montes (1868), L. R. 

4 C. P. 93 ... 637 

Fuidge (1864), L. & C. 390 357, 701 

Fullagar (1879), 14 Cox, 370 632n. 

Fuller (1778), 2 East, P. C. 498 ... 659 

— (1797), I H. & P. 180 54 

— (1798), 2 Leach, 790 1134 

— . (1816), R. & R. 308 ... 360, 399, 

401, 640, 1109, 1431 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 269 438 

Fulwood's Case (1637), Cro. Car. 

488 ... 1008 

Furley (1844), 1 Cox, 76 392 

Furly 0. Newnham (1780), 2 Doug. 

419 ... 483 
Fursey (1833), 3 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

543 ... 451, 898, 1220, 1222, 1223 

Fussell (1848), 3 Cox, 291 351 



Fussell (1848), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

723 ... 1117, 1219 

Fuzil Deen (1895), 6 Queensland 

L. J. 302 ... 468 



GADBURY (1838), 8 C. & P. 676 366 

Gainer (1835), 7 C. & P. 231 1384 

"Gale (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 141 617 

Gallager (1875), 13 Cox, 61 459 

— (1883), 15 Cox, 291 (Jr.) 

455, 1069, 1079", 1428 
Gallard (1733), 1 Sess. Cas. 231 ... 1317 
Galliard c. Laxton (1862), 2 B. & 

S. 363 ... 902, 965 
Gallon's Case, Fitz. Abr. Trial. 

554 ... 1055 
Gallon t>. Emuss (1844), 13 L. J. 

Ch. 388 ... 1421 

Gamble (1867), 10 Cox, 545 915 

Gamlen (1858), 1 F. & F. 90 20 

Gamlingay (1790), 3 T. R. 513 ... 1360 
Gammon (1832), 5 C. & P. 321 ... 1023 

Garbett (1847), 1 Den. 236 384, 469 

Gardener (1833), 1 Mood. 390 901 

Gardiner (1839), 2 Mood. 95' 1191 

Gardner (1811), 2 Camp. 513 410 

— (1824), 1 C. & P. 479 ... 640, 687 

— (1845), 1 C. & K. 628 

207n., 590 

— (1856), Dears. & B. 40 ... 714 

— (1859), 1 F. & F. 669 ... 865 

— (1862), L. & C. 243 529 

— [1899] 1 Q. B. 150 ... 203, 205, 

465 

— and Hancox (1916), 85 

L. J. (K. B.) 206 ... 393 

— c. Mansbridge (1887), 19 

Q. B. D. 207 ... 801 
Garland (1776), 1 Leach, 144 657 

— (1851), 5 Cox, 165 1311 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 224 (Ir.) 

343, 344, 1467 

— [1910] 1 K. B. 154 ... 6, 55, 60, 

213, 335, 343, 

723, 728, 820, 1453 

Garner (1848), 1 Den. 329 347, 388 

— (1864), 4 F. & F. 346 358 

Garnett v. Ferrand (1827), 6 B. & 

C. 611 ... 935 

Garnham (1861), 8 Cox, 451 545 

Garratt (1834), 6 C. & P. 369 554 

— (1893), 10 T. L. R. 167 ... 703 
Garrells o. Alexander (1801), 4 

Esp. 37 ... 446n. 
Garrett (1853), Dears. 232 713 

— (1860), 8 Cox, 368 535 

— and Davis (1910), 4 Cr. 

App. R. 21 ... 1271 

— Ex parte De Dryver [1918] 

I K. B. 6 ... 1005 
Garside (1834), 2 A. & E. 266 ... 113, 455, 

Garvey (1887), 16 Cox, 252 (Jr.) ... 1400 
Gascoigne (1783), 2 East, P. C. 709 640 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixxvii 



» PACE 

Gaskell and Walter's Contract 

[1906] 1 Ch. 1 ... 265 
Gate Fulford (Inhabs.) (1855), 

6 Cox, 510 ... 112 
— (1856), Dears. & 

B. 74 ... 346 
Gathercole (1838), 2 Lew. 237 

1162, 1247 

Gaunt (1895), 18 Cox, 210 927, 929 

Gauntlet, The (1872), L. R. 4 P. C. 

1^4 ... 1083, 1087 

Gavin (1885), 15 Cox, 656 392 

Gay (1835), 7 C. & P. 230 375 

Gayer (1757), 1 Burr. 245 1387n. 

Gayford v. Chouler [1898] 1 Q. B. 

316 ... 801 
Gaylor (1857), Dears. & B. 288 

875, 1445, 
1450 

Gazard (1838), 8 C. & P. 595 1196 

Geach (1840), 9 C. & P. 499 ... 190, 19S, 

834 

Geary (1689), 2 Salk. 630 224 

Geering (1849), 18 L. J. (M. C.) 215 358 
Geery l. Hopkins (1702), 2 Ld. 

Raym. 851 ... 418, 483 
George (1841), C. & Mar. Ill 459 

— (1868), 11 Cox, 41 921 

— (1901), 65 J. P. 729 296, 716 

— (1909), 2 Cr. App. R. 252 

304, 311 

— Ex parte (1897), 18 Cox, 

631; 66 L. J. Q. B. 383 ... 536 
Gerard's Case (1777), 2 W. Bl. 

1123 ... 1387n. 

Gerrans (1876), 13 Cox, 158 75 

Gerrish (1839), 2 M. & Rob. 219 

1088, 1105 
Gibbon (1862), L. & C. 109 1195 

— V. Pepper (1696), 1 Ld. 

Raym. 32 ... 932 
Gibbons (1752), Fost. Cr. L. 107 

658, 666 

^ (1812), R. & R. 442 663 

— (1823), 1 C. & P. 97 387 

— and Proctor (1918), 82 

J. P. 287 ... 60, 336, 894, 895 
Gibbs (1855), Dears. 445 ... 604, 607, 635 
Gibson (1785), 1 Leach, 357 ... 660 

— (1806), 8 East, 107 153 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 672 ... 496 

— (1861), 8 Cox, 436 612 

— V. Barton (1875), L. R. 

10 Q. B. 329 ... 630 

— (1886), 18 Q. B. D. 537 ... 344 

— u. Lawson [1891] 2 Q. B. 

545 ... 1280, 1281, 1283 

Giddins (1842), C. & Mar. 634 54 

Gilbert (1828), 1 Mood. 185 519 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 84 681 

— (1907), 38 Canada Sup. Ct. 

284 ... 371 

— (1914), 11 Cr. App. R. 23 305 

— (1921), 16 Cr. App. R. 34 303 

Gilbie (1816), 5 M. & Sel. 520 120 

Gilchrist (1841), C. & Mar. 224 ... 571 



PAGE 

Gilchrist o. Gardiner (1891), 12 
N. S. W. Rep. (Law) 

184 ... 125 
Giles (1827), 1 Mood. 166 823, 14.35 

— (1865), L. & C. 502 ... 697, 699, 703 

— (1895) (unreported) 174 

Gilgannon (1899), 63 J. P. 457 ... 687 
Gilham (1795), 1 Esp. 285 477 

— (1828), 1 Mood. 186, 203 

388 472 

Gilkes (1828), 8 B. & C. 439 ' 422 

Gill (1718), 1 Str. 190 933 

— (1818), 2 B. & Aid. 204 ... 694, 1423, 

1424, 1427 

— (1821), 1 Lew. 305 687 

— (1854), Dears. 289 615 

Gillbrass (1836), 1 Cox, 43 288 

Gilles (1820), R. & R. 366n 1346 

Gillingham (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 

187 ... 175 

Gillis (1866), 11 Cox, 6fl 387 

Gillow (1825), i Mood. 85 939 

Gilmore (1882), 15 Cox, 85 ... 157, 786, 

954 
Gingell o. Stepney Borough Coun- 
cil [1906] 2 K. B. 468 ... 1362 
Giorgetti (1865), 4 F. & F. 546 

189, 195 

Girdwood (1776), 1 Leach, 142 ... 38, 683, 

685 1237 

Girod (1906), 22 T. L. R. 720 ... 730, 731 

Girt D. Fillingham [1901] P. 176 ... 1165 

Gisson (1847), 2 C. & K. 781 1024 

Glamorgan Coal Co. v. South 
Wales Miners' Federation [1903] 
2 K. B. 545; [1905] A. C. 239 

1281, 1422 
Glandfield (1791), 2 East, P. C. 

1034 ... 744 
Glass (1847), 1 Den. 215; 2 C. & 

K. 395 ... 589 
Gleed (1916), 12 Cr. App. R. 32 ... 729 
Glen (1897), 9 Queensland L. J. 

140 ... 20n. 

Glenn (1820), 3 B. & Aid. 373 100 

Glossop (1821), 4 B. & Aid. 616 ... 350 
Gloster (1888), 16 Cox, 471 ... 374, 375, 

376 
Gloucestershire (1842), C. & Mar. 

506 ... 1378 
Glover (1814), R. & R. 269 ... 554, 556 

— (1864), L. & C. 466 610, 611 

— V. Hynde (1674), 1 Mod. 168 935 
. Glubb D. Edwards (1840), 2 M. & 

Rob. 300 ... 445 

Clyde (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 139 528 
Gnosil (1824), 1 C. & P. 304, 305n. 

639, 641 

Goate (1700), 1 Ld. Raym. 737 ... 833 

Goddard (1703), 2 Ld. Raym. 920 ... 160 

— (1882), 15 Cox, 7 371, 375 

— 0. Smith (1704), 3 Salk. 

245 ... 125 

Godinho (1912), 76 J. P. 16 ... 386, 390 
Godsen o. Dartford JJ. (1897), 

62 J. P. 104 ... 927 



Ixxviii 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Godspeed (1911), 75 J. P. 232 57 

Golf (1810), R. & R. 179 39, 40 

— V. Byby (1598), Cro. Eliz. 

540 ... 1445 

Goffe (1672), 1 Vent. 216 904 

Gogarty (1849), 3 Cox, 306 (Jr.) ... 1136 
Gogerly (1818), R. & R. 343 ... 355, 1436, 

1443n. 

Going, Rowe (Ir. K. B.) 563 132 

Golathan (1915), 24 Cox, 704 168 

Gold (1907), 71 J. P. 360 1036 

Goldberg (1904), 20 Cox, 699 959 

Gelding (16931, 12 St. Tr. 1269 

■ 648. 651 

Goldshede (1844), 1 C. & K. 657 ... 384 
Goldsmid v. Bremer (1798), 1 

Hagg. (Consist. Rep.) 324 ... 1296 
.Goldsmith (1873), 12 Cox, 594 ... 296, 298 

— (1873), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

74 ... 152 
Goldstein (1916), 11 Cr. App. R. 27 

336 1038 
Goldthorpe (1841), C. & Mar. 335 920 
Gomez Serra d. Munez (1727), 2 

Str. 821 ... 453 

Gompertz (1847), 9 Q. B. 824 ... 1423, 

1424, 1427 

Gooch (1838), 8 C. & P. 293 574 

Good (1842), 1 C. & K. 185 1452 

Goodbody (1838), 8 C. & P. 665 ... 608 

Goodchild. See Goodall. 

Goode (1837), 7 A. & E, 536 170 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 582 530 

— (1842), 1 C. & K. 185 24 

— (1853), 6 Cox, 318 921 

Gooden (1871), 11 Cox, 672 815 

Goodfellow (1842), C. & Mar. 569 1196 

— (1845), 1 Den. 81 1386 

— (1879), 14 Cox, 326 ... 432 

Goodhall (1821), R. & R. 461 698 

Goodier v. Lake (1737), 1 Atk. 446 446 
Goodman (1859), 1 F. & F. 502 ... 1399 
Goodrich, Be [1904] Prob. 138 ... 414 
Goodright v. Moss (1777), 2 Cowp. 

591 ... 443, 472 
Goodspeed (1911), 75 J. P. 232 ... 726 
Goodtitle o. Braham (1791), 4 

T. R. 497 ... 447, 835 

— V. Clayton (1768), 4 

Burr. 2224 ... 446 
Goodwin (1867), 10 Cox, 534 1106 

— (1828), 1 Lew. 100 589 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 276 510 
Goose's Case (1598), Moore (K. B.), 

401 ... 1445- 
Gorbutt (1856), Dears. & B. 166 

157, 510, 606, 617 
Gordon (1746), 1 East, P. C. 71 

21, 1070 

— (1781), 21 St. Tr. 485 ... 370, 406, 

1066, 1069, 1220, 1221 
— ■ (1787), 22 St. Tr. 175 

127, 1119, 1246 

— (1789), 1 Leach, 515 ... 402, 898, 

903, 1216, 1444, 1450 

— (1803), R. & R. 48 41, 1302 



PAGE 

Gordon (1842), C. & Mar.' 410 424 

— (1843), 12 L. J. (M. C.) 84 486 

— (1889), 23 Q. B. D. 354.. .706, 719 

— V. Cann (1899), 68 L. J. 

(Q. B.) 434 ... 1382 

Gore (1611), 9 Co. Rep. 81 889 

Gorge (1696), 3 Salk. 189 7 

Gorges (1916), 85 L. J. (K. B.) 

1049 ... 885 

Goss (1860), Bell, 208 700, 701, 702 

Gotley (1805), -R. & R. 84 ... 1212, 1215 

Gough (1781), 2 Doug. 791 39 

Gould (1763), 3 Burn's J. (30th ed.) 

98 221 

— (1780), 1 Leach, 217 '. 677 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 364 ... 394, 399 

— V. Jones (1762), 1 W. Bl. 

384 ... 446 
Gould & Co., Ltd. V. Houghton 

[1921] 1 K, B. 509 ... 1444, 1456 

Cover (1863), 9 Cox, 282 1110 

Gowen (1786), 1 Leach, 246n 744 

Grady (1836), 7 C. & P. 650 438 

Graham (1778), 2 East, P. C. 945 813 

— (1837), 2 Lew. 97 1300 

— (1875), 13 Cox, 57 601 

— (1888), 16 Cox, 420.. .1218, 1223 

— (1905), 69 J. P. 324 142 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 252 

684, 688 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 218 

337 1032 

— (1913), 8 Cr. App. R. 149 719 
Granatelli (1849), 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

979 ... 1080, 1081 
Grand (1903), 3 N. S. W. State 

Rep. 216 ... 221 
Grant (1848), 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

507 ... 1118 

— (1865), 4 F. & F. 322 746 

Graves (Lord) (1887), 4 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 609n. ... 169 
Gray (1835), 7 C. & P. 164 ... 1018, 1440 

— (1844), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 117 

187, 189, 191, 347 

— (1865), 10 Cox, 184 (Jr.) ... 1124, 

1125, 1216 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 1098 893 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 1102 ... 359, 743 

— (1891), 17 Cox, 299 219, 711 

— [1900] 2 Q. B. 36 132, 1215 

— (1903), 68 J. P. 40 342, 345 

— (1903), 22 N. Z. L. R. 52 ... 1203 

— (1904), 68 J. P. 327 989 

— (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 242 ... 354 

— (1917), 12 Cr. App. R. 244 ... 312 

— V. Milner (1819), 8 Taunt. 739 810 
Grayson (1921), 16 Cr. App. R. 7 392 
Great Bolton (1828), 8 B. & C. 71 660 
Gieat Broughton (1771), 5 Burr. 

2700 ... 1304 
Greathead (1878), 14 Cox, 108 714 

Great North of England Rail. 

Co. (1846), 9 Q. B. 315 ... 9 
Great West Laundry Co. (1900), 

13 Manitoba, 60 ..'. 9 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixxix 



PAGE 

Great Western Rail. Co. (Direc- 
tors) ,(,1888), 20 Q. B. D. 410 ... 148 
Greaves v. Greaves (1872), 41 

L. J. (P. & M.) 66 ... 1300 

— u. Keene (1879), 4 Ex. D. 

73 ... 1000, 1002 
Green (1832), 5 C. & P. 312 390 

— • (i835), 7 C. & P. 156 894 

— ■ (i"852), 3 C. & K. 209 834 

^ (1854), Dears. 323 696 

— (1856), Dears. & B. 113 ... 159 

— (1862), 3 F. &-F. 274 1011 

— N (1899), 34 L. J. N. 622 ... 1293 

— (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 127 ... 1270 

— (1914), 78 J. P. 224 22, 23 

— I). Duckett (1883), 11 Q. B. 

D. 275 ... 1234 

— u. Goddard (1704), 2 Salk. 

641 ... 934 

— V. Green [1893] Prob. 89 ... 1305 
Greenacre (1837), 8 C. & P. 35 

868, 1455 

— Ex parte (1837), 8 C. & 

P. 32 ... 439 
Greenaway (1908), 72 3. P. 389 ... 522 
Greenberg (1919), 83 J. P. 167 ... 1202 

Greenhalgh (1854), Dears. 267 712 

Greenhow (1876), 1 Q. B. D. 703 ... 1363 
Greenitt (1785), 1 Leach, 98n., 363 1170 

Greening [1913] 3 K.-B. 846 884 

Greenough o. Eccles (1859), 5 

C. B. (N. S.) 786 ... 488 
Greenslade (1870), 11 Cox, 412 ... 486 
Greenwich (D. B. W.) v. Mauds- ' 

lev a870), L. R. 5 Q. B. 397 ... 1362 
Greenwood (1846), 2 C. & K. 339 643 

— (1852), 2 Den. 453 ... 1104, 

1105, 1444 

— (1857), 7 Cox, 404 ... 865, 889 

— V. Backhouse (1902), 

20 Cox, 196 ... 26 

Gregg (1708), 14 St. Tr. 1371 1075 

Gregory (1697), 1 Salk. 372 127 

— (18.36), 5 B. & Ad. 555.. .5, 1356 

— (1845), 7 Q. B. 274 29 

— (1850), 15 Q. B. 957 ... 231, 233 

— (1860), 2 F. & F. 153 894 

— (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

77 ... 4, 1428, 1429, 1446, 1447 

— V. Taverner (1833), 6 C. & 

P. 280 ... 493 
Grellier v. Neale (1792), Peake, 

146 ... 444 
Greswolde u. Kemp (1842), C. & 

Mar. 635 ... 405 
Grey (1666), Kel. (J.) 64 885 

— (1734), 2 East, P. C. 708 ... 641 

— (1864), 4 F. & F. 73 1320 

— (1909), 2 Cr. App. R. 37 ... 314 

— (Lord) (1682), 9 St. Tr. 127 1419 

Grice (1837), 7 C. & P. 803 1385 

-Gridley v. Swinborne (1886), 52 

J. P. 739, 791 ... 1278 
Griepe (1698), 1 Ld. Raym. 256 ... 1184 
Griffin (1809), R, & R. 151 394 



PAGE 

Grittin (1853), 6 Cox, 219 472 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 402 886 

— (1879), 14 Cox, 308 (Ir.) 

1295, 1301 

Griffith (1824), 1 C. & P. 298 910 

— Re (1878), 12 Ch. D. 665 ... 628 

— V. Taylor (1876), 2 C. P. 

D. 194, 202 ... 42 

— V. Williams (1830), 1 Cr. 

& J. 47 ... 447n. 
Griffiths (1838), 8 C. & P. 248 ... 938 

— (1841), 9 C. & P. 746 ... 495 

— (1858), Dears. & B. 548 816 
Griffits V. Ivery (1840), 11 A. & 

E. 322 ... 446n. 

— .;. Payne (1839), U A. & 

E. 131 ... 833 
Griggs (1660), Sir T. Raym. 1 ... 467 
Grills (1910), 11 C. L. R. 400 ... 393n. 
Grimes (1752), 2 East, P. C. 647 ... 599 

— (1894), 15 N. S. W. Rep. 

(Law) 209 ... 872 

Grimwade (1844), 1 Den. 30 1236 

Grimwood (1896), 60 J. P. 809 ... 161, 219 
Grinberg (1917), 33 T. L. R. 428 ... 733 
Grivell v. Malpas [1906] 2 K. B. 

32 ... 1289 
Groomb'ridge (1836), 7 C. & P. 

, 582 ... 11, 1018 

Gross (1913), 23 Cox, 455 889 

Grosvenor (1745), 2 Str. 1193 133 

— (1819),. 2 Stark. (N. P.) 

511 ... 1357 

Grout (1834), 6 C. & P. 629 892 

Grove (1835), 7 C. & P. 635 619 

Grover (1840), 8 Dowl. Pr. Cas. 

325 ... 112 

Grubb [1915] 2 K. B. 683 634 

Grunceli (1839), 9 C. & P. 365 ... 514, 533 

Grymston (1559) 1074 

Guelder (1860), Bell, 284 617 

Guerchy (1765), 1 W. Bl. 545 124 

Guernsey (1858), 1 F. & F. 394 

490 512 
Guinea (1811), Ir. Circ. Rep. 167' 490 

Gully (1773), 1 Leach, 98 164 

Gunnell (1886), 16 Cox, 154 ... 370, 563 
Gurney (1867), 10 Cox, 550 1205 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 414 ... 200, 1420 

— V. Langlands (1822), 5 B. 

& Aid. 330 ... 447, 835 
Gutch (1829), M. & M. 433, 438/1. 

1121, 1252 
Guthrie (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

241 ... 212, 1032 
Guttridge (1840), 9 C. & P. 228 

93, 103, 372, 373 

Guy (1902) (unreported) 748 

Gwyn (1720), 1 Str. 401 418 

Gwynne (1759), 2 Burr. 749 118 

Gyde (1908), 72 J. P. 504 109, 121 

Gylee (1909), 73 J. P. 72 893 

Gyles c. Hill (1809), 1 Camp. 471n. 

404. 420 



Ixxx 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

HADFIELD (1800), 27 St. Tr. 1281 

14, 170 

— (1870), L. R. 1 

C. C. R. 253 ... 786 

— (1886), 16 Cox, 148 ... 1184 
Hadwell v. Righton [1907] 2 K. B. 

345 1355 

Hadwen [1902] 1 K. B, 882 ... 204, 205 

206, 460, 465, 491 

Hagan (1837), 8 C. & P. 167 882 

— (1873), 12 Cox, 357 358 

— (1913), 9 Or. App. R. 25 

337, 728, 729 
Hagmaier u. Willesden Overseers 

[1904] 2 K. B. 316 ... 183n., 184 
Hague (1863), 33 L. J. (M. C.) 

. gj 1399 

Hailey (1824), 1 C. & P. 258 ...'.'.'. 1197 
Haines (1821), R. & R. 451 064 

— (1847), 2 C. & K. 368 ... 890, 894 

— (1850), 5 Cox, 114 288, 289 

Hains (1696), Comb. 337 428 

Hake (1827), 4 Man. & Ry. 483n. ... 1233 
Hale (1846), 2 C. & K. 326 552 

— [190.5] 1 K. B. 126 992 

Hales (1729), 2 Sir. 816 121 

Hall, 1 Sir. 416 1162 

— (1776), 2 W. Bl. 1110 ... -88, 485, 

1202 

— (1786), 1 T. R. 320 47 

— (1790), 2 Leach, 559 387 

— (1818), R. & R. 355 664 

— (1822), 1 B. & C. 123 1387 

— (1828), 3 C. & P. 409 512 

— (1836), 1 Mood. 474 608 

-- (1838), 8 C. & P. 358 371 

— (1848), 1 Den. 381 513 

— (18.57), 1 F. & F. 33 1120 

— (1872), 12 Cox, 159 443, 837 

— (1875), 13 Cox, 49 613 

— [1891] 1 O. B. 747 5, 6, 99 

— (1919), 14 Cr. App. R. 58 ... 337 

— D. Ball (1841), 3 Scott (N. R.) 

477 ... 450 

— V. Cox [1899] 1 Q. B. 198 ... 1344 

— V. McWilliam (1901), 20 Cox, 

33 ... 1344 
Hall's Estate, Re (1853), 22 L. J. 

(Ch.) 177 ... 443, 1294 
Hallard (1796), 2 East, P. C. 498 ... 659 
Hallett (1841), 9 C. & P. 748 ... 494, 1019 
Halliday (1889), 61 L. T. 701 ... 872, 918, 

942 
Halllwell u. Counsell (1878), 38 

L. T. 176 ... 885 
Halloway (1628), Cro. Car. 131 ... 882 

— (1823), 1 C. & P. 127 ... 511" 

Halton (1824), Ry. & M. 78 170 

Hamilton (1784), 1 Leach, 348 ... 676 

(1837), 8 C. & P. 49 

598, 641, 676 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 212 ... 685 

— (1848), 9 Q. B. 271 ... 701n., 

707, 711 

— , (1849), 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

1130 ... 1079 



PAGE 

Hamilton (1899), 12 Manitoba, 507 259n. 

— [1901] 1 K. B. 740 242 

— (1908), 1 Cr. App. R. 87 234 

— (1917), 13 Cr. App. R. 32 

307, 337 
Hammaclc v. White (1862), 31 

L. J. (C. P.) 131 ... 890 
Hammersley (iei9), 14 Cr. App. R. 

118 ... 1475 
Hammersmith (1816), 1 Starls. 

(N. P.) 357 ... ip64 
Hammersmith Rail. Co. v. Brand 

(1869), L. R. 4 H. L. 171 ... 1313 
Hammerson (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 

121 ... 710 

Hammon (1812), R. & R. 221 531 

Hammond (1787), 1 Leach, 444 ... 22 

— (1799), 2 Esp. 719 1426 

— (1844), 1 Cox, 60 743 

— V. Stewart (1722), 1 Str. 

510 ... 481, 484 

Hamp (1852), 6 Cox, 167 ... 1202, 1422 

Hampton (1830), 1 Mood. 255 836 

Hamworth (1731), 2 Str. 900 112 

Hancbclc (1807), R. & R. 170 680 

— (1878), 14 Cox, 119 732 

— V. Somes (1859), 1 E. & 

E. 795 ... 161 

— V. Whilev (1816), 7 

. Taunt. 205 ... 351 
Hancox (1913), 8 Cr. App. R. 193 

219, 337 

— (1916), 80 J. P. 135 393 

Handcock v. Baker (1800), 2 B. & 

P. 260 ... 886, 1003 
Handley (1833), 5 C. & P. 565 ... 1384 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 547 ... 514 

— (1859), 1 F. & F. 648 ... 1010 

— (1874), 13 Cox, 79 ... 873, 874, 

922 

Hands (1887), 16 Cox, 188 524 

Hankey (1757), 1 Burr. 316 134 

Hankins (1824), McCl. & Y. 27 ... 95, 96 

— (1849), 2 C. & K. 823 ... 471 

Hanks (1828), 3 C. & P. 419 1184 

Hann (1765), 3 Burr. 1716 132 

Hanson (1850), 2 C. & K. 912 ... 930, 945 
Hanway v. Boultbee (1830), 4 C. 

& P. 350 ... 790 
Hapgood (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

221 ... 4, 215, 1023, 1432 
Hardcastle v. South Yorks. Rail. 

C. (1859), 4 H. & N. 67 ... 1315 
Hardie (1821), 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

• 609 ... 1069, 1070, 1221 
Harding (1690), 2 Vent. 315 ... 1065, 1074 

— (1807), R. & R. 125 531 

— (1908), 25 T. L. R. 139 

219n., 348 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 10 730n. 

— u. Cooper (1816), 1 Stark. 

(N. P.) 467 ... 1210n. 

— V. Stokes (1837), 2 M. & 

W. 233 ... 1397 
Hardwick (1811), 1 Phill. Ev. 

(7th ed.) Ill ... 387 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixxxi 



PAGE 

Hardwick v. Lane [1904] 1 K. B. 

204 ... 1344 

Hardy (1794), 24 St. Tr. 199 ... 207, 354, 

473, 492, 1064, 1066 

— (1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

278 ... 7S6 

— (1910), 74 J. P. 396 731 

Hargrafe (1831), 5 C. & P. 170 ... 879 

— V. Le Breton (1769), 

4 Burr. 2422 ... 1250 
Hargreave v. Spink [1892] 1 Q. B. 

25 ... 297' 
Harkness and Allsop, Re [1898] 

2 Ch. 358 ... 859 
Harland (1838), 5 A. & E. 826 ... 1233 
Harley (1830), 4 C. & P. 369 ... 909, 923, 

1435 

— Carr. Supp. 254 1301 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 89 591 

Harman (1620), 1 Hale, 534 641 

— Rowe (Ir. K. B.) 441 ... 134 
Harmar v. Davis (1817), 7 Taunt. 

577 ... 421 

Harmer (1848), 2 Cox, 487 397 

Harmwood (1787), 1 East, P. C. 

440 ... 1023 

Harney (1850), 4 Cox, 441 432 

Harnley (1850), 4 Cox, 441 432 

Harratt v. Wise (1829), 9 B. & C. 

712 ... 410 

Harries (1811), 13 East, 270 135 

Harrington -(1866), -10 Cox, 370 ... 883 
— 0. Fry (1824), Ry. & M. 

90 ... 446 

Harris (1753), 2 East, P. C. 1023 744 

— (1762), 3 Burr. 1330 121 

— (1791), 4 T. R. 202 5, 6 

— (1795), 2 Leach, 701 659 

— (1831), 5 C. & P. 159 911 

— (1833), 6 C. & P. 105 683 

— (1833), 6 C. & P. 129 802 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 416, 428, 

430 ... 823 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 446 908 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 581 486 

— (1842), 1 C. & K. 179 812 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 661 765 

— (1844), 1 Cox, 106 392 

— (1849), 4 Cox, 21 340 

— (1854), Dears. 344 616 

— (1864), 4 F. & F. 342 ... 742, 743 

— (1866), 10 Cox, .352 1343 

— (1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

282 ... 1317 

— (1887), 15 Cox, 75 743 

— (1893), 17 Cox, 656 607, 613 

— (1897), 61 J. P. 792 171 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 85 ... 334 
— . (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 30 ... 310 

— (1918), 82 J. P. 196 ... 434, 436, 

437 

— b. Brisco (1886), 17 Q. B. 

D. 504 ... 1204 

— V. Mobbs (1877), 3 Ex. D. 

273 ... 1365 

A.C.P. 



PAGE 

Harris v. Saunders (1825), 4 B. & 

C. 411 ... 442 

— u. Tippett (1811), 2 Camp. 

637 ... 474 
Harrison (1661), 5 St. Tr. 1008 ... 1065 

— (1692), 12 St. Tr. 833 ... 433 

— (1756), 1 Leach, 47 538 

— (1777), 1 Leach, 180 809 

— (1794), 6 T. R. 60 136 

— (1864), 9 Cox, 503 1196 

— V. Bush (1855), 5 E. & 

B. 344 ... 1251 

— i;. Hodgson (1830), 10 B. 

& C, 445 ... 934 

— u. Southwark, etc., W. 

W. Co. [1891] 2 Ch. 

409 1312 

Harrod (1846), 2 C. & K. 294 ... 164, 165 
Hart (Minter) (1833), 6 C. & P. 

106 ... 569 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 652 806 

— (1772), 1 W. Bl. 386 1250 

— (1776), 1 Leach, 145 50 

— (1796), 30 St. Tr. 1311, 1334 

1195, 1216 

— V. Gumpach (1872), L. R. 

4 P. C. 439 ... 1251 

Hartel (1837^, 7 C. & P. 773 201 

Hartford (1779), 1 Cowp. Ill 1360 

Hartley (1807), R. & R. 139 ... 611, 612 

— V. Hindmarsh (1866), L. R. 

1 C. P. 553 ... 162 

Hartshorne (1653), 6 Cox, 395 803 

— V. Watson (1839), 5 

Ring. (N. C.) 477 ... 452 

Harvey (1787), 1 Leach, 467 516 

— (1812), R. & R. 267 815 

— (1823), 2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1 

130, 400, 833, lllS, 
1119, 1249 

— (1823), 2 B. &C. 257 352 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 353 547 

— (1858), 8 Cox, 99 1196 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 546 ... 447, 490, 

835 

— (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

284 ... 825, 1112, 1113 

— V. Farnie (1883), 8 App. 

Cas. 43 ... 1305 

— u. Morgan (1816), 2 Stark. 

N. P. 17 ... 1210n. 

— V. Truro R. D. C. [1903] 

2 Ch. 638 ... 1355, 1361, 1364 

Harwood (1738), 2 Str. 1088 225 

Haslam (1786), 1 Leach, 418 ... 455, 726 

— (1845), 1 Den. 73 1399 

— (1916), 85 L. J. (K. B.) 

1511 ... 462 

Hassall (1826), 2 C. & P. 434 ... 24 

— (1861), L. & C. 58 535 

Hassell (1837), 5 Dowl. 531 119 

Hastie (1863), L. & C. 269 606 

Haswell (1780), 1 Doug. 387 ... 131, 136 

— (1821), R. & R. 458 1177 

Hatfield (1820), 4 B. & Aid. 75 

1365, 1371 

/ 



Ixxxii 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Hatfield (1835), 4 A. & E. 156 ... 1362 
Haughton (1833), 5 C. & P. 559 ... 790 

— (1852), 1 E. & B. 501 

1363, 1367 
Hausmann (1909), 73 J. P. 516 ... 128, 302 
Haviland, Ex parte (1880), « J. P. 

789 ... 134 
Hawdon (1839), U A. & E. 143 ... 119 

Hawes (1847), 1 Den. 270 1296 

Hawke v. Hulton, Ltd. [1909] 

2 K. B. 93 ... 9, 1340, 1343, 1344 

Hawkes (1838), 2 Mood. 60 810 

Hawkeswood (1783), 1 Leach, 257 810 
Hawkins (1704), 2 East, P. C. 485 

662, 665 

— (1828), 3 C. & P. 392 ... 1438 

— (1850), 1 Den. 584 614 

— [1896] Q. B. D 486 

Haworth (1830), 4 C. & P. 254 ... 837 

— Greenw. Coll. Stat. 137 382 
Hay (1859), 2 F. & F. 4 472 

— (1849), 1 Den. 602, 604 342 

— (1899), 16 Cape of Good Hope 

Rep. 190 ... 18n. 

— D. Tower Division Justices 

(1890), 24 Q. B. D. 561 ... 165, 266 

— (1911), 22 Cox, 268 17 

Haydn (1825), 2 Fox & Sm. (Ir.) 

379 ... 471 

Haydon (1836), 7 C. & P. 445 604 

Hayes (1727), 2 Ld. Raym. 1518 57 

— (1730), 2 Str. 844 216 

— (1838), 2 M. & Rob. 155. ..205, 206 

— (1903), 6 Canada Cr. Gas. 

101 ... 73n. 
Hayman (1829), M. & M. 401 

1366, 1369 
Haynes (1614), 12 Co. Rep. 113 ... 543 

— (1815), 4 M. & Sel. 214 ... 2, 51, 

1286 

— (1859), 1 F. & F. 666 ... 18, 206 

— (1900), 64 J. P. 441 210 

Hayward (1833), 6 C. & P. 157.. .375, 885 

— (1844), 1 C. & K. 518.. .532, 614 

— (1846), 2 C. & K. 234 ... 471 

— (1908), 21 Cox, 692 ... 869, 873 

Haywood (1801), R. & R. 16 790 

Hazel (1785), 1 Leach, 368 216 

Hazleton (1874), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

134 ... 693, 703 

Hazy (1826),- 2 C. & P. 458 353 

Hazzlewood (1883), 48 J. P. 151 ... 709 

Head (1858), 1 F. & F. 350 545 

— (1905), 69 J. P. 224 393 

Headge (1809), R. & R. 160 615 

Headley's (Lord) Case (1806), R. & 

R. 117 ... 72 

Heane (1864), 4 B. & S. 947 101 

Hoaphy, Be (1888), 22 L. R. Ir. 

500 ... 1423 

Heard (1912), 76 J. P. 232 1475 

Hearn (1841), C. & Mar. 109 ... 386, 494 
Heath (1810), R. & R. 184 ... 1109, 1112, 

1431 

— (1838), 2 Mood. 33 530, 570 



PAGE 

Heath u, Weaverham Overseers 

[1894] 2 Q. B. 108 ... 1370 
Heatoii (1863), 3 F. & F. 819 1305 

— (1896), 60 J. P. 508 ... 896, 952 
Heaven u. Crutchley (1903), 68 

J. P. 53 ... 765, 796, 800 
Hebditch u. Mcllwaine [1894] 

2 Q. B. 54 ... 12.51 

Heber (1732), 2 Str. 915 135 

toedges (1803), 28 St. Tr. 1315 ... 1154 

— (1828), 3 C. & P. 410 1098 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 262 ... 1022 
Hedley o. Pinkney S.S. Co. [1894] 

A. C. 222 ... 1388 

Heesom (1878), 14 Cox, 40 102, 358 

Heffer v. Martyn (1867), 15 W. R. 

390 ... 1421 
Hegarty u. Shine (1878), 14 Cox, 

142 (.Ir.) ... 932 

Hehir (1895), 18 Cox, 267 (Ir.) 526 

Helby v. Matthews [1895] A. C. 571 297 
Helsham (1830), 4 C. & P. 394 ... 863 
Heming (1799), 2 East, P. C. 1116 683 

— (1833), 5 B. & Ad. 666 ... 135 
Hemingway (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 

47 ... 338 
Hemming (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 

236 ... 233, 234, 339 
Hemmings (1864), 4 F. & F. 50 ... 512 

— 0. Gasson (1858), E. B. 

& E. 346 ... 1250 
Hempstead (1818), R. & R. 344 

125, 213 

Hems (1836), 7 C. & P. 312 901 

Hench (1810), R. & R. 163 524 

Henderson (1870), 11 Cox, 593 536 

— V. Preston (1888), 21 

' Q. B. D. 362 ... 1000, 1002 
Hendon (1832), 4 B. & Ad. 628 ... 1374 
Hendrick (1921), 15 Cr. App. R. 

149 ... 1334 

Hendy (1850), 4 Cox, 243 684 

Henkers (1886), 16 Cox, 257 1013 

Hennah (1877), 13 Cox, 547 ... 924, 926, 

947 
Hennell u. Lyon (1817), 1 B. & 

Aid. 182 ... 425 
Hennessy v. Wright (1888), 57 

L. J. (Q. B.) 594 ... 473 
Henry (1840), 2 Mood. 118 640 

— V. Adey (1803), 3 East, 221 442 
Hensey (1758), 19 St. Tr. 1341 

1065, 1066, 1075 

Henshaw (1864), L. & C. 444 698 

Hensler (1870), 11 Cox, 570 ... 3, 694, 713, 
717, 1431, 1433 
Henslow v. Fawcelt (1835), 3 A. & , 

E. 51 ... 1397 

Henson (1852), Dears. 24 1311 

Henwood (1870), 11 Cox, 526 .-. 541 

Herbert (1792), 2 Ld. Ken. 466 

133, 1418 
Herion [1913] 1- K. B. 284 ... 245, 1040 

Heron (1913), 77 J. P. 380 1474 

Herrmann (1879), 4 Q. B. D. 284 

1093, 1104 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixxziii 



PAGE 

Herrmann v. Jeuchner (1885), 15 

Q. B. D. 361 ... 88 
Hertfordshire C. C. v. New River 

Co. [1904] 2 Ch. 513 ... 1377 
Heseltine (1873), 12 Cox, 404 ... 738, 742, 

743 

Hesketh (1592), K. B. Rolls 1063 

Hetherington (1840), 4 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 563 ... 1162, 1163 

Hevey (1782), 1 Leach, 229 1420 

Hewett (1842), C. & Mar. 534 388 

Hewgill (1854), Dears. 315 710 

Hewitt (1809), R. & R. 158 150 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 1101 ... 920 

— (1912), 76 J. P. 360 ... 800, 1185 

— V. Hattersley [1912] 3 K. B. 

35 1289 

Hewlett (1858), 1 F. & F. 91 939 

Hey (1849), 1 Den. 602 604 

Heydon (1762), 3 Burr. 1270 136 

— (1762), 1 W. Bl. 351 418 

Heymann (1873), L. R. 8 Q. B. 102 

152, 1420 

Heywood (1847), 2 C. & K. 352 ... 845 

— (1864), L. & C. 451 58 

Hibbert (1869), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

184 ... 1011 

— (1875), 13 Cox, 82 ...' 1284 

Hicklin (1868), L. R. 3 Q. B. 360 

1118, 1162, 1318, 1319 
Hickman (1783), 1 Leach, 278 640 

— (1831), 5 C. & P. 151 ... 872 
Higgins (1801), 2 East, 5 ... 3, 4, 1428, 

1429, 1431 

— (1829),. 3 C. & P. 603 ... 396 

— (1836), 6 L. J. (M. C.) 9 119 
Higginson (1761), 2 Burr. 1232 

1325, 1328 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 129... 15 

Higgs (1846), 2 C. & K. 322 660 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 527 ... 1384, 1385 

— V. Dixon (1817), 2 Stark. 

(N. P.) 180 ... 446 
Higham u. Ridgway (1808), 10 

East, 109 ...■ 374 

Higley (1830), 4 C. & P. 366 920 

Higson (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 167... 340 
Hilaire (1903), 3 N. S. W. St. Rep. 

228 ... 30n., 1292n. 
Hill (1777), 20 St. Tr. 1318 752 

— (1781), 1 East, P. C. 439 1032 

— (1811), R. & R. 190 353, 710 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 274 ... 352, 401, 

806, 834 

— (1843), 2 M. & Rob. 458 674 

— (1847), 2 Cox, 246 815 

— (1849), 1 Den. 453 728 

— (1851), 2 Den. 254 452, 975 

— (1886), 50 J. P. 137 975 

— (1911), 7 Cr. App. R. 1 ...203, 465 

— (1911), 7 Cr. App. R. 26 337 

— [1914] 2 K. B. 386 1042 

— (19181, 82 J. P. 194 366 

— V. Yates (1810), 10 East, 229... 222 

— V. Yates (1818), 2 Moore 

(P. C.) 80 ... 1002 



PAGE 

Hillam (1872), 12 Cox, 174 383 

Hilliard (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 171 337 
— . (1914), 83 L. J. (K. B.) 

439 ... 518, 525 

I-IiUman (1863), L. & C. 343 926 

Hills (1853), 2 E. & B. 176 120 

Hilton ae37), 2 Lew. 214 893 

— (1858), Bell, 20 342 

Hind (1813), P.. & R. 253 1295 

— (1860), Bell, 253 377 

Hinde (1902), 22 N. Z. L. R. 436 

36, 959 
Hindmarsh (1792), 2 Leach, 569 ... 868 
Hines (1870\ SO Cent. Cr. Ct. Sess. 

Pap. 309 ... 895n. 

Hinks (1845), 1 Den. 84 459 

Hirsch" (1899), 34 L. J. N. 132 1324 

Hirschfeld (1897), 61 J. P. 520 ... 383 

Hirst (1896), 18 Cox, 374 302 

Hisfed (18981, 19 Cox, 16 392 

Hilfihin (190s), 1 Cr. App. R. 161 .. 1342 
Hoare (1817|, 6 M. & Sel. 266 1230 

— (1859), 1 F. & F. 647 ... 535, 620 

Hoatson (1847), 2 C. & K. 777 833 

Hobbs [1898] 2 Q. B. 647 1341, 1344 

Hobinstock (1902), C. C. C 731 

Hobson (1803), R. & R. 56 605 

Hodge (1838), 2 Lew. 227 865 

Hodges (1828), M. & M. 341. ..575, 794, 798 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 195.. .13, 76, 170 

— V. Webb (1920), 2 Ch. 70... 1281 
Hodgkinson (1900) (unreported) ... 1154 

— V. Willis (1813), 3 

Camp. 401 ... 425 
Hodgkiss (1836), 7 C. & P. 298 

365, 492 
Hodgson (1730), 1 Leach, 6 ... 888, 1438 

— (1812), R. & R. 211 ... 365, 1022 

— (1828), 3 C. & P. 422 617 

— (1856), Dears. & B. 3.. .803, 832 

— B. Fullarton (1813), 4 

Taunt. 787 ... 418 
Hodnett v. Forman (1815), 1 Stark. 

(N. P.) 90 ...' 446 

Hogan (1851), 2 Den. 277 2, 871 

Hogg (1841), 2 M. & Rob. 380 236 

Hoggins (1809), R. & R. 142 ... 611, 615 
Holberry (1840), 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

1347 ... 1418 
Holbrook (1877-8), 3 Q. B. D. 60; 

4 Q. B. D. 42 ... 1116, 1123, 1252 

Holchester (1866), 10 Cox, 226 202 

Holcroft (1578), 4 Co. Rep. 466; 

2 Hale 246 ... 156 
Holden (1809), R. & R. 154 ... 823, 833 

— (1833), 5 B. & Ad. 347 

109, 112, 113, 121 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 606 

40, 486, 868 

— (1872), 12 Cox, 166 1186 

— [1912] 1 K, B. 483 811 

— V. Thompson (1907), 2 

K. B. 489 ... 1204 
Holditch (1920), 15 Cr. App. R. 122 106 
Holdsworth (1832), 1 Lew. 279 ... 379 



Ixxxiv 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Hole ... Bartow (1858), 27 L. J. 

(C. P.) 208 ... 1312, 1314 
Holiday u. Hicks (1599), Cro. Eliz. 

638, 661 ... 296 
Holland (1782), 1 T. R. 692 132 

— (1791), 4 T. R. 557 128 

— (1841), 2 M. & Rob. 351... 869 
Hollingberry (1825), 4 B. & C. 329 

211 1422 
HoUis (1776), 20 St. Tr. 1225 '. 1389 

— (1873), 12 Cox, 463 924, 926 

— (1883), 12 Q. B. D. 25 ... 522, 526 

HoUond (1791), 5 T. R. 607 51, 1154 

HoUoway (1833), 5 C. & P. 524 514 

— (1839), 9 C. & P. 43 77 

— (1848), 1 Den. 370 513, 514 

— (1851), 17 Q. B. 317 ... 231, 345 

— (1901), 65 J. P. 712 434 

Holman (1862), L. & C. 177; 9 Cox, 

201 ... 58 
Holmes (1852), Dears. 207 1317 

— (1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 334 

365, 1022, 1034 

— (1883), 12 Q. B. D. 23 ... 694, 708 

— Rowe (It. K. B.), 239 134 

— c. Pontin (1792), Peake 

(3rd ed.), 135 ... 445 
Holroyd (1841), 2 M. & Rob. 339 

786, 953 

Holt (1793), 5 T. R. 436 406, 410, 

1123, 1249 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 518 ... 913, 939 

— (1860), Bell, 280 357, 361, 716 

— (1920), 15 Cr. App. R. 10 ... 17 
Holyoake (1842), 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

1381 ... 1162 
Home ^. Bentinck (1820), 2 B. & 

B. 130, 162 ... 472 

Hood (1830), 1 Mood. 281 898 

Hoodless (1900), 64 J. P. 282 ... 373, 1051 

Hook (1858), Dears. & B. 606 1191 

Hooper (1819), 1 Chit. (K. B.) 491 117 

Hoost (1802), 2 East, P. C. 950 837 

Hope (1834), 1 Mood. 414 815 

— (1909), Vict. L. R. 149 375n. 

— V. Evered (1886), 17 Q. B. D. 

338 ... 1036 

Hopes (1834), 7 C. & P. 136 394 

Hopkins (1838), 8 C. & P. 591 868 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 254 1011 

— (1866), 10 Cox, 229 358, 883 

— [1896] 1 Q. B. 652 1271 

Hopley (1860), 2 F. & F. 201 885 

— (1915), 11 Cr. App. R. 248 710 

Hopper [1915] 2 K. B. 431 885 

Hopwood (1913), 8 Cr. App. R. 143 889 
Horan (1872), Ir. Rep. 6 C. L. ... 294, 296 
Horn (1883), 15 Cox, 205 ... 232, 343, 1468 

— (1912), 76 J. P. 270 1034 

— V. Noel (1807), 1 Camp. 61... 1296 

Hornby (1844), 1 C. & K. 305 531 

Home (1777), 20 St. Tr. 651 ... 127, 1119 
Horner (1783), 1 Leach, 270; Cald. 

295 ... 521 

— (1790), 2 East, P. C. 703 "'. 639 

— (1910), 74 J. P. 216 852 



PAGE 

Horner v. Horner (1799), 1 Hagg. 

(Consist. Rep.) 337 ... 1299 

Hornsea (1854), Dears. 291 1363 

Horsey (1862), 3 F. & F. 287 888 

Horton v. Mead [1913] 1 K. B. 154 1039 
Horwood V. Smith (1788), 2 T. R. 

750 ... 297, 298 

Hoseason (1811), 14 East, 605 132 

Hotine (1904), 68 J. P. 143 632 

'Hough (1806), R. & R. 120 363, 834 

Houghton V. Taplin (1897), 13 

T. L. R. 386 ... 1287 
Hounsell u. Smith <1860), 2 C. B. 

(N. S.) 731 ... 1315 
Housin V. Barrow (1794), 6 T. R. 

122 898 

How V. Hall (1811), 14 East, 274 ... 369 
Howard (1832), 1 M. & Rob. 187 ... 421 

— [1902] 2 K. B. 363 132 

— (1910), 6 Cr. App. R. 17... 303 

— V. Smith (1841), 3 Scott 

(N. R.) 574 ... 368 
Howarth (1821), 3 Stark. (N. P.) 

29 ... 699 

— (1828), 1 Mood. 207 899, 

903, 940 

— (1870), 11 Cox, 588 712 

— (1918), 13 Cr. App. R. 99 338 
Howell (1830), 2 Den. 362n 545 

— (1839), 9 C. & P. 437 ... 764, 

765, 1436 

— (1844), 1 Den. 1 375 

— (1864), 4 F. & F. 160 1419 

Howes (1834), 6 C. & P. 404 390 

— Re [1902] 2 K. B. 290 1259 

Howie (1869), 11 Cox, 320 810, 811 

Howkins (1850), 4 pox, 224 604 

Howley (1862), L. & C. 159 815 

Howse (1912), 107 L. T. 239 824 

Hubbard (1881), 14 Cox, 565 ■ 376 

Hube (1792), 5 T. R. 542 1166, 1167 

Hubert v. Groves (1794), 1 Esp. 147 1308 
Huberty (1906), 70 J. P. 6 ... 1327, 1466 
Hubson (1690), 1 East, P. C. 258... 888 
Hucks (1816), 1 Stark. (N. P.) 521 375 
Hudson (1858), 1 F. & F. 56 1197 

— (1860), Bell, 263 690, 713, 

720, 1423 

— [1912] 2 K. B. 465 463 

Hufflett (1920), 84 J. P. 24 914 

Huggins (1730), 2 Ld. Raym. 1574 

217, 347, 869, 871 

Hughes (1785), 1 Leach, 406 666 

— (1802), 2 East, P. C. 1002 835 

— (1813), 2 Lew. 229 22 

— (1826), 2 C. & P. 420 790 

— (1830), 4 C. & P. 373 1223 

— (1832), 5 C. & P. 126 913 

— (1832), 1 Mood. 370 608 

— (1841), 9 C. & P. 752 1023 

— (1842), 2 Cr. & D. (C. C. 

Jr.), 396 ... 196 

— (1843), 1 Cox, 44 206 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 235 194 

— (1844), 1 C. & K'. 519 ... 76, 1196 

— (1850), 4 Cox, 449 921 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixxxv 



PAGE 

Hughes (1857), Dears. & B. 248 ... 870, 
890, 894 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 355 706 

— (1860), 8 Cox, 278 1446 

— (1860), Bell, 242 57, 726 

— (1878), 14 Cox, 223 398 

— D. Marshall (1831), 5 C. & 

P. 150 ... 1389 

— D. Rogers (1841), 8 M. & 

W. 123 ... 447n. 
Hugill (1800), 2 Russ. Cr. (7th ed.), 

1447 ... 577 
Hull (1664), gel. (J.) 40 890 

— (1860), 2 F. & F. 16 66 

— (1902), Queensland State 

Rep. 1 ... 362n. 

— Be (1882), 9 Q. B. D. 689 ... 141 

— (and Smith (1880) (unre- 

ported) ... 203 
Hulme (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 77 ... 1285 
Hulse o. Hulse (1871), L. R. 2 P. & 

D 259 1303 
Humphreys (1842), C. & Mar. 601.!. 78 
Humphries (1903), 67 J. P. 396.. .460, 461 
Humphris [1904] 2 K. B. 89 ... 1259, 1264 
Humphrys, Ex parte (1850), 19 L. J. 

(M. C.) 189 ... 438 
Hundsdon (1781), 2 East, P. C. 611 556 
Hungerford (1790), 2 East, P. C. 

518 ... 656 

Hunt (1811), 31 St. Tr. 367 ... 127, 211, 

353 1121 

— (1820), 3 B. & Aid. 444 ... 112, 121 

— (1820), 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 171 

355, 369, 451, 1137, 
1219 1220 1427 

— (1825), 1 Mood. 93 ... 889, 899, 910, 

939, 1003 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 642 610 

— (1845), 1 Cox, 177 1220 

— (1847), 2 Cox, 261 228, 229 

— V. Goodlake (1873), 43 L. J. 

(C. P.) 54 ... 1122 

— u. Star Newspaper Co. [1908] 

2 K. B. 319 ... 1250 
Hunter (1794), 2 East, P. C. 928, 

977 ... 694, 816 

— (1829), 3 C. & P. 591 102, 

433, 482 

— (1829), 4 C. & P. 128 ... 433, 837 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 642 703 

— [1921] 1 K. B. 555 ... 1470, 1472 

— V. Johnson (1884), 13 Q. B. 

D. 225 ... 930, 1001 

Huntley (1860), Bell, 238 726 

Hard b. Moring (1824), 1 C. & P. 

372 ... 472 
Hurley (1843), 2 M. & Rob. 473 ... 835 
Hurse (1841), 2 M. & Rob- 360 ... 1104, 
1105, 1436 
Hutchings (1878), 6 Q. B. D. 300 ... 157 
Hutchins (1831), 2 Deac. Cr. L. 

1517 ... 769 

Hutchinson (1678), 3 Keb. 785 157 

— (1784), 1 Leach, 339 ... 1158 

•„ — (1822), 2 B. & C. 608n. 377 



PAGE 

Hutchinson (1864), 9 Cox, 555 ... 891, 897 
Hyams (1836), 7 C. & P. 441 ...... 664 

Hyde v. Hyde (1866), L. R. 1 P. & 

D. 130 ... 1298 
Hvland (1898), 24 Vict. L. R. 101 ... 926 



lANSON u. Stuart (1787), 1 T. R. 

748 ... 1245, 1328, 1329 

Ibrahim [1914] A. C. 599 ...' 385, 392 

Ilderton v. Ilderton (1793), 2 H. Bl. 

145 ... 1300 

Illidge (1849), 1 Den. 404 817 

Ilott V. Wilkes (1820), 3 B. & Aid. 

304 ... 896 
Immer and Davis (1917), 13 Cr. 

App. R. 22 ... 337 
Incledon (1810), 13 East, 164.. .1311, 1354 

Inder (1848), 1 Den. 325 824 

Ingham (1864), 5 B. & S. 257 ... 14Q, 143 
Ingleson [1915] 1 K. B. 512 ... 168, 334 

Ingram (1696), 2 Salk. 593 1223 

— (1712), 1 Salk. 384 22 

Ingrey (1900), 64 J. P. 164 373 

Inhabitants of, R. v. See name ot 

parish, county, or place. 
Instan [1893] 1 Q. B. 450 ... 2, 875, 894 
International, The (1871), L. R. 

3 Adm. & Eccl. 321 ... 1083, 1086 
International Securities Co., Re 

(1908), 24 T. L. R. 837 ... 1344 

Ion (1852), 2 Den. 475 823, 1103 

Iowa V. Height (1902), 94 Amer. 

St. Rep. 323 ... 931 

Ireland [1910] 1 K. B. 654 231 

Irving V. Callow Park Dairy Co. 

(1902), 66 J. P. 804 ... 1290 
Isaac (1799), 2 East, P. C.1031 ... 741 

Isaacs (1862), L. & C. 220 924, 926 

Isherwood (1758), 2 Ld. Kenyon 

202 ... 130 
Isle of Ely (1850), 19 L. J. (M. C.) 

223 ... 1374 1376 

Islip (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 209 ! 339 

Israel (1847), 2 Cox, 263 169 

Ivens (1835), 7 C. & P. 213 1309 

Izod (1904), 20 Cox, 690 873, 922 



JACKLING u 

Jackson (1783), 

— (1787), 

— (1794), 

— (1802), 

— (1813), 

— (1826), 

— (1838), 

— (1844), 

— (1855), 

— (1857), 

— (1864), 

— (1890), 

— (1909), 



Carter [1912] 107 

L. T. 848 ... 1290 
1 Leach, 267 ... 675, 687 

1 T. R. 653 133 

25 St. Tr. 783, 885 

73, 1075 
1 Leach, 193n. ... 640 
3 Camp. 370 703 

1 Mood. 119 517 

2 Mood. 32 - 530 

1 C. & K. 384 618 

6 Cox, 525 459 

7 Cox, 357 866 

9 Cox, 505 537 

17 Cox, 104 ... 9lS, 941 

3 Cr. App. R. 192 

242, 1320 



Ixxxvi 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Jackson' (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 22 ... 335 

— (1919), 14 Cr. App. R. 41 208 

— V. Roth [1919] 1 K. B. 102 1342 

— V. Thomason (1861), 31 

L. J. Q. B. 11 ... 489 
Jacobs (1817), R. & R. 331 ... 1046, 1047 

— (1826), 1 Mood. 140 1301 

— V. Layborn (1843), 11 M. & 

W. 685 ... 452 

Jaeobson (1880), 14 Cox, 522 1346 

Jagger (1797), 1 East, P. C. 455 ... 467 
James (1693), 1 Show. 397 367, 421 

— (1831), 5 C. & P. 153 1227 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 553 834 

— (1837), 8 C. & P. 131 771 

— (1844), 1 C. & K. 530 ... 930, 941 

— (1849), 4 Cox, 90 838, 1437 

— (1850), 2 Den. 1 1307 

— (1863), 32 L. J. (M. C.) 211 1348 

— (1871), 12 Cox, 127 56, 99, 

101, 707 

— (1890), 24 Q. B. D. 439 ... 593, 

1446, 1449 

— [1902] 1 K. B. 540 47, 49, 

539 728 

— (1909), 2 Cr. App. R. 319 

389, 392 

— (Judge) and Midland Rail. 

Co. [1908] 1 K. B. 958 ... 1353 

Jameson (1896), 2 Q. B. 425 ... 10, 31, 

121, 151, 863, 1081, 1084, 1085, 1087 

Jarrald (1863), L. & C. 301 669, 670 

Jarvis (1824), 1 Mood. 7 661 

— (1837), 2 M. & Rob. 40 

1452, 1455 

— (1855), Dears. 552 399, 1109 

— (1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 96 389 

— (1902), 20 Cox, 249 1010 

Jayne d. Price (1814), 5 Taunt. 326 1231 

Jeans (1844), 1 C. & K. 539 790 

— V. Wheedon (1843), 2 M. & 

Rob. 480 ... 495 
JefferieS, Ex parte (1829), 6 Bing. 

195 ... 1387n. 

Jefferson (1908), 72 J. P. 467 ... 218, 

305, 334 

Jellyman (1838), 8 C. & P. 604.. .467, 1047 

Jemmy Governor (1900), 21 N. S. 

W. Rep. 278 ... 86n., 163n. 
Jemot (1812), Old Bailey, 28 Feb. 

MS. ... 647 
Jenkins (1813), R. & R. 244 660 

— (1822), R. & R. 492 394 

— (1845), 1 Cox, 177 436 

— (1869), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

187 ... 375, 376 

— V. Tucker (1788), 1 H. Bl. 

90 ... 1345 
Jenkinson (1904), 21 Cape Sup. Ct. 

233 372n 
Jenks D. Turpin (1884), 13 Q. B. 

D. 505 ... 1329, 1332, 1333, 1334 

Jennipg (1838), 2 Lew. 130 908 

Jennings (1829), 4 C. & P. 249 1023 

— (1858), D. & B. 447; 7 

Cox, 397 ... 603, 605 



PAGE 

Jennings (1910), 74 J. P. 245 ... 1472, 1475 

— (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 242 727 

Jennison (1862), L. & C. 157 698 

Jendur (1740), 7 Mod. 400 54, 131 

Jenoure v. Delmege [1891] A. C. 73 1251 

Jenson (1835), 1 Mood. 434 607 

Jephson v. Barker (1890), 3 

T. L. R. 40 ... 230 
Jepson (1798), 2 East, P. C. 1115 

683, 1237 

Jessamine, 19 Can. Cr. Cas. 214 ... 18ri. 

Jessop (1858), Dears. & B. 442 ... 713 

— (1877), 16 Cox, 204 ... 377, 875, 

1427, 1437 

Jewell (1857), 7 E. & B. 140 ... 112, 119 

Jeyes (1835), 3 A. & E. 416 6, 283 

Joachim (1912), 28 T. L. R. 380 ... 801 

Jobling.(1823), R. & R. 525 661 

John (1835), 7 C. & P. 324 394 

— (1875), 13 Cox, 100 23, 590 

Johns (1790), 1 East, P. C. 357.. .374, 467 
Johnson (1726), 1 Str. 644 129 

— (1752), 1 Wils. 325 100 

— (1786), 2 East, P. C. 488 665 

— (1805), 6 East, 583 ... 10, 150, 

151 

— (1805), 7 East, 65 ... 38, 590, 

1120 

— (1815), 3 M. & Sel. 539 ... 6, 59 

— (1816), 4 M. & Sel. 515.. .6, 283 

— (1827), 1 Mood. 173 286 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 218 ... 533, 

665, 1435, 1436 

— (1846), 2 C. & K. 394.. .434, 435 

— (1847), 2 C. & K. 354 .... 374 

— (1851), 2 Den. 310 521 

— (1860), 2 E. & E. 613 ... 137» 

— (1864), L. & C. 489 534 

— (1865), L. & C. 632 1032 

— (1884), 15 Cox, 481 1015.' 

— [1904] A. C. 817, 824 : 129' 

— [1909] 1 K. B. 439 ... 304, 334, 

339 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 168 3W 

— (1910), 6 Cr. App. R. 82 335 

— (1911), 7 Cr. App. R. 97 

234 339 

— (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 218' 730 

— (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 57 

336, 348, 1237 

— Re Gertie (1904), 8 Canada 

Cr. Cas. 243 ... 1034n. 

— V. Needham [1909] 1 K. B. 

626 ... 791 

— u. Ogilby, 3 P. Wms. 

279 ... 1209n. 
Johnston (1842), 2 Mood. 254 

698, 707 

— (1851), 5 Cox, 133 (Jr.) 815 

— (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 

262 ... 693, 

— (1917), 12 Cr. App. R. 

137 339 

Joiner (1910), 74 J. P. 200 399, 541 

Jollifte (1791), 4 T. R. 285 ... 102, 131, 
133, 1217 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixxxvii 



PAGE 

JoUifte 1). Wallasey L. B. (1874), 

L. R. 9 C. P. 62 ... 1358 

Jolly (1919), 83 J. P. 296 17 

Jones (1664), Kel. (J.) 37 24 

— (1726), 2 Str. 704 136 

— (1741), 2 Str. 1146 5 

— (1742), 1 Wils. (K. B.) 7 ... 132 

— (1764), 1 Leach, 53 817 

— (1773), 1 Leach, 102 ... 13, 169, 170 

— (1776), 1 Leach, 139 640 

— (1779), 1 Leach, 204 837 

— (1785), 2 East, P. C. 991 .... 802 

— (1790), 1 Leach, 537 602 

— (1791), Peake, 51 (3rd ed.)... 1196 

— (1806), 8 East, 31 104, 1154 

— (1809), 2 Camp. 131 59, 401 

— (1809), R. & R. 152 386, 394 

— (1812), 3 Camp. 230 ... 1354, 1355 

— (1827), 2 C. & P. 629 396 

— (1830), 4 C. & P. 217 676 

— (1831), 2 B. & Ad. 611 353 

— (1835), 7 C. & P. 167 289 

— (1836), 2 Har. & Wol. 293 ... 112 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 288 619 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 258 ... 910, 913 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 401 ... 175, 283 

— (1841), 9 Dowl. Pr. Cas. 504 

116, 118 

— (1842), C & Mar. 611 530 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 614 1304 

— (1843), 2 Mood. 293 ;... 771 

— (1845), 1 Den. 101 35 

— (1846), 1 Den. 166 471 

— , (1847), 2 C. & K. 524 1182 

— (1847), 1 Den. 188 ... 513, 515, 593 

— (1847), 1 Den. 218 123& 

— (1848), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 783 

1117, 1220 

— (1851), 1 Den. 551 697, 708 

— (1861), 4 L. T. 154 1019 

— (1869), 11 Co.x, 358 1303 

— (1870), 11 Cox, 393 649, 653 

— (1870), 11 Cox, 544 891, 892 

— (1872), 12 Cox, 241 392 

— (1874), 12 Cox, 628 896 

— (1877), 14 Cox, 3 730 

— (1883), 11 Q. B. D. 118 1305 

— ■ (1884), 15 Cox, 475 709 

— [1896] 1 Q. B. 4 ... 714, 1037, 1051 

— [1898] 1 Q. B. 119 ... 705, 1269, 

1270, 1419 

— (1901), 19 Cox, 678'... 2, 871, 895, 

997 

— <1901), 36 L. J. N. 650 915 

— (1908), 1 Cr. App. R. 196 

234, 339 

— (1908), 72 J. P. 215 883 

— (1909), 3 Cr, App. R. 67 ... 464 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 29 

1473, 1475 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 207 ... 218 

— (1910), 74 J. P. 168 ....'.. 517, 524 

— (1910), 6 Cr. App. R. 1 1472 

— (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 290 

'343, 1036 

— •(1912),.76 J. P. 272 1015 



PAGE 

Jones (1918), 87 L. J. K. B. 448 ... 866 

— V. Astburnham (1804), 4 

East, 455 ... 1207 

— V. Clay (1798), 1 B. & P. 191 124 

— 0. Davies (1902), 20 Cox, 184 

26, 556 

— V. German [1896] 2 Q. B. 418 

504, 1209 

— ,.. Jones (1841), 9 M. & W. 

75 ... 445 

— V. Mason (1729), 2 Str. 833 445 

— V. Merionethshire Perman- 
ent Benefit Building Society 

[1892] 1 Ch. 173 ... 1210n. 

— V. Pope (1666), 1 Saund. 34 1005 

— D. Randall (1774), 1 Cowp. 

17 ... 406, 419 

— ij. Scott (1909), 73 J. P. 148 1338 

— V. ScuUard [1898] 2 Q. B. 

565 ... 604 

— V. Stevens (1822), 11 Price, 

235 ... 1249 

Jordan (1836), 7 C. & P. 432 ... 657, 668 

— (1839), 9 C. & P. 118 ... 12, 205, 

1018 
Jordeson v. Hull Gas Co. [1899] 

2 Ch. 217 ... 1313 
Jordin u. Crump (1841), 8 M. & 

W. 782 ... 952 
Josephs (1839), 8 Dowl. Pr. Cas. 

178 ... 112 
— ^. Adkins (1817), 2 Stark. 

(N. P.) 76 ... 292 
Josephson (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 8 303 

Joule (1836), 5 A. & E. 539 112 

Jousry (1914), 24 Cox, 523 493 

Joyce (1814), 3 C. & P. 411n. 

1098, 1099 

Juby (1886), 16 Cox, 160 1267, 1269 

Judd (1788), 2 T. R. 255 742 

Judge V. Bennett (1887), 52 J. P. 

247 ... 1283 
Juryman (case of a) (1810), 12 

East, 231n. ... 179, 222 
Justices of. See name of county 
or borough. 



KAIN (1837), 8 C. & P. 187 687 

— (1883), 15 Cox, 388 206 

Kane [1901] 1 K. B. 472 637 

Katz (1900), 64 J. P. 807 437, 988 

Kauftman (1904), 68 J. P. 189.. .1010, 1113 
Kaufman v. Gerson [1904] 1 K. B. 

591 ... 1209n., 1210n. 
Kay (1857), Dears. & B. 231 524 

— (1870), 11 Cox, 529 811 

— (1887), 16 Cox, 292 1297, 1300 

— V. Brookman (1829), M. & M. 

I 286 ... 445 

Kealey (1857), 2 Den. 68 706 

Keane (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 12 ... 1475 

Keary (1878), 14 Cox, 143 170 

Keafe (1697), Comb. 406 888 

Keating (1910), 74 J. P. 452 339 

Keen (1847)., 10 Q. B. 928 106, 228 



Ixxxviii 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Keena (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

606, 614 
Keighley (1856), Deafs. & B. 145; 

7 Cox, 217 ... 702 
Kelr u. Leeman (1844-6), 6 Q. B. 

308; 9 Q. B. 371 ... 1210/1., 1211 
Keite (1697), 1 Ld. Raym. 138... 216, 347 
Kelly (1820), R. & R. 421 1436 

— (1847), 3 C. & K. 379 1437 

— (1848), 3 Cox, 75 476 

— (1848), 2 C. & K. 814 882 

— (1910), 26 T. L. R. 196 1475 

Kclsey (1832), 1 Dowl. 481 286 

Kelson (1909) 3 Cr. App. R. 231 397 

Kemp V. Christmas (1898), 79 L.'T. 

233 ... 1234 
Kempson (1893), 28 L. J. Newsp. 

477 ... 888, 1287, 1314 
Kennaway [1917] 1 K. B. 25 ... 363, 807 
Kennedy v. Cowie [1891] 1 Q. B. 

771 ... 1286 

— D. Lyell (1883), 9 App. 

Cas. 81 ... 472 
Kennett (1781), 5 C. & P. 282n. ... 1221 
Kennltt (1903), Queensland St. Rep. 

17 ... 868n. 

Kenny (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 307 ... 539, 728 

Kenrick (1843), 5 Q. B. 49 ... 700, 1419, 

1424, 1425 

Kensington v. Inglis (1809), 8 East, 

273 ... 443, 490 
Kensit d. Dean of St. Paul's [1905] 

2 K. B. 249 ... 1165 
Kent (1810), 13 East, 220 1374 

— (1814), 2 M. & Sel. 513 1374 

Kent JJ. (1809), 11 East, 229 141 

Kent County Council, Re [1891] 1 

Q. B. 389 ... 269 

— V. Sandgate U. D. C. (1897), 

61 J. P. 517 ... 1363 
Kenward v. Knowles (1744), 

Willes, 463 ... 1387n. 
Kenworttiy (1823), 1 B. & C. 711... 230 
Kenyon (1901), 36 L. J. N. 571 ... 5, 1346 
Kerr (1837), 8 C. & P. 176 527 

— (1921), 15 Cr. App. R. 165 ... 301 
Kerridge v. Simmonds (1906), 4 

Aust. C. L. R. 253 ... 1210n. 

Kerrigan (1864), L. & C. 383 707 

Kerrison (1813), 1 M. & Sel. 435 ... 1374 

— (1815); 3 M. & Sel. 526 ... 1374 

Kersey (1908), 21 Cox, 690 396, 865 

Kershaw (1902), 18 T. L. R. 357 ... 11 

Kessal (1824), 1 C. & P. 437 878 

Ketteridge [1915] 1 K. B. 467 ... 219, 222 

Kew (1872), 12 Cox, 455 892 

Key (1857), 2 Den. 347 189, 198 

Keyn (1876), 2 Ex. D. 63 32, 34, 346 

Kidd (1907), 72 J. P. 104 546 

Kiddle (1898), 19 Cox, 77 372n., 373 

Kilham (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

261 ... 708, 712 
Killminster (1835), 7 C. & P. 228 ... 66 
Kimber d. Press Association [1893] 

1 Q. B. 65 ... 1124, 1241, 1251 
Kinder (1800), 2 East, P. C. 855 ... 805 



PAGE 

King (1747), 2 Str. 1268 100 

— (1817), R. & R. 332 1436 

— (1820), 2 Chit. (K. B.) 217 ... 121 

— (1832), 5 C. & P. 123 836 

— (1844), 13 L. J. (M. C.) 43 ... 552 

— (1845), 1 Cox, 232 459 

— (1845), 7 Q. B. 782 220, 232 

— (1871), 12 Cox, 73 614, 619 

— [1897] 1 Q. B. 214 ... 60, 161, 234, 

694, 700, 703, 
705, 710 

— (1900), 19 N. Z. L. R. 409 ... 645 

— (1905), 9 Canada Cr. Cas. 

436 ... 868n. 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 44 ... 539 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 117 ... 1042 

— (qui tarn) v. Cole (1796), 

6 T. R. 642 ... 136 

— V. Tebbart (1693), Skin. 387 934 
Kingham (1902), 66 J. P. 393 

372n., 1033 

Kinghorn [1908] 2 K. B. 949 449 

Kinglake (1870), 11 Cox, 499 470 

— (1870), 18 W. R. 806, cit. 226 
Kingsland (1919), 14 Cr. App. R. 8 351 
Kingston (1806), 8 East, 41 57, 59 

— (1830), 4 C. * P. 387 ... 386 

— (Duchess) (1776), 20 St. 

Tr. 355 ... 112, 426, 467, 1306 

Kinloch (1746), Post. 16 222 

Kinnear (1819), 2 B. & Aid. 462 

208 810 877 
Kinnersley (1719), 1 Str. 193... 1424,' 1425 

— (1760), 1 W. Bl. 294 

& n. ... 131 

— u. Orpe (1779), 1 Doug. 

36 ... 424 

Kipps (1850), 4 Cox, 167 1009 

Kirkhara v. Gill [1897] 1 Q. B. 

201 ... 297 

— (1837), 8 C. & P. 115 ... 885 
Kirkpatrick (1908), 1 Cr. App. R. 

170 ... 340 
Kirkwood (R.) (1831), 1 Mood. 304 

838, 1437 
Kirschenboim v. Salmon and 

Gluckstein [1898] 2 Q. B. 19 ... 1273 
Kirwan d. Goodwin (1841), 9 Dowl. 

330 ... 1210n. 

Kitchen (1805), R. & R. 95 913 

Kitchener (1873), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

88 ... 1375 

Kitson (1853), Dears. 187 369, 744 

Klosowski (1903), 167 Cent. Crim. 

Ct. Sess. Pap. 471 ... 358 
Knewland (1796), 2 Leach, 721 

526, 640 
Knight (1823), 1 C. & P. 116 22, 24 

— (1827), 7 B. & C. 413 1360 

— (1871), 12 Cox, 102 528 

— (1905), 69 J. P. 108 392 

— (1908), 73 J. P. 14 336, 

348, 512 
Knights (1860), 2 F. & F. 46 ... 873, 922 
Knill (1822), 5 B. & Aid. 929n. ... 1191 
Knock (1877), 14 Cox, 1 ... 880, 887, 933 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Ixxxix 



Knowlden (1864), 5 B. & S. 532 

69, 70, 1473 

Knowles (1810), 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

497 ... 1137 

— (1901), 65 J. P. 27 928 

Knox, Re (1889), 23 L. R. Ir. 542 

1300, 1301 

Kohn (1864), 4 F. & F. 68 34, 1424 

Kopelewitch (1905), 69 J. P. 216 ... 71 

Kops [1894] A. C. 650 209, 461 

Krausch (1913), 32 N. Z. L. R. 

1229 ... 351 n. 
Krause (1902), 66 J. P. 121 ... 907, 1430 
Kupterberg (1918), 13 Cr. App. R. 

166 ... 157 
Kurasch [1915] 2 K. B. 749 360 

— (1917), 13 Cr. App. R. 13 307 



LABOUCHERE (1880), 14 Cox, 419 1249 
— ((884), 12 Q. B. 

D. 320 ... 131, 135, 
136, 1246 
Lacon u. Higgins (1822), 1 D. & 

R. 28 ... 1297 
— 0. Hooper (1795), 6 T. R. 

224 ... 1227 

Laey (1848), 3 Cox, 517 '." 486 

Laidler a899), 19 Cox, 360 490 

Laird i.. Dobell [1906] 1 K. B. 

131 ... 26 
Laitwood (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 

248 ... 1433n. 
Lake (1869), 11 Cox, 333 855 

— V. Butler (1854), 5 E. & B. 

99 ... 37 
Lallement (1853), 6 Cox, 204 ....'.'. 915 
Lamb (1694), 2 East, P. C. 664 ... 528 

— V. Burnett (1831), 1 Cr. & 

J. 291 ... 885. 
Lamb's Case (1610), 9 Co. Rep. 

59 ... 1121 

Lambe (1791), 2 Leach, 552 395 

Lambert (1810), 31 St. Tr. 335 

365, 1U8, 1123 

— (1847), 2 Cox, 309 619 

Lamont v. Crook (1840), 6 M. & 

W. 615 ... 484 
Lancashire (1831), 2 B. & Ad. 813 1378 

— (JJ.) (1822), 1 D. & R. 

485 ... 133 
Lancashire and Yorkshire Rail. 
Co. t>. Davenport (1906), 70 J. P. 

129 1363 
Lancaster (JJ.) (1819), 1 Chit'. 

(K. B.) 602 ... 135 

— (1868), 32 J. P. 711 ... 1375 

— (1890), 16 Cox, 737 ... 1205, 

1401 
Landow (1913), 23 Cox, 457 ... 4, 1036, 

1431 
Landulph (1834), 1 M. & Rob. 393 1360 
Lane o. Hegberg (1699), Bull. 

(N. P.) 19, eit. ... 933 
Langbridge (1849), 1 Den. 448 ... 434 



PAGE 

Langford (1842), C. & Mar. 602 

765, 1225 

Langhurst (1866), 10 Cox, 353 102 

Langley (1703), 6 Mod. 125 1245 

— V, Bombay Tea Co. 

[1900] 2 Q. B. 460 ... 1273 
Langmead (1864), L. & C. 427 ... 732 
Langton (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 296 ... 49, 491 
Lapier (1784), 1 Leach, 320 ... 534, 597, 

639, 642 

Lara (1796), 6 T. R. 565 703, 721 

Larkin (1854), Dears. 365 344 

Larkins (1911), 75 J. P. 320 334 

Larner (1880), 14 Cox, 497 715 

Latham (1864), 5 B. & S. 635 ... 58, 108, 

219 220 
Latimer (1851), 15 Q. B. 1077. ..138, 1253n. 

— (1886), 17 Q. B. D. 359 

800, 889, 939, 942 
Laugher (1846), 2 C. & K. 225 ... 22, 388 
Laughton v. Sodor & Man 
(Bishop of) (1872), L. R. 4 P. C. 

495 ... 1251 
Launock v. Brown (1819), 2 B. & 

' Aid. 592 ... 904 
Laurens (1915), 11 Cr. App. R. 

215 ... 634 

Laurent (1898), 62 J. P. 250 382 

Lautour v. Teesdale (1816), 8 

Taunt. 830 ... 1298 
Lavender (1793), 2 East, P. C. 566 530 
Lavey (1776), 1 Leach, 153 1094 

— (1850), 3 C. & K. 26 1185 

Law (1862), 2 F. & F. 836 18 

— [1900] 1 Q. B. 605 285, 1405 

Lawes (1843), 1 C. & K. 62 669 

Lawford b. Davis (1878), 4 P. D. 

61 ... 1300 

Lawley (1731), 2 Str. 904 131, 1202 

Lawrence (1830), 4 C. & P. 231 

664, 665, 668 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 901 ... 102 

— (1850), 4 Cox, 440 533 

— (1877), 36 L. T. 404 ... 699 

— (1909), 25 T. L. R. 374 205 

— V. Hedger (1810), 3 

Taunt. 14 ... 1002 

— u. Smith (1822), Jacob, 

471 ... 1163 
Laws 0. Eltringham (1881), 8 Q. B. 

D. 283 ... 801 

Lawson [1905] 1 K. B. 541 628, 630 

Layburn v. Crisp (1838), 4 M. & 

W. 320 ... 425 

Layer (1722), 16 St. Tr. 93 ... 167, 354, 

394, 1065, 1066 

Layton (1849), 4 Cox, 149 13 

Lea (1837), 2 Mood. 9 160 

— c. Charrington (1889), 23 

Q. B. D. 45, 272 ... 1036 

Leach [1912] A. C. 305 468, 1031, 

1042, 1293 

— u. Simpson (1839), 5 M. & 

W. 309 ... 433 

Leake (1833), 5 B. & Ad. 469 ... 1361, 

1364, 1365 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Leate, 12 Co. Rep. 15 822 

Leatham (1860), 8 Cox, 425 127 

— (1860), 8 Cox, 498 394 

— (1861), 3 E. & E. 658 ... 125 
Leavett v. Clark [1915] 3 K. B. 9 557 
Lebern, Ex parte (1907), 21 Cox, 

431 ... 1005 
Leckhampton Quarries Co. v. 
Ballinger (1904), 68 J. P. Rep. 

464 ... 1361 
Ledbetter (1850), 3 C. & K. 108 ... 432 

Ledbitter (1825), l.Mood. 76 1214 

Ledger (1862), 2 F. & F. 857 890 

Leddington (1839), 9 C. & P. 79 ... 1447 
Ledgingham (1670), 1 Vent. 97, 

104 ... 221n. 
Ledwith v. Catchpole (1783), Cald. 

291 ... 1002 
Lee (1600), 1 St. Tr. 1403 1065 

— (1689), Cas. (K. B.) temp. 

Hardw. 371, cit. ... 671 

— (1766), 1 Russ. Cr. (7th ed.) 

508 ... 1191 

— (1804), 5 Esp. 123 1125 

— (1818), R. & R: 361 455 

— (1834), 6 C. & P. 536 1455 

— (1848), 3 Cox, 80 811 

— (1859), 8 Cox, 233 702 

— (1863), L. & C. 309 698, 701 

— (1864), 4 F. & F. 63 ... 432, 434, 435 

— (1908), 72 J. P. 253 1104 

— (1911), 7 Cr. App. R. 31 372 

— V. Bayes (1856), 18 C. B. 599 291 

— v. Boothby (1665), 1 Keb. 720 428 

— V. Butler [1893] 2 Q. B. 318 297 

— V. Dangar [1892] 1 Q. B. 231 ; 

2 Q. B. 337 ... 1206 

— V. Gansel (1774), 1 Cowp. 1 ... 660 

— D. Risdon (1816), 7 Taunt. 188 542 
Lee's Case (1671), 1 Ventr. 105 ... 1387n. 
Leech (1821), 3 Stark. (N, P.) ... 610 

— (1856), 7 Cox, 100 708 ' 

Leeds v. Cook (1803), 4 Esp. 256 ... 482 

Leefe (1809), 2 Camp. 134 1196 

Lee Kun [1916] 1 K. B. 337 200 

Lefroy (1872), L. R. 8 Q. B. 134 ... 1216 

Leggett (1838), 8 C. & P. 191 ... 886 
Lehwess (1904), 140 Cent. Cr. Ct. 

Sess. Pap. 731 ... 1205 
Leicester u. Cherryman [1907] 
2 K. B. 101 

294, 298 
Leicestershire (JJ.) (1813), 1 M. & 

Sel. 442 ... 231 
Leigh (1764), 1 Leach, 52 599 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 915 17 

Le Mesurier v. Le Mesurier [1895] 

A. C. 517 ... 1305, 1306 
Le Neve w. Mile End (Vestry) 

(1858), 8 E. & B. 1054 ... 1362 

Leng (1858), 1 F. & F. 77 1469 

— (1870), 34 J. P. 309 1246 

Lennard (1772), 1 Leach, 90 1111 

Lennox v. Stoddart [1902] 2 K. B. 

21 ... 1340, 1341 
Leonard (1842), (unreported) 673 



PAGE 

Leonard (1848), 1 Den. 304 715 

Leopard u. Liloun (1897) (unre- 
ported) ... 1420 

Leprue (1866), 30 J. P. 723 1357 

Lesbini [1914] 3 K, B. 1116 881 

Lesley (1860), Bell, 220 ... 33, 1000, 1006 
Leslie, Ex parte. He Guerrier 

(1882), 20 Ch. D. 131 ... 292 
Lever (1838), 1 Vi^il. Wol. & Hod. 

35 ... 112 
Levcrson (1869), L. R. 4 Q. B. 394 105 
Levett (1639), Cro. Car. 538, cit. 

25, 886 
Levi (1865), L. & C. 597 1262 

— V. Levi (1833), 6 C. & P. 239 1420 

Levine (1867), 10 Cox, 374 701 

Levinger (1870), L. R. 3 P. C. 282 

188, 191 
Levy (1858), 8 Cox, 73 1469 

— [1912] 1 K. B. 158 343, 1451 

— V. Edvpards (1823), 1 C. & 

P. 40 ... 934 

Lewis (1679), 7 St. Tr. 250 73 

— (1726), 2 Str. 704 112 

— (1754), Fost. 116 805 

— (1769), 4 Burr. 2456 Ill 

— (1827), 2 C. & P. 623 665 

— (1833), 6 C. & P. 161 909 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 523 915 

— (Cadwalader) (1840) (un- 

reported) ... 834 

— (1857), Dears. & B. 182 ... 29, 34 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 404 1420 

— (1909), 78 L. J. K. B. 722 

221, 222, 223, 336 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 96 ... 728 

— Ex parte (1888), 21 Q. B. 

D. 191 ... 1220 

— V. Harris (1914), 110 L. T. 

337 39' 

— V. Levy (1858), E. B. & e! 

537 ... 1124, 1125 

— I). Owen [1894] 1 Q. B. 102 962 
-^ V. Sapio (1827), M. & M. 

39 ... 446 

— V. Walter (1821), 4 B. & 

Aid. 605 ... 1124 
Leworthy u. Rees (1913), 23 Cox, 

522 555 
Leyfield's Case (1610), 10 Co. Rep. 

92 b, 93 ... 403, 420, 443 
Leyman u. Latimer (1877), 3 

Ex. D. 15 ... 1246 

Leyton (1640), Cro. Car. 584 100 

Liebman v. Pooley (1860), 1 Stark. 

(N. P.) 167 ... 450 
Light (1857), Dears. & B. 332 •. 900 

— (1915), 84 L. J. (K. B.) 

865 ... 713, 718 
Lightfoot I/. Cameron (1777), 2 

W. Bl. 1113 ... 484 

Lillyman [1896] 2 Q. B. 167 ... 372, 1022, 

1028, 1030, 1033, 1051 

Lince (1873), 12 Cox, 451 710 

Lincoln (Mayor of) (1838), 8 A. & 

E. 65 ... 1377 



TABLE OF CASES. 



xci 



PACE 

Lincoln's (Earl of) Case, Sir W. 

Jones, 152 ... 476 
Lindo V. Belisaro (1795), 1 Hagg. 

(Consist. Rep.) 216 ... 1296 
Lindsay (1704), 14 St. Tr. 987 ... 10 

— (1902), 66 J. P. 605 ... 1295, 

1298 
Lines (1844), 1 C. & K. 393 1023 

— [1902] 1 K. B. 199 968, 1383 

Linford v. Fitzroy (1849), 13 O. B. 

240 ... 87. 89, 90 
Lingate, 1 Phill. Ev. (7th ed.) 414 390 
Linneker [1906] 2 K. B. 99 ... 914, 941, 

1433n. 

Linsberg (1905), 69 J. P. 107 930, 

1001 
Lisburn (Borough of) (1863), Wolf. 

& B. 221 ... 1390 
Lister (1856), Dears. & B. 118 ... 617 

Lithgo (1818), R. & R. .357 680 

Little (1821), R. & R. 430 170 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 559 523 

— (1883), 15 Cox, 319 490 

Liverpool S.P.C.C. v. Jones, 30 

T. L. R. 584 ... 991, 996 
Liverpool (Mayor) (1802), 3 East, 

86 ... 1365 

Lloyd (1767), 2 East, P. C. 1122 ... 683 

— (1803), 4 Esp. 200 1309 

— (1808), 1 Camp. 260 1360 

— (1830), 4 C. & P. 233 377 

— (1832), 4 B. & Ad. 135 226 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 318 ... 962, 1023 

— V. Passingham (1809), 16 

Ves. 59, 84 ... 475 
Lock (1872), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 10 

1032, 1050 
Locke-King v. Woking U. D. C. 

(1897), 14 T. L. R. 32 ... 1355 
Lockett (1772), 1 Leach, 94 ... 805, 813 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 300 ... 1385, 

1437 

— [1914] 2 K. B. 720 58, 726 

Lockhart (1785), 2 East, P. C. 658 394 
Lockley (1864), 4 F. & F. 155 ... 901 
Lockwood V. Cooper [1903] 2 K. B. 

428 ... 1334 

Locost (1664), Kel. (J.) 30 667 

Loggen (1718), 1 Str. 74 1207 

LoUey (1812), 2 CI. & F. 567n. 

1305, 1306 
Lomas (1913), 30 T. L. R. 125 

336, 1444 
London (Mayor) (1719), 1 Str. 307 418 

— (1844), 5 Q. B. 555 437 

— (1858), E. B. & E. 509 ... 298 

— (1866), 16 Q. B. 772 1245 

— (1870), L. R. 4 Q. B. 371 

293 297 

— (1871), 12 Cox, 50 'll88 

— (1886), 16 Cox, 77 69 

London and Globe Finance Cor- 
poration, Re tl903] 1 Ch. 728 

627, 631, 711, 833 



PAGE 

London, Brighton, etc.. Rail. Co. 
V. Truman (1885), 11 App. Cas. 

45 ... 1313 
London County Council, Ex parte 
Keys [1914] 3 K. B. 

310 ... 269 
— Worley [1894] 2 Q. B. 

826 ... 6» 
Long (St. John) (1830-1), 4 C. & 

P. 398, 423 ... 876, 877 
Longbottom (1849), 3 Cox, 439 ... 891 

Longden (1812), R. & R. 228 900 

Longland (1895), 6 Queensland 

L. J. 56 ... 189n. 
Longstreeth (1826), 1 Mood. 137 

517, 519, 523 
Longton Gas Co. (1860), 2 E. & E. 

651 ... 1354 
Lonsdale (Lord) o. Rigg (1857), 

1 H. & N. 923 ... 544 
Lopez (1858), Dears. & B. 525 

24, 33, 36 
Lord (1905), 69 J. P. 467 633 

— (1908), 1 Cr. App. R. 110 ... 339 
Lordsmere (1850), 15 Q. B. 689 

1361, 1362 
— (1886), 16 Cox, 65 ... 1368, 

1371 
Lort u. Button (1876), 45 L. J. 

(M. C.) 95 ... 457 
Loughborough Highway Bd. v. 

Curzon (1886), 16 Q. B. D. 565 ... 1348 
Loughran (1839), 1 Crawf. & Dix. 

(C. C. Ir.) 79 ... 1202 
Louw (1904), 21 Cape S. C. 36 ... 1070 
Lovat (Lord) (1746), 18 St. Tr. 

529 ... 354, 355, 1066 
Lovegrove [1920] 3 K. B. 643 ... 356, 359 
Lovelass (1834), 2 M. & Rob. 349 1130 
Lovell (1839), 2 M. & Rob. 236 

606, 620 

— (1881), 8 Q. B. D. 185 ... 516, 

525, 640 

— u. Beauchamp [1894] A. C. 

607 ... 13, 1264 

Lovett (1839), 9 C. & P. 432 ... 174, 192, 

487, 1117, 1121 

— (1870), 11 Cox, 602 290 

Lovibond (1871), 19 W. R. 753 ... 5 

Low (1866), 10 Cox, 168 604 

Lowdens u. Keaveney [1903] 2 Ir. 

Rep. 82 ... 1354 

Lowden [1914] 1 K. B. 144 850 

Lowe (1883), 52 L. J. (M. C.) 122 

410, 428 

— (1850), 3 C. & K. 123 ... 890, 893 
Lowicke (1696), 13 St. Tr. 267 

354, 1066 
Lowrie (1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 61 569 
Lows V. Telford (1876), 1 App. 

Cas. 414 ... 1231 
Lucas (1823), 2 Fox & Sm. 

(K. B. Ir.) 30 ... 113 

Luck (1862), 3 F. & F. 483 1438 

Luckhurst (1853), Dears. 245 388 

Lucy (1842), C. & Mar. 511 1399 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Ludlow (Mayor, etc.) v. Charlton 

(1840), 9 C. & P. 242 ... 425 
Lumley (1869), L. K. 1 C. C. R. 

196 ... 400, 401, 1302 

— (1912), 22 Cox, 635 889 

Lund (1921), 16 Cr. App. R. 31 ... 1305 

Lunny (1854), 6 Cox, 477 371 

Lutterell d. Reynell (1671), 1 Mod. 

282 292 

Lydford [1914] 2 K. B. 378 '.'.'. 248 

Lyell V. Kennedy (1889), 14 App. 

Cas. 437 ... 368, 415, 1297 

Lynch (1832), 5 C. & P. 324 884 

— [1898] 1 Q. B. 61 1286 

— [1903] 1 K. B. 744 ... 10, 30, 76, 

100, 104, 122, 174, 434, 

1055, 1064, 1074, 1076 

Lynn (1788), 2 T. R. 733 1346 

— (1824), 1 C. & P. 527 1355 

Lyon (1793), 2 Leach, 597, 608 ... 50, 815 

— (1813), R. & R. 255 807, 837 

— B. Fishmongers Co. (1876), 

1 App. Cas. 662 ... 13.58 
Lyons (1778), 1 Leach, 185 659 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 217 732 

— (1858), Bell, 38 738 

— V. Wilkins (No. 1) [1896] 

1 Ch. 811 ... 1284 

— V. (No. 2) [1899] 1 Ch. 

255 ... 1283, 1284 



M. (1908), 72 J. P. 214 924 

Mabbett (1851), 5 Cox, 339 872 

Mabel (1840), 9 C. & P. 474 ....'..... 965 
Mabin (1901), 20 N. Z. L. R. 451 1239 
Macarthy (1842), C. & Mar. 625 ... 102 
Macauley (1783), 1 Leach, 287 ... 639 

McAthey (18G2), L. & C. 250 729 

McCabe ;;. Joynt [1901] 2 Ir. Rep. 

115 ... 1251 
McCatterty (1867), 10 Cox, 603 

780, 1066, 1067 
MacCann (1798), 27 St. Tr. 399 ... 1075 
— (1910), 6 Cr. App. R. 115 254 
McCarthy [1903] 2 Ir. Rep. 146 

907, 1283 
McCarther (1793), 1 Peake, 211 

(3rd ed.) ... 453, 477 
McCartie (1859), 11 Ir. Rep. C. L. 

188 87 93 
McClarens (1849), 3 Cox, 425 ... 23, i452 
McClatchie v. Haslam (1891), 

17 Cox, 402 ... 1210n. 
Macclesfield (Earl) (1725), 16^ St. 

Tr. 767 ... 1155, 1205 

— u. Starkey (1684), 10 

St. Tr. 1329 ... 78 

— (1831), 2 B. & Ad. 

870 ... 660 
McCluskey (1921), 15 Cr. App. R. 

148 ... 284 
McConnell (1844), 1 C. & K. 371 813 
McCormick (1964), 17 Ir. C. L. R. 

411 ... 88 



McCraw v. Gentry (1812), 3 Camp. 

232 ... 444 

McCuUey (1838), 2 Mood. 34 548 

Macdaniel (1756), 19 St. Tr. 745 

642, 871, 1422, 1443, 1450 
McDermott (1813), R. & R. 356 ... 938 

— Re (1866), L. R. 1 

P. C. 260; 2 P. C. 341 ... 1216 
Maodouald (1747), 18 St. Tr. 857 

10, 1064 

— (1861), L. & C. 85.. .611, 612 

— (1885), 15 Q. B. D. 323 

12 538 

— or McDonell (1909),' 

73 J. P. 490 ... 459, 460 
Macdougall u. Knight (1886), 17 

Q. B. D. 636 ... 1251 

— ... (1889), 14 App. 

Cas. 194 ... 1124, 1251 

— c. (1890), 25 

Q. B. D. 1 ... 1251 

Mace (1886), 50 J. P. 776 1013 

M'Dowell V. Dublin (Mayor) [1903] 

2 Ir. Rep. 541 ... 400, 800 
McEneany (1878), 2 L. R. Ir. 236 121 

McFarlane [1920] 2 K. B. 183 460 

Macterson v. Thoytes (1790), Peake 

(3rd ed.), 29 ... 446n. 
McGavaran (1852), 6 Cox, 64 ... 206, 1034 
McGee (1895), 6 Queensland L. J. 

151 ... 1021n. 

McGinnes (1870), 11 Cox, 391 24 

McGowan (1858), 11 Ir. C. L. R. 

207, cit. ... 191 
MacGrath (18701, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

205 ... 516, 525, 640 

McGrath (1881), 14 Cox, 598 762 

MacGregor (1844), 1 C. & K. 429 

32, 653 

— u. Thwaites (1824), 3 B. 

& C. 24 ... 1124 
McGrowther (1746), 18 St. Tr. 391 

21, 1070, 1439 
McGuire (1645), 4 St. Tr. 653 1054 

— (1801), 2 East, P. C. 1002 835 

— (1898), 34 New Bruns. 

430 ... 72, 185n. 

Machardy [1911] 2 K. B. 1144 ... 231 

McHugh [1901] 2 Ir. Rep. 569 ... 1125, 

1126, 1216 

Machynlleth and Pennegoes (1822), 

2 B. & C. 166 ... 1376 
Mcintosh (1800), 2 Leach, 833 ... 811, 837 

— V. Dun [1908] A. C. 390 ... 1251 

Mclntyre (1847), 2 Cox, 379 869 

McKale (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

125 522 
Mackalley (1611), 9 Co. Rep. 65 6 

211, 1440, 1443 
Mackarty (1706), 2 Ld. Raym. 

1179; 3 ib. 325 2, 1287, 1419 

Mackay (1868), 11 Cox, 148 375 

McKearney (1829), Jebb (C. Ct. 

Ir.), 99 ... 669 
McKeay (1826), 1 Mood. 130 810 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

McKeever (1871), Ir. Rep. 5 C. L. 

86 ... 62, 753 

McKeevit (1880) (unreported) 1283 

MoKenzie (1820), R. & R. 429 ... 8, 224 

— [1892] 2 Q. B. 519 1285 

Mackenzie & Higginson (1911), 

75 J. P. 159 ... 1036, 
1417, 1427 
— V. Hawke [1902] 2 

K. B. 216 ... 1346 
Mackerel (1831), 4 C. & P. 448 ... 769 
Mackney (1903), 29 Vict. L. R. 22 

1010, 1013 
Maclane (1797), 26 St. Tr. 722 ... 1074 
McLauchlan (1911), 75 J. P. 8 

554, 1383 
McLean [1911] 1 K. B. 333 ... 227, 339 
McLeod (1802), 2 East, 202 129 

— (1874), 12 Cox, 534 876 

— V. Att.-Gen. for N. S. W. 

[1891] A. C. 455 ... 29, 30, 
1292n. 

— u. St. Aubyn [1899] A. C. 

549 ... 1215, 1216 

— V. Wakley (1828), 3 C. & 

P. 311 ... 1250 
McLoughlin (1838), 8 C. & P. 635 938 
— Re (1878), 1 L. R. Ir. 

421 ... 1298 
McMahon (1875), 13 Cox, 275 {Ir.) 732 
— (1894), 13 N. S. W. 

Rep. (Law) 131. ..1103, 1104 
McMakin (1808), R. & R. 333n. ... 1436 
McNair a909), 2 Cr. App. R. 2 ... 337 
Macnamara (1890), 20 Ontario, 

489 ... 1329n. 

McNamee (1832), 1 Mood. 368 530 

McNaughten (1881), 14 Cox, 576 

888 1219 
Macnaughton (1843), 4 St. Tr! 

(N. S.) 847 ... 15, 16, 17, 18 
McNee v. Persian Investment Cor- 
poration (1889), 44 Ch. D. 306 ... 1344 
McNeill (1907), Vict. L. R. 265 ... 372 
McPherson (1857), Dears. & B. 

197 ... 4, 215, 673, 1432 
McQueen u. Jackson [1903] 2 K. B. 

163 ... 1289 
McQuire i^. Western Morning 

[1903] 2 K. B. 100 ... 1250 

McRue (1838), 8 C. & P. 641 1023 

Madan (1780), 1 Leach, 223 1182 

Maddy (1672), 1 Ventr. 158 882 

Maden v. Catanacli (1862), 7 H. & 

N. 360 ... 454, 478 
Madercine (1899), 20 N. S. W. 

Rep. (Law) 36 ... 1317n. 
Madge and Armstrong (1894), 29 

L. J. Newsp. 301 ... 84 

Madox (1805), R. & R. 92 599 

Magee (ineert.), Rowe (K. B. Ir.) 

416 ... 127, 128 
Magellan Pirates, The (1853), 

1 Eccl. & Adm. (Spinks) 81 ... 653 
Maguire v. Liverpool Corporation 

[1905] 1 R. B. 767 ,.. 1347 



PAGE 

Mahon (1826), 4 A. & E. 575 ... 138, 929 

Mahony (1854), 6 Cox, 487 837 

Malnwaring. See Manwaring. 
Makin v. Att.-Gen. for N. S. W. 

[189?] A. C. 57 ... 354, 355, 357, 
358, 359 
Male and Cooper (1893), 17 Cox, 

689 392 

Malings (1838), 8 C. & P. 242 '.'.'. 203 

Mallison (1902), 20 Cox, 204 545 

Mallory (1884), 13 Q. B. D. 33 ... 385 

Maloney (1861), 9 Cox, 6, 26 865 

Malton, L. B. v. Malton Farmers 
Trading Co. (1879), 4 Ex. D. 302 1312 

Malvisi (1909), 73 J. P. 392 460 

Manby v. Witt (1856), 18 C. B. 544 1250 
Manchester (Justices) [1899] 1 Q. B. 

571 ... 132 
— (Mayor, etc.) (1857), 

7 E. & B. 453 ... 117 

Manldetow (1853), Dears. 159 1009 

Manley (1844), 1 Cox, 104 ... 1435, 1445 

— (incerl), Rowe (Ir. K. B.) 

646 ... 133 
Mann (1815), 4 M. & Sel. 337 1373 

— (1885), 49 J. P. 743 378 

— [1914] 2 K. B. 107 918 

— V. Brodie (1885), 10 App. 

Cas. 378, 386 ... 1360 
Manners (1837), 7 C. & P. 801 ... 1436 

— V. Postan (1803), 3 B. & 

P. 343 ... 444 

— ... Tyler [1902] 1 K. B. 

585 ... 1290 
Manning (1672), Sir. T. Raym. 212 882 

— (1849), 2 C. & K. 903n. 

22, 23, 1439, 1452 

— (1849), 1 Den. 467 188 

— (1852), Dears. 2l' 513 

— (1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

338 ... 744 

— (1883), 12 Q. B. D. 241- 

210, 211, 1425 

Mannion (1846), 2 Cox, 158 (Jr.) 32 
Mansell (1857), 8 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

831 ... 62, 176, 179, 190, 198 

Mansfield (1841), C. & Mar. 140 356 
Manwaring (1856), Dears. & B. 

132 ... 402, 451, 1294, 1297 

Manzano (1860), 2 F. & F. 64 ... 203 
Mapleback, Re (1877), 4 Q. B. D. 

150 ... 1210n. 
Mappin Bros. o. Liberty & Co. 

[1903] 1 Ch. 118 ... 1364 

March (1844), 1 C. & K. 496 930 

Marcus (1846), 2 C. & K. 356 833 

— V. Crook [1914] 3 K. B. 

173 ... 1290 

Margetts (1801), 2 Leach, 930 ... 662 
Markham v. Cobbe, Sir W. 

Jones, 147; Noy, 81 ... 292 

Marks (1802), 3 East, 157 1130 

— (1866), 10 Cox, 367 606 

— V. Beyfus (1890), 25 Q. B. 

D. 494 ... 473 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Marks v. Frogley [1898] 1 Q. B. 

396, 888 ... 1005 
Markuss (1864), 4 F. & F. 356 

876, 890 
Marlborough (Duke), Ex* parte 

(1844,) 5 Q. B. 955 ... 132, 1216 
Marriott (1838), 8 C. & P. 425 

2, 871, 872 

— (1911), 75 J. P. 288 ... 382, 440 
Marsden (1829), M. & M. 439 ... 129 

— (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

131 ... 900, 965 

— [1891] 2 Q. B. 149 1016, 1023, 

1028, 1030 

— Ex parte (1876), 2 Ch. D. 

786 ... 1259, 1265 

Marsella (1901), 17 T. L. R. 164 ... 432 

Marsh (1837), 6 A. & E. 236 ... 62, 76, 

78, 101 

— (1849), 1 Den. 505 718, 1432 

— (1862), 3 F. & F. 523 606 

— V. Colinet (1798), 2 Esp. 

665 ... 444 

— u. Keating (1834), 1 Mont. 

& A. 592 ... 291 

— V. Loader (1863), 14 C. B. 

(N. S.) 535 ... U 

Marshall (1811), 13 East, 322 135 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 147 ... 433 

— (1855), 4 E. & B. 475 ... 132 

— (1870), 11 Cox, 490 613 

— (1899), 34 L. J. Newsp. 

48 ... 105 

— (1899), 63 J. P. 36 463 

— (1910), 74 J. P. 380 1475 

Marsham, Ex parte; Pethick 

Lawrence [1912] 2 K. B. 362 ... 158 
Marson v. L. C. & D. Rail. Co. 

(1868), L. R. 6 Eq. 101 ... 681 
Martin (incerf.), Rowe (Ir. K. B.), 

726 ... 133 
-^ (1801), 2 Leach, 923 '..'. 1105 

— (1806), R. & R. 108 658 

— (1811), R. & R. 198 1171 

— (1817), R. & R. 324 855 

^ (1827), 3 C. & P. 211 896 

— (1832), 5 C. & P. 128 869 

— (1834), 6 C. & P. 562 ... 365, 1022 

— (1881), 14 Cox, 633 352, 401 

— (1838), 8 A. & E. 481 51 

— (1839), 9 C. & P. 213 ... 3, 1431 

— (1848), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 925 

61, 62, 195, 197 
' — (1849), 1 Den. 398 152, 343 

— (1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

58 ... 714 

— (1867), The Times, Nov. 7 897 

— (1869), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

214 ... 1106 

— (1872), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 378 

114, 207, 338, 344, 346, 347n. 

— (1880), 5 Q. B. D. 34 ... 703, 805 

— (1881), 8 Q. B. D. 54 ... 872, 

910, 942 

— (1889), 17 Cox, 36 987 



, PAGE 

Martin (1904), 4 N. S. W. State 

Rep. 720 ... 343n., 1201n. 

— (1905), 9 Canada Cr. Cas. 

371 ... 460 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 31 ... 1475 

— V. Benjamin [1907] 1 K. B. 

64 ... 1334 

— V. White [1910] 1 K. B. 665 

422, 1461, 1466, 1469 
Martindale v. Falkner (1846), 2 

C. B. 706 ... 402 
Mash V. Darley [1914] 3 K. B. 1226 

422, 457 

Mason (1756), Fost. 132 874, 885 

-- (1792), 1 East, 180n 50 

— (1792), 2 East, P. C. 975 ... 50 

— (1820), R. & R. 419 639 

— (1848), 2 C. & K. 622 835 

— (1912), 76 J. P. 184 451 

— (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 121 ... 883 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 169 

361, 363, 835 
Massey u. Morris [1894] 2 Q. B. 412 1388 
Master v. Miller (1791), 4 T. R. 320 

292, 1204 
Masters (1848), 1 Den. 332 ...'340, 346, 

614 

Mastin (1834), 6 C. & P. 396 892 

Mather (1733), 2 Barnard (K. B.) 

249 ... 133 
Mathieson (1906), 25 N. Z. L. R. 

879 ... 20n. 
Mathurin (1903), 12 Quebec L. R. 

(K. B.) 494 ... 76, 173n., 196n. 
Matthews (1719), 15 St. Tr. 1323 ... 1120 

— (1850), 1 Den. 596 23 

— (1873), 12 Cox, 489 529 

— (1876), 14 Cox, 5 771 

Mattison v. Johnson (1916), 85 

L. J. (K. B.) 741 ... 1327 
Maunsell (1839), 1 Ir. Law Rep. 

257 134 

Mawbey (1796), 6 T. R. 619 ... 347, 415, 
1187, 1422, 1424 
Mawgan in Meneage (1838), 8 A. & 

E. 496 ... 8, 225, 1349 
Mawgridge (1706), 17 St. Tr. 57 

878, 881, 883, 885 
Maxtield (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 230 1474 

Maxwell (1909), 73 J. P. 176 964 

May (1861), L. & C. 13 612 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 448 920 

— (1900), 64 J. P. 570 49 

— [1912] 3 K. B. 572 1034 

— V. Waters [1910] 1 K. B. 431 555 

Maybury (1864), 4 F. & F. 90 1356 

Mayers (1872), 12 Cox, 311 1019 

Mayhew (1834), 6 C. & P. 315 1191 

Mayle (1868), 11 Cox, 150 613 

Maynard (1774), 2 East, P. C. 501 662 

— (1812), R. & R. 240 ... 140, 920 

Mayne (1883), 32 W. R. 95 187 

Mazagora (1815), R. & R. 291 ... 401, 833 
Mazeau (1840), 9 C. & P. 676 ... 838, 1435 
Mead (1823), 3 D. & R. 301 113 

-r (1824), 2 B. & C. 605 377 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Mead (1831), 4 C. & P. 535 570 

— V. Young (1790), 4 T. R. 28 806 
Meade (1903), 19 T. L. R. 540 1315 

— [1909] 1 K. B. 895 ...'20, 352, 400 
Meadham (1848), 2 C. & K. 633 ... 1382 
Meadows (1844), 1 C. & K. 399 ... 1010 

— (1856), 2 Jur. (N. S.) 716 203 

Meakin (1869), 11 Cox, 270 700 

Meal (1848), 3 Cox, 70 666 

Mean (1904), 69 J. P. 27 356, 1340 

Meany (1862), L. & C. 213 219 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 506 (Ir.) ... 1078 

Mears (1851), 2 Den. 79 1419 

Medland (1851), 5 Cox, 292 537 

Medley (1834), 6 C. & P. 292 1311 

Medlicot o. Joyner (1669), 1 Mod. 

4 ... 443 
Mee u. Cruikshank (1902), 20 Cox, 

210 ... 227, 1000 

— V. Reid (1791), Peake (3rd ed), 

33 ... 453 
Meek (1840), 9 C. & P. 513 ... 1187, 1191 
Meekins v. Smith (1791), 1 H. Bl. 

629 ... 484 
Meers v. Lord Stourton (1711), 1 

P. Wms. 146 ... 476 
Megson (1840), 9 C. & P. 418 ... 372, 376 

Mehan [1905] 2 Ir. Rep. 577 1476 

Meigh (1857), 7 Cox, 401 815 

Meikleham (1906), 11 Ontario L. R. 

366 ... 33n. 
Melik (1916), 12 Cr. App. R. 100 ... 219 

Mellish (1805), R. & R. 80 607 

Mellor (1805), R. & R. 144 39 

— (1830), 1 B. & Ad. 32 1360 

— (1858), Dears. & B. 468 

179, 344, 347n. 

— u. AValmesley [1905] 2 Ch. 

164 ... 374 
Melville (Lord) (1806), 29 St. Tr. 

549 ... 406 
Menage (1862), 3 F. & F. 310... 685, 689 

Mence (1841), C. & Mar. 234 591 

Mendez v. Villa Real (1734) Cas. 

(K. B.) temp. Hardw. 18 ... 426 
Mercer v. Denne [1905] 2 Ch. 538 

374, 403, 412 

— u. Woodgate (1869), L. R. 

5 Q. B. 26 ... 1362 
Merceron (1818), 2 Star. (N. P.) 

366 ... 384 
Meredith (1838), 8 C. & P. 589 ... 932, 
962, 1032 
Merivale v. Carson (1888), 20 

Q. B. D. 275 ... 1250 
Merriman (1907), Victoria L. R. 1 730n. 
— V. Chippenham (Hun- 
dred) (1768), 2 East, P. C. -709 ... 641 
Merry (1900), 19 Cox, 442 1033 

— V. Green (1841), 7 M. & 

• W. 623 ... 529 
Merthyr Tydfil (Justices) (1894), 

10 T. L. R. 375 ... 1026 
Messenger (1668), 6 St. Tr. 879 ... 1070 
Messer (1913), 82 L. J. (K. B.) 913 633 
Metcalf (1848), 3 Cox, 220 179, 208 



PAGE 

Metcalfe (Johnson) (1862), Yorks 

Spring Assizes MS. ... 435n. 

— (1913), 29 T. L. R. 512 ... 227 
Metropolitan Asylums Managers 

V. Hill (1881), 6 App. Cas. 193 

1311, 1318 
Metropolitan Bank v. Pooley 

(1885), 10 App. Cas. 210 ... 1203 
Metle D. Mette (1858), 28 L. J. 

(Matr.) 117 ... 1301 
Metz (1915), 11 Cr. App. R. 164... 69, 122 

Meunier, fie [1894] 2 Q. B. 415 455 

Mexborough (Earl) v. Whilwood 
Chemical Manure Co. [1897] 2 

Q. B. Ill ... 469 

Miard (1844), 1 Cox, 22 684 

Michael (1840), 9 C. & P. 356 ... 875, 

909, 1435 

Michell (1880), 50 L. J. (M. C.) 76 1263 

— D. Brown (1858), 1 E. & 

E. 267 .... 6 

Middleditch (1845), 1 Den. 92 686 

Middlehurst (fie Bowman) (1757), 

1 Burr. 399 ... 353 
Middlesex (Justices) (1834), 5 B. & 

Ad. 1113 ... 62, 160 

— (1843), 2 Dowl. (N. S.) 

719 ... 65 

Middleship (1851), 5 Cox, 275 873 

Middleton (Lord) (1713) 1074 

— (1873), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

38 ... 526 
Midland Insurance Co. v. Sniith 

(1881), 6 Q. B. D. 561 ... 292 
Midwinter (1749), Fost. App. 415 1443n. 

Mierre (1771), 5 Burr. 2787 1387n. 

Migotti V. Colvill (1869), 4 C. P. D. 

233 232 1000 
Mildrone (1786), 1 Leach, 412... 453, 477 
Miles (1779), 1 Doug. 284 131, 136 

— (1890), 24 Q. B. D. 423 ... 155, 

156, 161, 162 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 13 156 

— V. Hutchings [1903] 2 K. B. 

714 ... 789 
MiUssich u. Lloyds (1877), 46 L. J. 

(C. P.) 404 ... 1124, 1251 

Millar (1837), 7 C. & P. 665 42, 574 

Millard (1813), R. & R. 245 363, 834 

Miller (1772), 2 W. Bl. 797 ... 164, 1182 

— (1841), 2 Mood. 249 608 

— (1853), 3 Cox, 353 (Ir.) 729 

— (1876), 13 Cox, 179 1011 

— (1879), 14 Cox, 356.. .214, 909, 940 

— (1895), 18 Cox, 54 390 

— (1901), 65 J. P. 313 990 

— V. Race (1758), 1 Smith, 

L. C. (11th ed.) 463 ... 296 
Millewski (1908), Queensland State 

Rep. 27 ... 200/1. 

Millhouse (1885), 15 Cox, 622 204 

Milligan v. Wedge (1840), 12 A. & 

E. 737 ... 604 

Millis (1844), 10 CI. & F. 534 ... 1294, 

1296, 1298, 1306 

Mills (1857), Dears. & B. 205 713 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Mills V. CoUett (1829), 6 Bing. 85... 739 
Milner (1850), 4 Cox, 275 590 

— V. Maclean (1825), 2 C. & 

P. 17 ... 1232 

Milnes (1860), 2 F. & F. 10 ... 421, 1197 
Milton (1843), 1 C. & K. 58, 59n. 

405, 412 

— (1866), 10 Cox, 364 816 

— V. Studd (1910), 74 3. P. 217 1337 
Minet u. Morgan (1873), L. R. 8 Ch. 

App. 361 ... 471 
Minna Craig, The [1897] 1 Q. B. 55 426 
Minty o. Silvester (1915), 79 J. P. 

543 ... 1344 
Mirams v. " Our Dogs " Publish- 
ing Co. [1901] 2 K. B. 564 ... 1212 
Mitchel (1848), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 545 153 

— (1848), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 599 

188, 192, 1077, 1078 

— (1848), 3 Cox, 93 73n., 125 

Mitchell (1754), Fost. 119 813 

— (1842), 2 Q. B. 636 37 

— (1847), 1 Den. 282n 805 

— (1852), 2 Den. 468 643 

— (1860), 2 F. & F. 44 812 

— (1892), 17 Cox, 503 ... 375, 378 

— (1912), 76 J. P. 423 1475 

— Ex parte Livesey [1913] 

1 K. B. 561 ... 8, 1284 

— u. Johnson (1828), M. & 

M. 176 ... 445 

Mizen (1841), 2 M. & Rob. 382 1366 

Moah (1856), Dears. 626 , 619 

— (1858), Dears. & B. 550 803 

Moate (1832), 3 B. & Ad. 237 ... 120, 187 

Mobbs (1860), 2 F. & F. 18 102 

Mogambique (Companhia de) v. 
British S. Africa Co. [1893] A. C. 

602 ... 29 
Mockford (1868), 11 Cox, 16 ... 399, 541 
Mogan V. Caldwell (1919), 88 L. J. 

(K. B.) 1141 ... 26 
Mogg (1830), 4 C, & P. 364 ... 790, 909 
Mogul SS. Co. I). McGregor, Gow 

& Co. [1892] A. C. 25 ... 1281, 1421 
Moises o. Thornton (1799), 8 T. R. 

303 ... 416 
Moland (1843), 2 Mood. 276 ... 694, 1444, 

1457 
Mole (1844), 1 C. & K. 417 ... 527, 529 

Molieres (1758), Fost. 188n 10 

Molloy (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 75 

574, 727 

— [1921] 2 K. B. 364.. .46, 53, 573n. 

Monaghan (1870), 11 Cox, 608 954 

Money (1847), Greaves, Crim. Cons. 

Acts (2nd ed.), 112 ... 553 

Monkhouse (1849), 4 Cox, 55 20 

Monks V. Dykes (1839), 4 M. & W. 

567 ... 658 

Monson (1903), 67 J. P. 267 209 

— V. Tussauds, Ltd. [1894] 

1 Q. B. 671 ... 131, 1245, 1246 

Moody (1862), L. & C. 173 816 

Moon [1910] 1 K. B. 818 1027 



PAGE 

Moone v. Rose (1869), L. R. 4 Q. B. 

Mooney (1851), 5 Cox, 318 (Ir.) ... 375 
Moore (1784), 1 Leach, 314 ... 520, 1437 

— 1784), 1 Leach, 335 639 

— 1832), 3 B. & Ad. 184 ... 3, 1309, 
^ 1354 

— (1852), 2 Den. 522 387, 388 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 73 834 

— (1860), L. & C. 1 527 

— (1892), 61 L. J. (M. C.) 80 

346, 1193 

— (1898), 14 T. L. R. 229 879 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 54 

690, 720 
Moors (1801), 6 East, 419n. ... 369, 1129, 

1130 
Moran (1911), 75 J. P. HO ... 310, 1474 

— V. Pitt (1873), 42 L. J. 

(Q. B.) 47 ... 293 
Morant v. Chamberlin (1861), 6 H. 

& N. 541-... 1362 
Morby (1881), 8 Q. B. D. 571 ... 895n. 

Moreton (1914), 109 L. T. 416 714 

Morfit (1826), R. & R. 307 514 

Morgan (1610), 1 Bulstr. 84 216 

— (1764), 1 Leach, 54 453 

— (1780), 1 Doug. 314 134 

— (1831), 1 M. & Rob. 134n. 447n'. 

— (1852), 6 Cox, 107 1196 

— (1854), Dears. 395 521 

— (1875), 14 Cox, 337 ... 376, 377 

— (1895), 59 J. P. 827 392 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 157 463 

— (1917), 13 Cr. App. R. 2... 337 

— Re (1852), 6 Cox, 116 200 

— V. Brydges (1818), 2 Stark. 

(N. P.) 314 ... 491 

— V. McFee (1908), 14 
Canada Cr. Cas. 308 ... 1210n. 

Moriarty v. L. C. & D. Rail. Co. 

(1870), L. R. 5 Q. B. 314 ... 354 
Morley (Lord) (1666), 6 St. Tr. 769 

433, 877, 883 
Morphew (1814), 2 M. & Sel. 602... 102 
Morris (1761), 2 Burr. 1189 425 

— (1814), R. & R. 270 22, 823 

— (1820), 1 St, Tr. (N. S.) 

1021 ... 1357 

— (1830), 1 B. & Ad. 441. ..1313, 1357 

— (1839), 9 C. & P. 89 563 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 349 545 

— (1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 90 

156, 163, 866 

— V. Godfrey (1912), 76 J. P. 

297 1334 

— u. Miller (1767), 4 Burr. 

2057 ... 24 1293 
Morrison (1859), Bell, 158 .....] 571, 817 

— (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 159 

338, 463, 465 

— (1911), 75 J. P. 272 ... 206, 338 

— V. Kelly (1762), 1 W. 

Bl 385 227 

Morse [1904] W. N. 114 ..'. 1348, 1351, 

1360, 1364 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Morse (1910), 4 Cr. App, R. 50 ... 934 
Mortensen v. Peters (1906), 8 

Fraser (Just. Sc.) 93 ... 35 

Mortimer (1908), 72 J. P. 349 ... 339, 

' 527 529 

— [1911] 1 K. B. 70 ... 1340,'l341 

— V. M'Callan (1840), 6 M. 

& W. 58 ... 418 

Mortlock (1847), 7 Q. B. 459 6 

Morton (1795), 2 East, P. C. 955 ... 810 

— (1843), 2 M. & Rob. 514 .:. 392 

— (1873), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 22 808 

— (1909), 2 Cr. App. 145 340 

Moseley (1861), L. & C. 92 710 

Mosey (1784), 1 Leach, 265n 394 

Mosley (1825), 1 Mood. 97 375 

— (1835), 3 A. & E. 488.. .1386, 1387 
Moss (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 112 1340 

— V. Hancock [1899] 2 Q. B. Ill 

296 297 
Most (1881), 7 Q. B. D. 244 ... 907,'l246 

Mothersell (1718), 1 Str. 93 418 

Mott (1827), 2 C. & P. 521 1420 

Mount (1875), L. R. 6 P. C. 283 ... 237 
Mountford (1835), 7 C. & P. 242 ... 918 
Mousell Brothers, Ltd. u. L. N. 

W. Rail. Co. [1917] 2 K." B. 836 26 
Moxon (1841), 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 693 1162 
Mucklow (1827), 1 Mood.- 160.. .581, 593 
Muirhead (1908), 73 J. P. 31 ... 336, 348, 
1268 1269 
Mul Luchman (1904), 44 L. j'. 

Newsp. 60 ... 97 
Mulcahy (1868), L. R. 3 H. L. 306 

62, 154, 182, 193, 1074, 
1417, 1418, 1421, 1426 

MuUany (1865), L. & C. 593 1187 

MuUer (1864), 10 Cox, 43 494 

MuUett V. Hunt (1833), 1 Cr. & M. 

752 ... 484 
Mulligan v. Cole (1875), L. R. 10 

Q. B. 549 ... 1122 

MuUins (1848), 3 Cox, 526 ... 365, 455, 

456, 491, 1078 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 13 ... 354 

Munday (1799), 2 Leach, 850 574 

Munns (1908), 24 T. L. R. 627 ... 311 
Munroe (1820), 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

1356 ... 1070 

Munslow [1895] 1 Q. B. 758 ... 1239, 

1245, 1250 

Munson (1847), 2 Cox, 186 744 

Munton (1793), 1 Esp. 62 1154 

— (1829), 3 C. & P. 498 1196 

Murdock (1851), 2 Den. 298 ... 605, 618 
Mure V. Kaye (1811), 4 Taunt. 434 1002 
Murphy (1833), 6 C. & P. 103 ... 878, 

879, 1439 

— (1837), 8 C. & P. 297 ... 401, 

485, 1426 

— (1853), 6 Cox, 340 075 

— (1869), L. R. 2 P. C. 535 347 

— (1876), 13 Cox, 298 (Ir.) 705 
Murray (1750), 2 East, P. C. 496 ... 658 

— (1784), 1 Leach, 344 531 

— (1830), 5 C. & P. 145 ... 604, 614 

A.C.P. 



PAGE 

Murray (1852), 5 Cox, 509 (/r.) .... 892 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 80 1186 

— [1906] 2 K. B. 385 49, 661 

— (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 248 989 

— V. Benbow (1833), 4 St. 

Tr. (N. S.) 1409 ... 1163 

Murrow (1835), 1 Mood. 456 908 

Murton (1862), 3 F. & F. 492 ... 377, 869 

Mutters (1864), L. & C. 491 1315 

— (1864), L. & C. 511 538 

Mycock (1871), 12 Cox, 28 ... 1010, 1011 
Myerson (1908), 5 Aust. C. L. R. 

597 ... 219n., 513n. 
Myott (1853), 6 Cox, 406 849> 

NAGUIB [1917] 1 K. B. 359 1301 

Nash (1819), R. & R. 386 1386 

— (1852), 2 Den. 493 833 

— (1864), 4 B. & S. 935 54 

— (1903) (unreported) 1013 

Nasillski (1897), 61 J. P. 520 1296 

Nathan v. Woolf (1899), 15 T. L. R. 

250 ... 1296 

Nattrass (1882), 15 Cox, 73 742 

Naylor (1865), L. R. 1 C. C, R. 4 711 

— (1868), 11 Cox, 13 1186 

— (1910), 74 J. P. 460 911 

Neal (1835), 7 C. & P. 168 456 

Neale (1839), 9 C. & P. 431 1220 

— (1844), 1 Den. 36 1030, 1428 

Neat (1900), 69 L. J. (Q. B.) 118.. .541, 609 
Neeld d. Hendon U. D. C. (1899), 

81 L. T. 405 ... 1355, 1364 
Negus (1873), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 34 

606, 613 
Neil (1826), 2 C. & P. 485 1312 

— (1909), Queensland State Rep. 

225 ... 926n. 

Neilson (1914), 23 Cox, 685 1474 

Nelson [1902] A. C. 250 628 

— D. Whittall (1817), 1 B. & 

Aid. 19 ... 445 
Nether Hallam (1854), 6 Cox, 435... 1364 
Netherthong (1818), 2 B. & Aid. 179 1365 

Nettleton (1830), 1 Mood. 259 608 

Neville (1792), Peake (3rd ed.) ... 1312 

Newall (1852), 6 Cox, 21 1196, 1197 

Newbold (1869), 11 Cox, 231 1361 

Newboult (1872), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

344 ... 744 
Newcastle - upon - Tyne (Justices) 

(1831), 1 B. & Ad. 933 ... 1316 
Newhouse (1853), 22 L. J. (Q. B.) 

127 ... 1253n. 

Newill (1836), 1 Mood. 458 751 

Newland. See Knewland. 
Newman (1852), 2 Den. 390 ... 173, 422, 

1187 

— (1853), Dears. 85 ... 442, 1252 

— (1853), 1 E. & B. 268 ... 1123, 

1252 

— (1882), 8 Q. B. D. 706 ... 632n. 

— (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 134 209 
New Sarum (1845), 7 Q. B. 941 ... 1375 
Newton (1734), 1 Str. 413 132 

Q 



XCVUl 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Newton (1838), 2 Mood. 59 813 

— (1843), 2 M. & Rob. 503 

78 1298 

— (1844), 1 C. & K. 469 ! 402 

— (1845), 1 Cox, 195 121 

— (1849), 13 Q. B. 716 ... 218, 221 
~ (1852), 4 Cox, 262 496 

— (1859), 1 F. & F. 641. ..377, 435n. 

— [1892] 1 Q. B. 648 1326 

— (1903), 67 J. P. 453 136 

— (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 214 338 

— V. Harland (1840), 1 Scott 

(N. R.) 474 ... 1231 
TVew Windsor (Mayor) v. Taylor 

[1899] A. C. 41 ... 1374 

Nichol (1807), R. & R. 130 931 

Nicholas (1845), 1 Cox, 218 672 

— (1846), 2 C. & K. 246 ... 103, 

223 371 453 

Nicholl (1830), 1 B. & Ad. 21 ' 'U84 

Nicholls (1744), 2 Str. 1227 ... 113, 1425 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 267 ... 938 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 51 731 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 476.. .1029, 1031 

— (1874), 13 Cox, 75 872 

— V. Parker (1805), 14 East, 

331n. ... 370 
Nichols (1742), 13 East, 412n. 

113, 1425 

— (1900), 64 J. P. 217 84 

Nicholson (1794), 2 Leach, 610 516 

— (1840), 9 Dowl. 422 ... 188 

— [1899] 2 Q. B. 455 133 

— (1899), Cent. Crim. Court 1209 

— (1901) 65 J. P. 298 1234 

— V. Booth (1888), 57 L. J. 

(M. C.) 43 ... 927 
Nickless (1839), 8 C. & P. 757 ... 1385 

Nicolas (1852), 6 Cox, 120 375 

Nisbett (1852), 6 Cox, 320 810, 823 

Nixon (1719), 1 Str. 185 138 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 1040n. ... 921 
Noakes (1832), 5 C. & P. 326 ... 456, 1158 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 920 .;. 877, 890 

— (1917), 33 T. L. R. 201 431 

Noel [1914] 3 K. B. 848 ... 384; 561, 563, 

625, 633, 636 

Noon (1852), 6 Cox, 137 868, 881 

Noonan (1876), Ir. Rep. 10 C. L. 

505 ... 1234 

Norcott [1917] 1 K. B. 347 373, 1033 

Norden's Case {incert), Post. 129 638 
Norfolk County Council (1910), 

26 T. L. R. 269 ... 1373 
Norman (1842), C. & Mar. 501 ... 618 

— [1915] 1 K. B. 341 693 

Norris (1840), 9 C. & P. 241 772 

— (1917), 12 Or. App. R. 156 

335, 456, 733 
North (1795), 2 East, P. C. 1021 ... 743 
Northampton (1814), 2 M. & Sel. 

262 ... 1374 
North and South Wales Bank v. 

Macbeth [1908] A. C. 137 ... 810 
North CoUingham (1823), 1 B. & 

C. 578 ... 660 



PAGE 

North Eastern Rail. Co. (1901), 

19 Cox, 682 ... 225, 1373 
North Eastern Rail. Co. c. Dalton 

Overseers [1900] A. C. 345 ... 1370 
North Petherton (1826), 5 B. & C. 

508 ... 413 

Norton (1838), 8 C. & P. 671 640 

— (1886), 16 Cox, 59 99 

— [1910] 2 K. B. 496 334, 337, 

349, 393, 1028 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 197 ... 157 
Norwich (1719), 1 Str. 177 1364 

— (Mayor, etc.) v. Norfolk 
Rail. Co. (1855), 4 E. & 

B. 397, 440 ... 1358 

Nott (1843), 4 Q. B. 768 1201 

Nottingham JJ. (1755), Say. 216 ... 132 
— Corporation, Re [1897] 

2 Q. B. 502 ... 98 
Nottinghamshire C. C. v. Man- 
chester, etc., Rail. Co. (1894), 

71 L. T. 430 ... 1377 

Nutbrown (1750), Fost. 76 658 

Nuttall (1908), 73 J. P. 30 339 

Nye V. Niblett [1918] 1 K. B. 23 ... 789 



OAKEY c. Jackson [1914] 1 K. B. 

216 ... 895, 997 
Oakhampton (Mayor) (1752), 1 

Wils. (K. B.) 332 ... 472 
Oakley (1832), 4 B. & Ad. 307.. .1230, 1233 
Oastler (1874), L. R. 9 Q. B. 132 119 
Gates (Titus) (1685), 10 St. Tr. 

1073 ... 406 

Gates (1855), Dears. 459 698 

Oatley v. Lemon (1905), 20 Cox, 

791 ... 1290 
O'Brien (1824), Smith & Batty (Ir. 

K. B.) 79 ... 1235 

— (1834), Cooke & Alcock 

(Ir. K. B.) 128 ... 131 

— (Bronterre) (1840), 4 St. 

Tr. (N. S.) 1391 1117 

— (1845), 1 Cox, 185 452 

— (Smith) (1848), 6 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 571 ... 1117 

— (Smith) (1849), 7 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 1, 349 ... 191, 192, 194, 

224, 473, 1054, 

1062, 1069 

— (1850), 4 Cox, 398 666 

— (1882), 15 Cox, 29 156 

— (1890), 26 L. R. Ir. 451, 

523 ... 207 

— (1911), 75 J. P. 192 ... 211, 212, 

1222 

— (1911), 75 J. P. 392 632 

— (William), Ex parte (1883), 

12 L. R. Ir. 29 ... 1119, 1125 
O'Brien Dalton, Ex parte (1890), 

28 L. R. Ir. 36 ... 174 
O'Coigley (1798), 26 St. Tr. 1191, 

1231 195 196 
Ockley (1623), Palmer, 294 'll87 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

O'Connell (1831), 2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

629 ... 1218, 1418 

— (1843), 1 Cox, 410 218 

— (1844), 5 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

58, 61, 76, 192, 194, 211, 

220, 231, 451, 1068, 1219, 

1417, 1418, 1425 

— (1909), 73 J. P. 118 340 

O'Connor (Feargus) (1839), 4 St. 

Tr. (N. S.) 1299 ... 1247 

— (1840), 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

1352 ... 1117 

— (1843), 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

935 ... 29, 457, 473 

— (1872), 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

3n. ... 245, 1079 

— (1881), 15 Cox, 3 720 

— [1908] 2 K. B. 26 996 

— [1913] 1 K. B. 557 ... 66, 245 
Odgers (1843), 2 M. & Rob. 479 ... 152 
O'Doherty (1848), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

831 ... 192, 1078 
O-Donnell (1848), 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

637 ... 1117, 1418, 1428 

— (1857), 7 Cox, 337 461 

— (1917), 12 Cr. App. R. 

219 ... 210 
O'Donoghue v. Moon (1904), 68 

J. P. 349 ... 954 
Offin u. Rochford U. D. C. [1906] 

1 Ch. 342 ... 1355, 1364 

Offord (1831), 5 C. & P. 168 14 

Ogden V. Ogden [1908] P. 46 ... 1299, 1301 
O'Gorman d. Sweet (1890), 54 

J. P. 663 ... 786 

O'Halloran (1906), 70 J. P. 8 984 

O'Kelly V. Harvey (1881-2), 15 Cox, 

■ 435 (Ir.) ... 1220- 

Oldham (1852), 2 Den. 472 655, 670 

Oldroyd (1805), R. & R. 88 435, 490 

Olifier (1866), 10 Cox, 402 ... 1010, 1011. 

1013 
Oliphant (No. 2) [1905] 2 K. B. 67 

38, 736 
Olive 0. Guin (1658), 2 Sid. 145 ... 403 
Oliver (1811), 2 Leach, 1072 517 

— (1860), Bell, 287 212, 929 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 246 

384, 625, 636 

OUis [1900] 2 Q. B. 758 157, 362, 716 

0-Mealy v. Newell (1807), 8 East, 

364 ... 1199 
Omichund v. Barker (1744), 1 

Willes, 538 ... 453 

■Oneby (1726), 17 St. Tr. 29 877 

O'Neil V. Kruger (1863), 4 B. & S. 

389 ... 1280 

— u. Longman (1863), 4 B. & 

S: 376 ... 1280 
O'Neill (1854), 6 Cox, 495 224 

— (1871), Ir. Rep. 6 C. L. 1 • 

350, 1228 

— (1871), 3 Cr. & Dix. (Ir.) 

146 ... 208 
Onley u. Gee (1861), 30 L. J. 

(M. C.) 222 ... 1331 



PAGE 

Onslow's Case (1874), L. R. 9 Q. B. 

219 ... 1202 1217 
Opie (1669), 1 Wms. Saund!' 300k!. 132 

— (1860), 8 Cox, 332 921 

Oppenheimer v. Frazer [1907] 

2 K. B. 50 ... 297, 518, 525 

Orbell (1704), 6 Mod. 42 100 

Orchard (1848\ 3 Cox, 248 1317 

Orgill (1839), 9 C. & P. 80 ... 1295, 1300 
Original Hartlepool Collieries Co. 

V. Gibb (1877), 5 Ch. D. 713 ... 1354 

Orman (1880), 14 Cox, 381 1419 

Orpen (1898), 16 N. Z. L. R. 611 ... 375n. 

Orrell (1835), 7 C. & P. 774 201 

Orion (alias Castro) (1873), M. S. 174 

— (1878;, 14 Cox, 226 879, 1219 

Osbaldiston v. Simpson (1843), 

13 Sim. 513 ... 1210n. 
Osborn (1732), 2 Barnard (K. B.) 

138, 166 ... 1247 

— (1765), 3 Burr. 1697 7 

— B. Gillett (1873), L. R. 

8 Ex. 88 ... 292 

— V. London Docks Co. 

(1855), 10 Ex. 698 ... 469 

— u. Veitch (1858), 1 F. & F. 

317 930 
Osborne (1837), 7 C. & P. 799 103 

— (1837), 8 C. & P. 113 434 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 622 ... 372n. 

— [1905] 1 K. B. 551 ... 372, 373, 

1022, 1028, 1030, 
1033, 1051 

— I.. Gough (1803), 3 B. & 

P 551 87 

O'Shaughnessy (1912), 31 ' N. Z. 

L. R. 928 ... 359n. 

O'Shay (1898), 19 Cox, 76 931, 1021 

Osman (1881), 15 Cox, 1 , 375n. 

Oswestry (1817), 6 M. & Sel. 361 ... 1374 

— (Treasurer) (1848), 12 

O B 239 283 

Otto, Ex parte [1894] 1 Q. B. 420 1 295 
Over V. Harwood [1900] 1 Q. B. 

803 ... 352 

Overton (1842), C. & Mar. 655 1185 

Owen (1792), 2 Leach, 572 677 

— (1825), 1 Mood. 96 1436 

— (1826), 1 Mood. 118 967 

— (1830), 4 C. & P. 236 U 

— (1839), 9 C. & P. 83.. .93, 102, 103, 

382, 457, 461 

Owens (1828), 1 Mood. 205 790 

Oxenham (1877), 46 L. J. (M. C.) 

125 ... 538 
Oxford (Mayor, etc.) (1834), 3 Nev. 

& M. 877 ... 347 

— (1840), 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

497 ... 13, 15, 17, 913 
Oxfordshire (1811), 13 East, 411 

113, 347 

— (1812), 16 East, 223 ... 1374 

— (1825), 4 B. & C. 194 1374 

— (1827), 1 B. & Ad. 

297n. ... 781, 1374, 1378 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Oxfordshire (1830), 1 B. & Ad. 289 

781, 1375, 1378 
Oxlade [1919] 2 K. B. 628 340 



PACKARD (1842), C. & Mar. 236 

875, 896 
Packer (1714), 2 East, P. C. 653 ... 48 

— (1886), 16 Cox, 57 1013 

Paddle (1822), R. & R. 484 ... 683, 1236 
Paddock v.- Forrester (1840), 4 

St. Tr. (N. S.) 557 ... 129 
Page (15S8), 5 Co. Rep. 54 425 

— (1837), 8 C. & P. lS2- 1103 

— V. Faucet (1687), Cro. Eliz. 

227 350 

— u. Mann (1827), M. & M. 79 445 

Paget (1900), 64 J. P. 281 465 

Paice (1843), 1 C. & K. 73 746 

Paine's Case (1608), Yelv. Ill 1184 

Paine (1696), 1 Ld. Raym. 729 ... 367, 434 

— (1834), 7 C. & P. 135 666 

(And see Payne.) 

Palin [1906] 1 K. B. 7 735 

Palm (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 201 ... 477 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 253 ... 924 
Palmer (1680), 7 St. Tr. 1067 ... 479, 1067 

— (1761), 2 Burr. 1162 133 

— (1804), 1 B. & P. (N. R.) 

96 ... 823, 1435 

— (1831), 1 M. & Rob. 70 1385 

— (1834), 6 C. & P. 652 102 

— (1856), 5 E. & B. 1024 ... 112, 119, 

121 

— [1913] 2 K. B. 29 883 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 77 ... 351 
Pankhurst v. Jarvis (1909), 74 J. P. 

64 ... 1220 
Pantaleon da Sa (1654), 5 St. Tr. 

461 ... 10 

Pantaney (1907) 71 J. P. 101 373 

Pappineau (1726), 2 Str. 686 1312 

Paradise (1766), 2 East, P. C. 565 530 
Parapano v. Happaz [1894] A. C. 

165 ... 1301 
Pardenton (1853), 6 Cox, 247 ... 783, 954 

Pardee (1894), 17 Cox, 715 746 

Parish (1837), 7 C. & P. 782 103 

Park V. Mears (1800), 2 B. & P. 

217 ... 444 

Parke [1903] 2 K. B. 432 ... 3, 84, 104, 

105, 131, 217, 230, 427, 

1124, 1125, 1217, 1252 

Parker (1812), Coll. Lun. 477 14 

— (1837), 7 C. & P. 825 704 

— (1839), 9 C. & P. 45 742 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 639 1191 

— (1847), 2 Cox, 274 816 

— (1861), L. & C. 42 388 

— (1864), L. & C. 459 66 

— (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 225 434 

— (1895), 59 J. P. 793 893, 954 

^ (1910), 74 J. P. 208 803, 834 

— (19i2), 14 C. L. R. 681 ... 351n. 

— (and Bulteel) (1916), 25 

Cox, 145 ... 711, 1420 



PAGE 

Parker v. Alder [1899] 1 Q. B. 20 ... 26 

— V. Hoskins (1810), 2 Taunt. 

223 ... 445 

— V. M-William (1830), 6 

Bing. 683 ... 485 

Parkes (1794), 2 Leach, 614 517 

Parkin (1824), 1 Mood. 45 ... 42, 220, 511 

— V. Moon (1836), 7 C. & P. 

408 ... 492 

Parkins (1824), 1 C. & P. 548 202 

-= V. Hawkshaw (1817), 2 

Stark. (N. P.) 239 ... 471, 472 
Parkinson, Re (1897), 76 L. T. 715 

285, 1210n. 

Parks (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 50 ... 305 

Parkyns (1696), 13 St. Tr. 63 ... 354, 1065 

— (1820), 3 B. & Aid. 668 ... 134 

Parlement Beige, The (1880), 5 

P. D. 197 ... 35 
Parmiter u. Coupland (1840), 6 M. 

& W. 105 ... 1246, 1250 
Parnell (1881), 14 Cox, 508 ... 127, 188, 

1417 
Parr (1841), 2 M. & Rob. 346 729 

— (1862), 2 F. & F. 861 208 

Parratt (1831), 4 C. & P. 570 386 

Parrott (1913), 8 Cr. App. R. 186 ... 1142 
Parry (1837), 7 C. & P. 836 ... 159, 190, 

191 422 

— (1900), 35 L. J. N. 456 ' 790 

Parsons (1763), 1 W. Bl. 392, 401 ... 1426 

— (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 24 1182 

— (1888), 16 Cox, 498 601, 611 

— (1904) (unreported) 994 

Partridge (1836), 7 C. & P. 551 

386 39S 

Pascoe (1849), 1 Den. 456 'l214 

Passey (1836), 7 C. & P. 282 ... 1385, 1437 
Passman (1834), 1 A. & E. 603 

114, 119 

Patch (1782), 1 Leach, 238 520 

Pate (1850), 8 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1 ... 1079 

Pateman (1788), 2 T. R. 777 1387n. 

Patent Eurika Co. (1865), 13 L. T. 

365 ... 121 

Patience (1837), 7 C. & P. 775 902 

Patram (1787), 2 East, P. C. 782 ... 455 

Paty (1770), 2 W. Bl. 721 789 

Paul (1840), 2 M. & Rob. 307. ..1360, 1363 

— [1920] 2 K. B. 183 460 

Pavitt (1911), 75 J. P. 432 1463 

Pawlyn (1665), 1 Sid. 208 7 

Payne (1831), 4 C. & P. 558 938 

— (1833), 1 Mood. 378 901, 967 

— (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 27 1175' 

— (1872), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 349 

460, 461, 491 

— (1905), 69 J. P. 440 346n. 

— [1906] 1 K. B. 97 ... 6, 722, 728, 

1452 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 259 ... 730 

— (1913), 8 Cr. App. R. 171 ... 456 

— V. Wilson [1895] 2 Q. B. 

537 ... 297 

Peach (1758), 1 Burr. 548 '.'.'. 134 

Peacock (1814), R. & R. 278 805 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Peacock (1870)', 12 Cox, 21...79, 434, 436 

Pear (1779), I Leach, 212 715 

Pearce (1791), 1 Peake, 106 (3rd 

ed.) ... 356, 1121 

— (1794), 2 East, P. C. 603, 

673 ... 523, 593 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 667 467 

— u. Whale (1826), 5 B. & C. 

38 ... 1249 
Peard (1906), N. Z. L. R. 568 ... i025n. 
Pearks, Gunston & Tee, Ltd. v. 

Ward [1902] 2 K. B. 1 ... 9 

Pearson (1831), 4 C. & P. 572 ... 586 

— (1835), 2 Lew. 144 20 

— (1835), 2 Lew. 216 882 

— (1837), 7 C. & P. 671 438 

— (1908), 72 J. P. 451 730 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 40; 

74 J. P. 175 ... 335, 667 

— u. Lemaitre (1843), 5 

Man. & G. 700 ... 1250 

Pease (1832), 4 B. & Ad. 30 1313 

Peat (1781), 1 Leach, 228 642 

— (1838), 2 Lew. 288 468 

Pechell D. Watson (1841), 8 M. & 

W. 691 ... 1203 

Peck (1839), 9 A. & E. 686 1424 

Pedgrift v. Chevallier (1860), 8 

C. B. (N. S.) 246 ... 416 
Pedler u. Paige (1833), 1 M. & 

Rob. 258 ... 445 

Pedley (1772), 1 Leach, 325 1187 

Pedly (1834), 1 A. & E. 822 1354 

Peel (1860), 2 F. & F. 21 ... 375, 376, 494 

— (1862), L. & C. 231 37 

— V. Jervis (1885), 49 J. P. 264 295 
Peers and Brown (1917), 81 J. P. 

143 ... 1340, 1341 

— V. Caldwell [1916] 1 K. B. 

371 ... 1340 
Peirson (1705), 2 Ld. Raym. 1197 ... 1329 
Pelham (1846), 8 Q. B. 959 ... 2, 872, 974 
Pellew V. East Wonford (1829), 

9 B. & C. 134 ... 65 

Pellow, Re (1824), M'CL 111, 683 ... 95 

Peltier (1803), 28 St. Tr. 529 ... 127, 1119, 

1122, 1246, 1324 

Pembliton (1874), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

119 ... 741, 800 
Pembridge (1841), C. & Mar. 157 

419, 446 

— (1841), 3 Q. B. 901 ... 188 

Penderryn (1788), 2 T. R. 513 .:. 1365 

Penfold [1902] 1 K. B. 547 ... 1464, 1465, 

1466 
Pennegoes (Machynlleth and) 

(1822-3), 1 B. & C. 142 ... 113 
Penny (1855), Chester Assizes 770 

— V. Hanson (1886), 18 Q. B. 

D. 478 ... 699 
Penprase (1833), 4 B. & Ad. 573 

112, 113, 121 

Penson (1832), 5 C. & P. 412 1304 

Pepper and Piatt [1921] 3 K. B. 167 230 
Pepys (1792), Peake, 187 (3rd ed.) 1187 
Perceval (1666), 1 Sid. 243 196 



PAGE 

Percival (1905), 69 J. P. 320 669 

— Ex parte [1907] 1 K. B. 

696 ... 83 
Perfect (1917), 12 Cr. App. R. 273 337 

Perkes (1824), 1 C. & P. 300 664 

Perkins (1831), 4 C. & P. 537 

879, 1219, 1439 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 395 ... 375, 376 

— (1845), 7 Q. B. 165 145 

— (1851), 2 Den. 459 342, 728 

— (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 248 1335 

— i;. Jeffery [1915] 2 K. B. 

702 ... 364 

Perry (1660), 14 St. Tr. 1312 868 

— (1793), 5 T. R. 453 188 

— (1794), 2 Russ. Cr. {7th ed.), 

2278, 2281 ... 467, 1008 

— (1845), 1 Den. 69 569, 570 

— (1855), Dears. 471 920 

— [1909] 2 K. B. 697 375 

— V. Gibson (1834), 1 A. & E. 

48 ... 479 

— 0. Perry [1920] P. 361 1301 

Pertreis v. Tondear (1799), 1 Hagg. 

• (Consist. Rep.) 136 ... 1299 
Petch (1878), 14 Cox, 116 ... 544, 547, 554 

— (1909), 25 T. L. R. 401 

336, 348, 711 
Petcherine (1855), 7 Cox, 79 (Ir.) 1162 
Peters (1785), 1 Burr. 568 347 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 245 527 

— (1886), 16 Q. B. D. 636 ... 1266, 

1267, 1269 

— (1908), 1 Cr. App. R. 141 

936, 942 

Pdricus (1903), 67 J. P. 378 1197 

Pctrie (1784), 1 Leach, 294 676 

— (1855), 4 E. & B. 737 1361 

Petlit (1850), 4 Cox, 164 380n. 

Pew (1630), Cro. Car. 183 903 

Pharmaceutical Society v. London 

etc.. Supply Association (1883), 

8 App. Cas. 857 ... 9, 10 
Phelan (1881), 14 Cox, 579 (Jr.) ... 121 
Phelps (1757), 2 Ld. Ken. 570 133 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 180 ... 152, 897, 

899, 965, 1443 
Philip (1858), 1 F. & F. 105 ... 75, 174 
Philipps (1764), 3 Burr. 1564 128 

— (1805), 6 East, 464 ... 352, 1235 
Philips (1731), 2 Str. 921 ... 56, 99, 1195 

— (1839), 8 C. & P. 736 ... 12, 1018 
Phillips (1736), Cas. (K. B.) temp., 

Hardw. 241 ... 131 

— (1767), 4 Burr. 2089 128 

— (1778), 2 Cowp, 830 905 

— (1801), 2 East, P. C. 662, 

663 ... 512 

— (1811), 3 Camp. 73 923 

— (1842), 2 Mood. 252 ... 766, 771, 

1223 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 105 ... 83 

— (1868), 11 Cox, 142 ... 208, 222 

— (1900), 65 J. P. 41 1274 

— (1909), 73 J. P. 458.. .1272, 1273 

— (1921), 85 J. P. 120 1257 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Phillips (1921), 85 J. P. 188 234 

— V. Earner (1795), 1 Esp. 

355 ... 491 

— V. Eyre (1869), L. R. 

4 Q. B. 225 ... 1000 

Phillis (19161, 32 T. L. R. 414 885 

Phillpott (1853), Dears. 179 2, 871 

Phillpotts (1851), 2 Den. 302 1187 

Philp (1830), 1 Mood. 263 750, 751 

Philpot (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 140 ... 219 
Philpolts (1843), 1 C. & K. 112 ... 99, 704 
Phipoe (1795), 2 Leach, 673 ... 569, 645 
Pickering (1921), 15 Cr. App. R. 

175 693 

— V. Noves (1823), 1 B. & 

C. 262 ... 482 

— V. Willoughby [1907] 

2KB 296 927 

Picket (1765), 2 East, P. C. 501 ... 662 
Picton (1804), 30 St. Tr. 225 ... 31, 104 

Pierce (1852), 6 Cox, 117 527 

— . (1858), Bell. 235 298 

— (1886), 56 L. J. (M. C.) 85 1265 
Piggot's Case (1598), 5 Co. Rep. 

29a ... 153 
Pigott (1851), 1 Jr. C. L. Rep. 

471 ... 1234 

— (1868), 11 Cox, 44 (,Ir.) ... 1117, 

1118, 1122 
Pike (1784), 1 Leach, 317 599 

— (1829), 3 C. & P. 598 375, 376 

— [1902] 1 K, B. 552 ... 384, 625, 635, 

1265 

Pikesley (1839), 9 C. & P. 124 394 

Pilling (1858), 1 F. & F. 324 813 

Pim V. Curell (1840), 6 M. & W. 

234 ... 370, 425 

Pinhorn (1844), 1 Cox, 70 871 

Pinney (1831), 3 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

11 ... 38, 127, 129, 905, 1003, 1221 

Pinter, Re (1891), 17 Cox, 497 717 

Pitman (1826), 2 C. & P. 423 523 

Pitt (1762), 3 Burr. 1335 130, 1389 

Pittard v. Oliver [1891] 1 Q. B. 474 1251 
Pitton B. Walter (1718), 1 Str. 162 423 
Pitts (1842), C. & Mar. 284 872 

— (1912), 8 Cr. App, R. 126 

305, 1032 
Pittwood (1902), 19 T. L. R. 37 ... 893 

Platel (1903), Cent. Crim. Ct 289 

Piatt (1777), 1 Leach, 157 87, 1055 

— (1905), 69 J. P. 624 285 

— (Pepper and) [1921] 3 K. B. 

167 ... 230 
Platts (1879), 48 L. J. (Q. B.) 848 

334n., 1357 ^ 

Plestow (1808), 1 Camp. 494 709 ' 

Plumer (1814), R. & R. 264 ... 590, 1120 
Plummer (1700), Kel. (J.) 109 ... 216, 1438 

— (1844), 1 C. & K. 600 ... 872 
[1902] 2 K. B. 339 ... 173, 210, 

211, 343, 1416, 
1425, 1426, 1428 
Plunkett u. Cobbett (1804), 5 Esp. 

' 136 ... 1121, 1250 



PAGE 

Plympton (1724), 2 Ld. Raym. 

1377 ... 130, 1401 
Pocock (1740), 2 Str. 1157 ... 1215, 1216 

— (1851), 17 Q. B. 34 890 

— V. Moore (1825), Ry. & M. 

321 ... 1000 
Police (Commissioner of) v. Dono- 
van [1903] 1 K. B. 895 ... 423, 1466, 
1477 
Pollard, Re (1868), L. R. 2 P. C. 

106 ... 1217 

Pollman (1809), 2 Camp. 229n. ... 1206, 

1417, 1418 

Polly (1843), 1 C. & K. 77 656 

Polsue & Alfieri, Ltd. v. Rushmer 

[1907] A. C. 121 ... 1312, 1314 
Pomeroy v. Baddeley (1826), Ry. 

& M. 430 ... 485 
Pond (1718), Comyns, 312 ... 124, 1387n. 
Ponsford & Newport District 
School Board, Re [1894] 1 Ch. 

454 ... 5 

Pook (1871), 10 Cox, 172n 371 

Pool V. Bousfield (1807), 1 Camp. 

55 ... 12inn. 
Poole (1857), Dears. & B. 345 ... 513 

— (Mayor, etc.) (1887), 19 

Q. B. D. 602, 683n. ... 1348, 
1351, 1374 

— u. Huskinson (1843), 11 M. 

& W. 827 ... 1361 

— V. Stokes (1916), 78 J. P. 

231 991 

Pooley (1800), R. & R. 12 570 

— (1802), R. & R. 31 592 

— (1857), 8 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

1089 ... 1162 
Poordage's Case (1670), 1 Mod. 

22 ... 1387n. 
Pope (1834), 6 C. & P. 346 529 

— (1901), 18 T. L. R. 717 ... 203, 204 
Popham V. Pickburn (1862), 7 H. 

& N. 891 ... 1125 
Porter (1841), 9 C. & P. 778 ... 901, 963 

— (1864), L. & C. 394 975 

— (1873), 12 Cox, 444 897, 898 

— [1910] 1 K. B. 369 88, 1211, 

1422 
Porter's Trusts (1856), 25 L. ,J. 

(Ch.) 688 ... 443, 1294 
Portland (Countess) v. Prodgers 

(1683), 2 Vern. 104 ... 236 
Portugal (1885), 16 Q. B. D. 487 ... 637 

Post (1806), R. & R. 101 805 

Potter (1851), 2 Den. 235 674 

Poulterer's Case (1611), 9 Co. Rep. 

55 ... 1422 

Poulton (1832), 5 C. & P. 329 873 

Pountney (1836), 7 C. & P. 302 ... 388 

Povey (1852), Dears. 32 1295, 1300 

Powell (1771), 1 Leach, 77 50 

— (1775), 1 Leach, 110 453 

— (1831), 2 B. & Ad. 75 231 

— (1884), 54 L. J. (M. C.) 26 712 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 1 ... 731 

— (1915), 79 J. P. 272 1015 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Powell c. Blackett (1794), 1 Esp. 

97 ... 444 

— 0. Fall (1880), 5 Q. B. D. 

597 ... 1313 

— 0. Ford (1817), 2 Stark. 

(N. P.) 164 ... 446 

— u. Hoyland (1851), 6 Ex. 

67, 70 ... 525 

— V. Kempton Park Race- 
course Co. [1899] A. C. 143 

1339, 1340 

Power [1919] 1 K. B. 572 335 

Powle (1618), 2 RoUe Rep. 52 77 

Powlter's Case (1614), 11 Co. Rep. 

29 379 

Powner (1872), 12 Cox, 235 849 

Poynder (1823), 1 B. & C. 178 1387 

Poynton (1862), L. & C. 247 ... 534, 592 

Pratt (1830), 1 Mood. 250 519 

— (1854), Dears. 360 540 

— (1855), 4 E. & B. 860 1385 

— (1865), 4 F. & F. 315 727 

Prebble (1858), 1 F. & F. 325 900 

Pressy (1867), 10 Cox, 635 1020 

Preston (Lord) (1691), 12 St. Tr. 

645 ... 38, 74, 1065, 1066, 

1067, 1075 

— (1851), 2 Den. 353 529 

— [1909] 1 K. B. 568 463, 1022 

Prestridge (1881), 72 L. T. Journ. 

93 ... 436 

Price (1805), 6 East, 323 231, 399 

— (1833), 5 C. & P. 510 764 

— (1835), 7 C. & P. 178 ... 901, 967 

— (1837), 8 C. & P. 19 22 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 282 899 

— (1840), 11 A. & E. 727 5 

— (1841), 9 C. & P. 729 754 

— (1858), 8 Cox, 96 1438n. 

— (1884), 12 Q. B. D. 247.. .2, 6, 141, 

142, 1345 

— (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 15 ... 537 

— V. Manning (1889), 42 Ch. D. 

372 ... 489 

— o. Seeley (1843), 10 CI. & F. 

28 ... 1003 

— V. Torrington (Earl) (1703), 

1 Salk. 285 ... 374 
Pridmore (1913), 29 T. L. R. 330 

914, 967 

Pries (1853), 6 Cox, 165 815 

Priestley (1885), 49 J. P. 148 63 

— V. Hughes (1809), U East, 

1 1295 1299 

Primelt (1858), I F. & F. 50 ', 1011 

Prince (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

150 ... 516, 517, 705 

— (1868), 11 Cox, 145 539 

— (1875), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 154 

25, 26, 1011 

— u. Blackburn (1802), 2 

East, 250 ... 445 
Prince's (The) Case (1605), 8 Co. 

Rep. 18a, 206 ... 404 
Pringle (1840), 9 C. & P. 408 ... 807, 855 



PAGE 

Pritchard (1836), 7 C. & P. 303 

13, 169, 170, 171 

— (1901), 17 T. L. R. 310 

873, 874 

— (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 

210 ... 729 

Privett (1846), 1 Den. 193 '". 514 

Probert (1800), 2 East, P. C. 1030 741 

— (1852), Dears. 30 112 

Proctor (1918), 82 J. P. 287 ... 60, 336, 
894, 895 
Prosser (1768), 2 East, P. C. 502 663 
Protector v. Buckner (1655), Style, 

467 ... 882 
Proud (1861), L. & C. 97 ... 360, 608, 620 
Prouse's Case (1635), Cro. Car. 

389 ... 1387n. 
Prowse V. Spurway (1877), 46 L. J. 

Prob. 49 ... 1299 
Pruntey (1887), 16 Cox, 344 ... 988, 1029 

Prynn (1690), 5 Mod. 459 127 

Puck & Co., Ltd. (1912), 28 
T. L. R. 

197 112 

— (1912), 29 

T. L. R. 

11 1289 

Puddick (1865), 4 F. & F. 497 ... 202 
Pugh V. Griffith (1838), 7 A. & E. 

827, 836 ... 664 
Pulbrook, Ex parte [1892] 1 Q. B. 

86 ... 136, 1162, 1244 
Purchase (1710), 15 St. Tr. 645 

1069, 1070 
— (1842), C. & Mar. 617 

152, 153 

Purefoy (1794), Peake, Ev. 64 439 

Purnell (1748), 1 W.'Bl. 37 418 

Pusey (1726), 2 Str. 717 113 

Fyke v. Crouch (1696), 1 Ld. 

Raym. 730 ... 434 
Pyne's Case (1628), Cro. Car. 117 1065 
Pywell (1816), Stark. 402 700 

QUAIL (1866), 4 F. & F. 1076 ... 4, 1428, 

1430 

Qualter (1854), 6 Cox, 357 375 

Quarman u. Burnett (1840), 6 M. & 

W. 499 ... 604 
Quarmby (1921), 15 Cr. App. R. 

163 ... 17 
Queen Caroline's Case (1820), 

2 B. & B. 284 ... 396, 450, 475, 478, 

488, 489, 494, 496, 

497, 1427 

Quelch (1704), 14 St. Tr. 1067 649 

Quigley (1868), 18 L. T. 211 436 

Quinn (1898), 19 Cox, 78 (Jr.) 1425 

— (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 269 ... 1032 

— V. Leathern [1901] A. C. 495 

440n., 1281, 1284, 1421, 1423 

RAAKE (1838), 8 C. & P. 626 ... 811, 812 

Rabjohns [1913] 3 K. B. 171 234 

Radbourne (1787), 1 Leach, 457 ... 433 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Radclitte (1746), 1 W, BI. 3 ... 167, 189 

— V. Bartholomew [1892] 

1 Q. B. 161 ... 65 

Radford (1844), 1 Den. 59 823, 1103 

Radley (1849), 1 Den. 450 52 

Radyalski (1899), 24 Vict. L. R. 

687 ... 889 

Rae (1874), Ir. Rep. 8 C. L. 524 ... 135 

Raffety (1838), 2 Lew. 271 644 

Ragg (1860), Bell, 214 701 

Railton (1885), 14 Q. B. D. 153 

471, 1271, 1420 

Rakmi (1886), 11 Bombay, 59 943 

Raleigh's (Sir W.) Case (1603), 

2 St. Tr. 1, 15 ... 1057 

Ralphs (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 87 ... 1027 

Ram (1893), 17 Cox, 609 1019, 1436 

Rambert v. Cohen (1803), 4 Esp. 

213 ... 451 

Rampton (1664), Kel. (J.) 41 896 

Ramsay & Foote (1883), 15 Cox, 

231 1162 1252 

Ramsden (1827), 2 C. & p! 603 ..'. 493 

— (1843), 1 Cox, 37 644 

— (1858), E. B. & E. 949 

1369, 1370 
Randall (1842), C. & Mar. 496 

1313, 1357 

Randell (1887), 16 Cox, 335 706 

Rankin (1803), R. & R. 43 879 

— (1848), 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

711, 789 ... 1219 

Ranstord (1870), 13 Cox, 9 ... 3, 4, 907, 

1428, 1429, 1430, 1431 

Ranson (1812), R. & R. 232 570 

Rappolt (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 156 464 

Ratcliff (1592), 3 Co. Rep. 38 1011 

Ratcliffe (1882), 10 Q. B. D. 74 

1019, 1030 

— (1920), 84 J. P. 15 ... 338, 462 
Rathbone (1841), C. & Mar. 220 

591, 592 

Raudnitz (1869), 11 Cox, 360 410 

RaTenscroft (1809), R. & R. 161 ... 814 

Rawlings (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 5 336 

— V. Coal Consumers' 

Association (1874), 43 

L. J. (M. C.) Ill ... 1209n. 

— 0. General Trading Co. 

[1921] 1 K. B. 635 ... 1421 

— V. Till (1837), 3 M. & 

W. 28 ... 930 
Rawlins (1800), 2 East, P. C. 617 547 

— (1835), 7 C. & P. 150 662 

Raybould (1909), 73 J. P. 334 ... 339, 1471 
Rea (1865), 17 Ir. C. L. Rep. 584 ... 1216 

— (1872), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 365 

1300, 1304 
Read (1S48), 1 Den. 377 1032 

— (1877), 3 Q, B, D. 131 617 

— I). Brookman (1789), 3 T. R. 

151 ... 443 

— t). Coker (1853), 13 C. B. 850 930 

— V. Operative Society of 

Stonemasons [1903] 2 

K. B. 732 1281 



PAGE 

Read & Huggonson, Be (1742), 

2 Atk. 471 ... 1215 
Reader & Turner (1830), 4 C. & P. 

245 ... 752 
Reading (1679), 7 St. Tr. 259 470 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 649 ... 394 
Reane (1794), 2 East, P. C. 735 

638, 639 

Reaney (18.57), Dears. & B. 151 ... 375 

Rearden (1864), 4 F. & F. 76 356 

Reardon (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

31 ... 729 

Reason (1854), Dears. 226 589, 590 

— (1872), 12 Cox, 228 392 

Reason & Tranter (1722), 16 St. 

Tr. 1 ... 378. 882 

Reculist (1796), 2 Leach, 703 810 

Redfern (1834), 2 A. & E. 387 ... 85 

Redford (1869), 11 Cox, 367 606 

— D. Birley (1822), 1 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 1071 ... 355, 1137, 1218 
1219, 1220, 1221 
Redhead (Yorke) (1795), 25 St. Tr. 

1003 ... 203 
Redman (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

12 ... 687 
Reed (1842), C. & Mar. 306 527 

— (1854), Dears. 168, 257 ... 604, 614 

— (1871), 12 Cox, 1 1318 

— V. Lamb (1860), 6 H. & N. 75 1398 

— 0. Nutt (1890), 24 Q. B. D. 

669 ... 161 
Reekspear (1832), 1 Mood. 342 ... 1046, 

1047 
Rees (1834), 6 C. & P. 606 ... 402, 589, 590 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 568 394, 662 

— (1888) (unreported) 437 

— V. Bowen (1825), McClel. & 

Y. 383 ... 421 

— V. de Bernardy [1896] 2 Ch. 

437 ... 1204 
Reeve (1872), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 362 389 

— V. Hodson (1853), 10 Hare, 

App. xix. ... 425, 443 

Reeves (1839), 9 C. & P. 25 874 

Regan (1887), 16 Cox, 203 368 

Reid, Ex parte (1885), 49 J. P. 600 69 

— Margison (1808), 1 Camp. 

469 ... 368, 404 
Remnant (1807), R. & R. 136 ... 48, 487 

Rendle (186i), 11 Cox, 209 76 

Reniger v. Fogossa (1549), 1 Plowd. 

1 ... 11, 19 

Renshaw (1847), 2 Cox, 285 930 

Retail Dairy Co. u. Clarke [1912] 

2 K. B. 388 ... 1290 

Revel (1719), 1 Str. 421 1216 

Reynolds (1821), R. & R.-465 970 

— V. U. S. (1878), 8 Otto, 

145 ... 1306n. 

— Ex parte (1882), 20 Ch. 

D. 294 ... 469, 470 
Rhodes (1704), 2 Ld. Raym. 886 ... 213 

— (1742), 1 Leach, 24 415 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Rhodes [1899] 1 Q. B. 77 ... 76, 209, 357, 
361, 362, 460, 461, 
465, 694, 700, 716 
Rhondda U. D. C, o. Tall Vale 

Rail. Co. [1908] 1 K. B. 239.. .1363, 1375 
Rice (1803), 3. East, 581 877, 1235 

— (1834), 6 C. & P. 634 815 

— (1859), Bell, 87 574 

— (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 21 ... 1329 

— (1902), 5 Canada Cr. Cas. 

509 ... 897n. 

— u. Howard (1886), 16 Q. B. D. 

681 ... 489 
Richards (1800), 8 T. R. 634 7, 1360 

— (1811), R. & R. 193 814 

— (1828), 8 B. & C. 420 286 

— (1832), 5 C. & P. 318 ... 386, 390 

— (1844), 1 C. & K. 532 ... 513, 514 

— (1844), 1 Cox, 62 203, 805 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 860 ... 434 

— (1868), 11 Cox, 43 687 

— (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 311 

1452, 1454 

— (1897), 61 J. P. 389. ..1452, 1454 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 161 337 

— [1911] 1 K. B. 260 574 

Richardson (1834), 1 M. & Rob. 402 

1420, 1424 

— (1860), 8 Cox, 448.. .360, 620, 

806 

— (1863), 3 F. & F. 693 473 

— (1890), 111 Cent. Cr. 

Ct. Sess. Pap. 612 ... 1205 

— (1913), 29 T. L. R. 228 173 

— (1913), 108 L. T. 384 ... 223 

— V. Anderson (1805), 1 

Camp. 65n. ... 412 

— V. Willis (1872), L. R, 

8 Ex. 69 ... 159, 421, 1253n. 
Richman (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 

233 1271 
Richmond (1843), 1 C. & K. 240 '.'.'. 158 

— (1873), 12 Cox, 495 537 

Riclcard (1918), 88 L. J. K. B. 720 447 

Riclcetts (1811), 3 Camp. 68 940 

Rickman (1789), 2 East, P. C. 1034, 

1035, 1037 ... 356, 399, 743, 744 

Rider (1838), 8 C. & P. 539 203 

Ridgeley (1778), 1 East, P. C. 171 1111 
Ridgway (1862), 3 F. & F. 838 ... 701 
Ridley (1811), 2 Camp. 650 2, 973 

— (1823), R. & R. 515 1384 

— (1909), 25 T. L. R. 508 321 

Ridpath (1714), 10 Mod. 152 125 

Rigby (1839), 8 C. & P. 770 77 

Rigg (1866), 4 F. & F. 1085 439 

Riley (1851), 3 C. & K. 116 430, 1384 

— (1853), Dears. 149 527, 535 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 964 495 

— (1887), 18 Q. B. D. 481 ... 365, 1022, 

1034 

— [1896] 1 Q. B. 309 802, 803, 

824, 852 

— (1908), Queensland State Rep. 

141 ... 395n. 
Rimes (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 240 ... 310 



PAGE 

Ring (1800), 8 T. R. 585 481, 484 

— (1892), 61 L. J. (M. C.) 116 

215, 534, 673, 1433 
Ripley (1890), 17 Cox, 120 ... 1392, 140J 
Rispal (1762), 3 Burr. 1320 ... 1422, 1423, 

1424 
Ritson (1869), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 200 808 

— (1884), 15 Cox, 478 398 

Robb (1864), 4 F. & F. 59 1010 

Roberts (1702), 2 East, P. C. 487 666 

— (1808), 1 Camp. 399 ... 355, 1420 

— (1816), Carr. Supp. 57 169 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 652 812 

— (1848), 2 C. & K. 607 1191 

— (1855), Dears. 539 3, 1109, 

nil, 1431, 1432 

— (1873), L. R. 9 Q. B. 77 ... 285 

— (1878), 14 Cox, 101 402, 427 

— (1897), 18 Cox, 530 936, 994 

— (otherwise Spalding) (1920), 

15 Cr. App. R. 65 ... 463 

— u. Hunt (1850), 15 Q. B. 

17 ... 1361, 1362 
Robertson (1864), L. & C. 483 ... 640, 688 
Robins (1787), 1 Leach, 290n 639 

— (1843), 2 M. & Rob. 512 

365, 1022 

— (1844), 1 C. & K. 456.. .1009, 1011 

— (1844), 1 Cox, 114 1048 

— (1854), 6 Cox, 420 525 

Robinson (1568), 2 RoUe Rep. 50 ... 822 

— (1746), 1 Leach, 37 1419 

— (1755), 2 East, P. C. 565 530 

— (1759), 2 Burr. 799 5, 6 

— (1765), 1 W. Bl. 541 ... 129, 130 

— (1796), 6 T. R. 642, cit. ... 136 

— (1796), 2 Leach, 749 ... 364, 684 

— (1819), 2 Stark. (N. P.) 485 593 

— (1831), 1 -Mood. 327 664 

— (1834), 1 Mood. 413 ... 233, 1105 

— (1837), 2 M. & Rob. 14 685, 687 

— (1841), 12 A. & E. 672 ... 161 

— (1858), Bell, 34 550,712 

— (1864), 4 F. & F. 43 727 

— (1865), L. & C. 604 1102 

— (1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 80 383 

— (1887), 19 Q. B. D. 322 141, 142 

— (1897), 61 J. P. 520 ... 488, 490 

— [1915] 2 K. B. 342 

4, 718, 1431, 1432 

— [1917] 2 K. B. 108 307 

— Re (1854), 23 L. J. (Q. B.) 

286 ... 87, 88 

— V. Cowpen L. B. (1893), 

62 L. J. (Q. B.) 619 1362 

Robson (1820), R. & R. 413 521 

— (1861), L. & C. 93 538 

— (1864), 4 F. & F. 360 208 

— (1885), 16 Q. B. D. 137 

541, 609 

— u. Kemp (1803), 4 Esp. 

233 472 

Roche (1775), 1 Leach, 134 '.'.'. 157 

Rodda (1910), 74 J. P. 412 337 

Roddam (1777), 2 Cowp. 672 483 

Roden (1874), 12 Cox, 630 358 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Roderick (1837), 7 C. & P. 795 ...3, 1431 
Rodley [1913] 3 K. B. 468 ... 335, 354, 359 

Rodway (1841), 9 C. & P. 784 517 

Roe (1870), 11 Cox, 554 544 

Roebuck (1856), Dears. & B. 24 

701, 713, 717, 1314, 1433 

Rogan (1846), 1 Cox, 291 365,492 

Rogers (1772), 1 Leach, 89, 428 ... 659, 663 

— (1811), 2 Camp. 654 353 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 629 805 

— (1839), 9 C. & P. 41 ...812,814 

— (1839), 2 Mood. 85 

1088, 1105, 1108, 1112 

— (1851), 5 Cox, 293 591 

— (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

136 ... 730, 1440 

— (1878), 3 Q. B. D. 28 ...605,619 

— (1902), 66 J. P. 825 69 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 276 

413, 1029, 1031 

— (1915), 79 J. P. 16 ... 414, 1029 

— D. Hawken (1898), 67 L. J. 

(Q. B.) 526... 392 
Rogier (1823), 1 B. & C. 272 

720 1329 1331 

Rokeby (1690), 1 East, P. C. 312 ..." 905 

Rolf V. Dart (1809), 2 Taunt. 52 ... 404 

Rolfe (1889), 53 J. P. 823 298 

Rollet (1875), L. R. 10 Q. B.469... 1368 

Rooke (1858), 1 F. & F. 107 953 

Rookwood (1696), 13 St. Tr. 139 

100, 354, 474, 1064, 1066 

Rooney (1836), 7 C. & P. 517 356 

Roper (1737), 2 Str. 1072 138 

— c. Knott [1898] 1 Q. B. 868.. 801 
Roscommon JJ. [1894] 2 Ir. Rep. 

158... 110 
Rose (1784), 1 Leach, 342n 1158 

— (1847), 2 Cox, -329 649 

— (1884), 15 Cox, 540 880,886 

— (1898), 67 L, J: (Q. B.) 289 

87, 89, 386 

— (1909), 2 Cr. App. R. 265 ... 305 

— (1919), 14 Cr. App. R. 14 ... 307 

— D. Blakemore (1826), Ry. & 

M. 382... 475 

— V. Kempthorne (1911), 75 

J P 71 935 
Rosenberg (1843), 1 C. & K. 233... 539 

— (1879), Odgers on Libel 

(5th ed.), 20... 1246 

— (1906), 70 J. P. 264 ... 920 
Rosenson (1917), 12 Cr. App. R. 

235 ... 703, 706 
Rosenstein (1826), 2 C. & P. 414 ... 1323 
Rosier (1821), 2 Phill. Ev. (7th 

ed.) 112... 390 

Rosinski (1824), 1 Mood. 19 931 

Ross 0. Boyd (1903), 5 Eraser 

(Just. Sc), 64 ... 461 

Ross Tucket (1844), 1 Cox, 103 18 

Rothwell (1871), 12 Cox, 145 883 

Rough (1779), 2 East, P. C. 607 ... 543 
Rourlce v. Mealy (1878), 4 L. R. 

Ir, 166 ... 1210n. 
Rouse (1849), 4 Cox, 7 710,814 



PAGE 

Rouse [1904] 1 K. B. 184 463 

Row (1809), R. & R. 153 387 

Rowan (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 279... 337 
Rowe (ineert.), Rowe (Ir. K. B.), 

288,418... 134 
— ^. Brenton (1828), 8 B. & C. 

737 ... 424, 425 
Rowed (1842), 3 Q. B. 180 ... 1048, 1317 
Rowland (1826), Ry. & M. 401 ... 459 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 72 427 

/[1910] 1 K. B. 458 ...460,731 

— J (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 

t 277 ... 1474 

— u. Veale (1774), 1 Cowp. 

18 ... 1001 
Rowlands (1851), 2 Den. 364 ... 188, 347 

— (1852), 17 Q. B. 671 

112, 125, 1280, 1417, 1421, 1423 

— (1882), 8 Q. B. D. 530 

1257, 1268, 1269, 1271 

— (1898), 62 J. P. 459 ... 372n. 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 

224 ... 1093 

Rowley (1825J, 1 Mood. Ill 1196 

Rowton (1865), L. & C. 520 206, 365 

Roxburgh (1871), 12 Cox, 8 

929, 965, 1209 

Royce (1767), 4 Burr. 2073 216 

Rubens (1909), 2 Cr. App. R. 213... 1438 

Rudd (1775), 1 Leach, 115 455 

Rudge (1886), 16 Q. B. D. 459 ... 119 
Ruding V. Smith (1821), 1 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 1053 ... 1296, 1299, 1300 
Rudland (1865), 4 F. & F. 495 

202, 1019 

Rue (1876), 13 Cox, 209 387 

Rugby Charity Trustees v. Merry- 
weather (1790), 11 East, 376n. ... 1360 

Rugg (1871), 12 Cox, 16 2, 871 

Rundle (1855), Dears. 482 975 

Rush (1896), 60 J. P. 777 373 

Rushworth (1816), R. & R. 317 ... 813 
Russell (Lord) (1683), 9 St. Tr. 

577... 1065 

— (1805), 6 East, 427 1355 

— (1827), 6 B. & C. 566 

1312, 1313, 1357, 1358 

— (1831), 1 M. & Rob. 122 ... 1047 

— (1832), 1 Mood. 356 ... 875, 1447 

— (1833), 1 Mood. 377 664 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 247 ...75, 76 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 541 742 

— (1854), 3 E. & B. 942... 1358, 1373 

— (Earl) [1901] A. C. 446 

169, 1292, 1303 

— (1905), 69 J. P. 247 1340 

— (1905), 93 L. T. 407; 69 
J. P. 450; 21 T. L. R. 

749... 131 

— (1910), 6 Cr. App. R. 78... 1091 

— (1917), 12 Cr. App. R. 271 1474 
Russen (1777), 1 East, P. C. 438... 1023 
Russett [1892] 2 Q. B. 312 

516, 521, 522, 525 

Rust (1828), 1 Mood. 183 667 

Huston (1786), 1 Leach, 408 452 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Rutter (1908), 25 T. L. R. 73; 73 

J. P. 12 ...200, 310,336 

— V. Rutter [1907] 2 Ch. 592 ... 1300 
Ryalls (1848), 11 Q. B. 781 ... 231, 1187 

— V. Leader (1866), L. R. 1 

Ex. 296 ... 1124 
Ryan (1839), 2 M. & Rob. 213 

909, 913, 916, 939 

— (1846), 2 Cox, 115 1020 

— (1855), 7 Cox, 109 228 

— (1905), 9 Canada Cr. Cas. 

347 ... 586, 590 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 4 ... 1189 

— V. Shilcock (1851), 7 Ex. 72.. 664 

Rye (1909), 2 Cr. App. R. 155 541 

Ryland (1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

99 ... 2 

— (1868), 11 Cox, 101 '.'.'. 1031 

Rymer (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 136. ..3, 1309 



S D. S. (1889), 16 Cox, 566 292 

Sadbury (1700), 1 Ld. Raym. 484... 1223 

Sadi (1787), 1 Leach, 468 1446 

Sadler (1830), 4 C. & P. 218 481 

Sagar [1914] 3 K. B. 1112 

336, 362, 700 
Sage V. Eicholz [1919] 2 K. B. 171... 1411 

Sainsbury (1791), 4 T. R. 451 5 

St. Andrew's (Holborn) (1674), 1 

Mod. 112... 1365 
St. Benedict's (Cambridge) (1821), 

4 B. & Aid. 447 ... 1360 
St. George (Hanover Square) (1812), 

3 Camp. 222 ... 1365 
— (1840), 9 C. & P. 483 

173, 915, 930, 941 
St. Giles (Cambridge) (1816), 5 M. 

& Sel. 260 ... 1365, 1369 
St. Giles in the Fields. See 

Chadwiclc. 
St. Helens Smelting Co. «. Tipping 

(1865), 11 H. L. C. 642 ... 1312, 1314 
St. Martin's (Leicester) (1834), 2 

A. & E. 210 ... 490 
St. Pancras (1794), Pealte (3rd 

ed.), 286...1363, 1367, 1370 

Saldanha (1921), 85 J. P. 47 1192 

Salford (Mayor, etc.) v. Lever 

[1891] 1 Q. B. 168 ... 1409 
Salisbury (1831), 5 C. & P. 155 

586, 592 

Salmon (1802), R. & R. 26 741 

— (1880), 6 Q. B. D. 79 

897, 1437, 1440 
Salomons, Ex parte (1893), 28 L. 

J. N. 879 ... 1269 

Salop j(1810), 13 East, 95 1374 

Salt (1862),. 3 F., & F.. 834 363,834 

Salter (1840), 5 Esp. 125 1426 

Salvador, The (1870), L. R. 3 P. C. 

218 ... 1084 

Salvi (1857), 10 Cox, 481n 156 

Sampson (1846), 1 Cox, 355 607 

: — (1885), 52 L. T. 772 709 



PAGE 

Samuel o. Payne (1780), 1 Doug. 

359 ... 898, 1002 
Sanchar (Lord) (1612), 9 Co. Rep. 

119 ... 1446, 1449 
Sanders <1839), 9 C. & P. 79 674 

— (1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

75 ... 902, 961 

— [1919] 1 K. B. 550 700 

— (1919), 14 Cr. App. R. U.. 337 
Sanderson (1858), 1 F. & F. 37... 786, 953 

— (1859), IF. & F. 598 

902, 968 

Sandon (1854), 3 E. & B. 540 1350 

Sandoval (1887), 16 Cox, 206 

1084, 1087, 1372n. 
Sandys (1841), C. & Mar. 345 382 

— (1844), 1 Cox, 8 645 

Sangiovanni (1904), 68 J. P. 54 ... 96 

Sansome (1850), 1 Den. 545 381 

Saqui u. Stearns [1911] 1 K. B. 426 

665, 1437, 1447 

Sargent (1865), 10 Cox, 161 816 

Sarmon (1758), 1 Burr. 516 99 

Satchwell (1873), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

21 ... 753 
Sattler (1858), Dea»s. & B. 525 

24, 33, 36 
Saunders (1578), Plowd. 473 

889, 1445, 1450 

— (1825), 5 D. & R. 661 ... 113 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 277 ... 871 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 265 ... 1021 

— (1847), 2 Cox, 249 ...88,135 

— (1847), 10 Q. B. 484 135 

— (1875), 1 Q. B. D. 15 ... 1320 

— (1879), 14 Cox, 180 949 

— (1898), 63 J. P. 24 202, 

459, 460 

— [1899] 1 Q. B. 490 ...344,, 370 

— V. Holborn District 
Board [1895] 1 Q. B. 

64 ...5, 1309 

— (1911), 7 Cr. App. R. 

18... 234 

Savage (1824), 1 Mood. 51 197 

— (1831), 5 C. & P. 143 518 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 75 102 

— (1876), 13 Cox, 178 

1295, 1298, 1300 

— (1906), 70 J. P. 36 728 

Savile (1852), 18 Q. B. 703 138 

— V. Jardine (1795), 2 H. Bl. 

531 ... 1245 

Sawdon (1838), 2 Lew. 117 196 

Sawyer (1815), R. & R. 294 30,648 

Sayer v. Glossop (1848), 2 C. & K. 

694... 1294 
Sbarra (1918), 13 Cr. App. R. 118 

337 727 
Scaife (1836), 1 M. & Rob. 551 ... '378 
■ — (1841), 10 L. J. (M. C.) 144.. 87 

— (1851), 17 Q. B. 238 433 

— (1852), 18 Q. B. 773 118 

Scalbert (1794), 2 Leach, 620 221 

Scarborough (1848), 3 Cox, 72 50 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Scattergood v. Sylvester (1850), 15 

Q. B. 506 ... 297 
Schatfner (1920), 14 Cr. App. R. 

131... 303 
Schama and Abramovitch (1915), 

84 L. J. (K. B.) 396 ...397,733 
Schlesinger (1847), 10 Q. B. 670... 1187 

Schleter (1866), 10 Cox, 409 169 

Schmidt (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

15... 732 
Schofield, Ex parte (1877), 6 Ch. 

D. 230... 383 
Schwab (1907), 12 Canada Cr. Cas. 

539 ... 32 
Scofield (1784), Cald. 397 

S, 4, 741, 1428, 1431 
Scott (1761), 3 Burr. 1262 1222, 1223 

— (1785), 1 Leach, 401 159 

— (1842), 2 Q. B. 248n 1207 

— (1856), Dears. & B. 47 383 

— (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 415 

424, 1195, 1197 

— (1907), Vict. L. R. 471 1411n. 

— Ex parte (1829), 9 B. & C. 

446 ... 174 

— V. Att.-Gen. (1886), 11 P. D. 

128... 1299 

— u. Brown (1885), 51 L. T. 

746 ... 1231 

— V. — [1892] 2 Q. B. 724 

1209n., 1419 

— V. Director of Public Prose- 
cutions [1914] 2 K. B. 868... 1344 

— u. Sebright (1886), 12 P. D. 

21... 467 

— V. Shepherd (1773), 2 W. Bl. 

892 ... 352, .931 
Scott-Jarvis (1876), Times, Nov. 20 88 

Section (1844), 5 Q. B. 493 1385 

Scranton (1920), 15 Cr. App. R. 

104... 337 
ScuUey (1903), 23 N. Z. L. R. 380... 926n. 

Scully (1824), 1 C. & P. 319 887 

Scutt V. Hawkins (1622), 2 RoUe 

Rep. 243 ... 1248 
Seaford JJ. (1763), 1 W. Bl. 432... 133 

Searle (1831), 1 M. & Rob. 75 19 

Sears (1789), 1 Leach, 415n 528 

Seberg (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

264 ... 33, 451, 960 

Sedley (1663), 1 Sid. 168 130,1317 

Sefton (1811), R. & R. 202 663,680 

Seigley (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 186 

464, 465 
Selby V. Harris (1698), 1 Ld. Raym. 

745... 420 

Self (1776), 1 Leach, 137 2.871,894 

Sell (1840), 9 C. & P. 346 173 

Sellars (1905), 9 Canada Cr. Cas. 

153 ... 1305n. 
Sellen v. Norman (1829), 4 C. & P. 

80... 973 

Sellers (1796), Car. Supp. 233 378 

Sellis (1837), 7 C. & P. 850 874 

Selten (1871), 11 Cox, 674 878 



PAGE 

Selvester v. U. S. (1898), 170 U.S. 

262... 57,219,220 
Semayne's Case (1604), 5 Co. Rep. 

91... 904 
Senior (1832), 1 Mood. 346 873,876 

— [1899] 1 Q. B. 283 2,801, 

872, 888, 894, 895, 953, 996, 997 

Serjant (1669), 1 Sid. 414 77 

Serjeant (1826), Ry. & M. 352... 467, 1008 
Serne (1887), 16 Cox, 311 746, 888 

— (1888), 107 Cent. Crim. Ct. 

Sess. Pap. 418. ..156, 359 
Serva (1845), 1 Den. 104; 2 C. & 

K. 53 ... 34, 453, 478 

Seton (1797), 7 T. R. 373 113, 133 

Seward (1834), 1 A. & E. 706... 1418, 1424 
Sexton (ineert.); M. S. Chetw. 1 ... 390 
ShackUngton (1734), Andr. 201n.... 133 
Shadforth (1919), 14 Cr. App. R. 

77 ... 1322 

Sharman (1854), Dears. 285 803 

Sharpe (1838), 8 C. & P. 436 845 

— (1848), 3 Cox, 288 ... 1220, 1223 

— (1854), Dears. 415 37 

— (1857), Dears. & B. 160 ... 1346 

— (1903), 5 West Austr. Rep. 

125... 460 

Sharpies (1792), 4 T. R. 777 7 

Sharpless (1772), 1 Leach, 92 523 

Sharwin (1785), 1 East, P. C. 421... 645 

Shaw (1810), 12 East, 479 405 

— (1823), R. & R. 526 420, 1171, 1175 

— (1825), 6 D. & R. 154 94 

— (1834), 6 C. & P. 372 879 

— (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 145 975 

— (1888), 16 Cox, 503 475 

— V. Gould (1868), L. R. 3 

H. L. 55 ... 1305 

— D. Shaw (1861), 2 Sw. & Tr. 

517 ... 1202 
Shawe (1816), 5 M. & Sel. 403 

31, 104, 127 
Shea (1848), 3 Cox, 141 (Ir.) 938 

— (1856), 7 Cox, 147 ^r.) 527 

Sheard (1837), 7 C. & P. 846 938 

Sheares (1798), 27 St. Tr. 255 

73, 100, 1075 
Sheean (1908), 72 J. P. 232 ...463,1022 
Sheen (1827), 2 C. & P. 634... 156, 159, 160 

Sheffield (1787), 2 T. R. 106 1365 

Sheffield Canal Co. (1849), 13 Q. B. 

913 ... 1369 

Sheldon (1877), 32 L. T. 27 121 

Shellaker [1914] 1 K. B. 414 

356, 360, 362, 1025, 1031 
Shellard (1840), 9 C. & P. 277. ..355, 1427 
Shepherd (1836), 7 C. & P. 579... 389 

— (1856), Dears. 606 591 

— (1862), L. & C. 147 895 

— (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

118...541, 575, 576 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 325 1280 

— [1919] 2 K. B. 125 907 

Sheppard (1773), 1 Leach, 101... 192, 198 

— (1781), 1 Leach, 226... 805, 811 

— (1810), R. & R. 169... 401, 833 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Sheppard (1839), 9 C. & P. 121 ... 523 

— (1868), 11 Cox, 302 ...... 762 

Shergold v. HoUoway (1734), 2 Sir. 

1002... 1001 
Sheridan (1768), 1 East, P. C.438... 1023 

— (1811), 31 SI. Tr. 543 73 

Sheriff (1900), 35 L, J. N. 664 460 

Sheringham U. D. C. v, Halsey 

(1904), 68 J. P. 395 ... 1361 
Sherlock (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

20 ... 965, 1222 
Sherman (1736), Cas. (K. B.) temp. 

Hard. 303 ... 459 
Sherras u. de Rutzen [1895] 1 Q. B. 

918 26 

Sherritf (1903), 20 Cox, 334 ... 202, 204 
Sherskewsky (1912), 28 T. L. R. 

364... 339 
Sherwood (1824), 2 L. J. (O. S.) 

K. B. 78 ... 135 

— (1844), 1 C. & K. 556 ... 883 

— (1857), Dears. & B. 251 700 
Shields (1802), 28 St. Tr. 619, 647... 221 
Shillito V. Thompson (1875), 1 Q. 

• B. D. 12 ... 2, 1287, 1314 
Shimmin (1882), 15 Cox, 122 ... 204, 205 
Shipley Parish Council (1897), 18 

Cox, 531 ... 1349, 1360, 1364 
Shoppee v. Nathan (1892), 1 Q. B. 

245... 1206 
Shore v. Wilson (1839), 9 CI. & F. 

355... 1160 

Shott (1851), 3 C. & K. 206 1031 

Shotts Iron Co. v. Inglis (1882), 

7 App. Cas. 518 ... 1314 
Shrewsbury Justices (1733), 2 

Barnard (K. B.) 272... 133 
Shrewsbury (Mercers of) v. Hart 

(1823), 1 C. & P. 113 ... 418 

Shrimpton (1851), 2 Den. 3l9 366 

Shukard (1811), R. & R. 200 ... 822, 1103 
Shurmer (1866), 17 Q. B. D. 323 

436, 988, 1470 
Shuttleworth (1909), Victoria L. R. 

431 ... 476 
Sidebottom v. Adkins (1858), 27 

L. J. (Ch.) 152... 469 
Sidney (Algernon) (1683), 9 St. Tr. 

817... 1065, 1066 

Sidoli (1833), 1 Lew. 55 76 

Siffers (1904), 4 N. S. W. St. Rep. 

320 ... 1305n. 
Silbertson (1899), 129 Cent. Crim. 

Ct. Sess. Pap. 372... 1410 
Sills V. Brown (1840), 9 C. & P. 

601 ... 440 
Silverlock [1894] 2 Q. B. 766 

447, 451, 694, 835 
Silverman (1908), 12 Canada Cr. 

Cas. 79 ... 1202 
Simcox u. Yardley R. D. C. (1905), 

69 J. P. 66... 1364 

Simington [1921] 1 K. B. 451 1142 

Simmonds (1823), 1 C. & P. 84... 486 
— > (1909), 2 Cr. App. Rep. 

303 ... 361 



PAGE 

Simmonite (1843), 1 Cox, 30 78, 1298 

— [1916] 2 K. B. 821... 215, 1044 
Simmonsto (1843), 1 C. & K. 164 ... 1298 
Simons (1773), 2 East, P. C. 712... 641 

— (1773), 2 East, P. C. 731 ... 639 

— (1834), 6 C. & P. 540 ...395,438 
Simpson (1829), 1 Lew. 172 876 

— (1834), 1 Mood. 410 388 

— (1841), 5 Jur. 462 121 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 669 ... 765 

— (1850), 4 Cox, 276 590 

— (1854), Dears. 421 597 

— (1883), 15 Cox, 323 1294 

— (1898), 62 J. P. 825 437 

— (1909), 2 Cr. App. R. 128 337 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 217 339 

— (1915), 114 L. T. 238 884 

— V. Att.-Gen. [1904] A. C. 

476... 1358 

Sims (1905), 69 J. P. 8 224 

Simson (1664), Kel. (J.) 31 533 

Sinclair (1867), 13 Cox, 28 932 

Sindercome (1657), 5 St. Tr. 841 ... 1054 
Singleton v. Ellison [1895] 1 Q. B. 

607 ... 1326 
Sirdar Gurdyal Singh v. Faridkote 

(Rajah) [1894] A. C. 670... 29 
Sissinghurst House Case (1673), 1 

Hale 462 ... 1438 
Sissons V. Dixon (1826), 5 B. & C. 

758 ... 400 
Six-mile Bridge Case (1852), 6 Cox, 

122 (Ir.) ... 148 

Skeen (1859), Bell, 97 562 

Skeet (1866), 4 F. & F. 931 ...896, 1438 
Skerrett (1902), 4 West Austr. Rep. 

101 ... 619 

Skerrit (1826), 2 C. & P. 427 1105 

Skinner (1592), K. B. Rolls 1063 

— (1773), Lofft, 55 1251 

Skipworth's Case (1873), L. R. 9 

Q. B. 230 ... 1217 

Skutt (1774), 1 Leach, 106 592 

Slade (1888), 21 Q. B. D. 433 295 

Slane Peerage Claim (1855), 5 CI. 

& F. 23, 41 ... 442 
Slaney (1832), 5 C. & P. 213 ...446,469 
Slater v. Ashton-under-Lyne 

(Mayor) (1852), 18 Q. B. 398 ... 1368 

Slator (1882), 8 Q. B. D. 267 385 

Slatterie v. Pooley (1841), 6 M. & 

W. 664 ... 368, 450 
Slattery (1905), 2 Austr. C. L. R. 

546 ... 534n. 
Slaughenwhite (1905), 9 Canada 

Cr. Cas. 173 ... 936n. 
Slaughter (1831), 4 C. & P. 544n.... 388 

Sleeman (1853), Dears. 249 389 

Sleep (1861), L. & C. 44 1140 

— (1864), 9 Cox, 559 920 

Sloggett (1856), Dears. 656 383,469 

Slowly (1873), 12 Cox, 269 519 

Slowman v. Dutton (1834), 10 Ring. 

402... 1248 

Small (1837), 8 C. & P. 46 519 

Smallbones (1898), 33 L. J. N. 123 245 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Smallman [1897] 1 Q. B. 4 607 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 1 335 
Smalt D. WhitmiU (1736), 2 Str. 

1054 ... 481, 484 
Smartle v. Williams (1694), 1 Salk. 

280 424 425 
Smellie (1919), 14 Cr. App. R. 128' 174 
Smith (1710), Fost. 242 395 

— (1713), Baga de Secretis ... 1063 

— (1716), 2 East, P. C. 497 ... 658 

— (1780), 2 Doug. 441 6 

— (1796), 7 T. R. 80 135 

— (1802), 4 Esp. Ill 1356 

— (1804), 1 Russ. Cr. (7th ed.) 

764 ... 887 

— (1814), R. & R. 267 607, 614 

— (1817), R. & R. 339 433, 434 

— (1818), R. & R. 368 ... 644, 1158, 

1386 

— (1820), R. & R. 417 657, 664 

— (1823), R. & R. 516 608 

— (1826), 2 C. & P. 449 1000 

— (1827), 2 C. & P. 633 834 

— (1827), 1 Mood. 178 665, 676 

— (1828), 8 B. & C. 341 427 

— (1831), 4 C. &P. 411 834 

— (1831), 4 C. & P. 569 ... 750, 773, 

775 

— (1831), 5 C. & P. 107 849 

— (1833), 1 M. & Rob. 256 658 

— (1837), 8 C. & P. 153 2, 973 

— (1837), 8 C. & P. 160 ... 878, 880, 

887n. 

— (1837), 8 C. & P. 173 938 

— (1838), 2 M. & Rob. 109 99 

— (1838), 2 M. & Rob. 115 674 

— (1843), 2 Mood. 295 810 

— (1844), 1 C. & K. 423 530 

— (1845), 1 Cox, 260 11 

— (1845), 2 C. & K. 207 ... -397, 398 

— (1845), 1 Den. 79 811 

— (1848), 3 Cox, 443 ...'. 649 

— (1849), 1 Den. 510 ... 345, 346, 684 

— (1849), 13 Q. B. 738 105 

— (1852), 6 Cox, 31 1271 

— (1852), 2 Den. 449 569 

— (1853), 6 Cox, 198 767 

— (1853), 6 Cox, 314 704 

— (1855), Dears. 494 728, 729 

— (1856), Dears. 559 ... 909, 914, 939 

— (1856), Dears. 561 570 

— (1858), Dears. & B. 553 ... 22, 23 

— (1858), Dears. & B. 566.. .702, 803 

— (1862), L. & C. 131 8 

— (1862), L. & C. 168 816 

— (1865), L. & C. 607 2, 378, 

S72, 973 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 1066 883 

— (1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 110 1197 

— (1869), U Cox, 210 893 

— (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 266 

541, 722, 727, 728 

— (1873), 12 Cox, 597 298 

— (1887), 16 Cox, 170 375, 924 

— (1892), 17 Cox, 601 268, 481 

— (1897), 18 Cox, 470 393 



PAGE 

Smith (1898), 62 J. P. 231 508, 568 

— (1901), 65 J. P. 521 1309 

— (and York) (1902), 37 L. J. 

N. 89 ... 952 

— (1905)., 69 J. P. 51 716 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. 90 1472 

— (1909), 74 J. P. 54 351, 447 

— [1909] 2 K. B. 756 234 

— [1910] 1 K. B. 17 303, 1469, 

1471, 1472 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 123 ... 17 

— (1910), 6 Cr. App. R. 1« 19 

— (1910), 6 Cr. App. R. 207 ... 339 

— (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 72 19 

— (1915), 11 Cr. App. R. 81 ... 693 

— (1916), 114 L. T. 239 ... 358, 471 

— [1918] 2 K. B. 415 730 

— (1919), 14 Cr. App. R. 81 ... 337 

— (1919), 14 Cr. App. R. 101 ... 824 

— (1920), 84 J. P. 67 337 

— (1921), 85 J. P. 224 227, 339 

— i;. Blandy (1825), Ry. & M. 

257 396 

— <j. Dear (1903), 20 Cox, 458 

545, 550 

— V. Huson (1811), 1 Philli- 

more, 287 ... 1298 

— c. Moody [1903] 1 K. B. 56 1286 

— V. Perry [1906] 1 K. B. 262 ... 53n. 

— V. Selwyn [1914] 3 K. B. 98 293 

— V. Sydney (1870), L. R. 

5 Q. B. 203 ... 100) 

— V. Taylor (1806), 1 B. & P. 

(N. R.) 196 ... 1249 

— u. Thomasson (1890), 16 Cox, 

m 740 ... 1284 

— V. Williams (1892), 56 J. P. 

840 ... 788 

— O'Brien (1849), 2 H. L. C. 

465 ... 191, 192, 194, 224, 473, 
1054, 1062, 1069 
Smith's Advertising Agency v. 
Leeds Laboratory Co. (1910), 26 

T. L. R. 335 ... 1344 
Smyth (1832), 5 C. & P. 201 ... 661, 1232 
Snell V. Webling (1676), 2 Lev. 150 1247 

Snelling (1853), Dears. 219 814 

Snow (1776), 1 Leach, 151 877, 878 

Soane (1738), Andr. 272 132 

Scares (1802), R. & R. 25 823, 1436 

Sockett (1909), 72 J. P. 428 922 

Solita v. Yarrow (1831), 1 M. & 

Rob. 133 ... 447n. 
Solomons (1830), 1 Mood. 292 6 

— (1890), 17 Cox, 93 ... 520, 715 

— [1909] 2 K. B. 980 ... 611, 633, 

Somers [1906] 1 K. B. 326 1361 

Somerset (Earl) (1630), 2 St. Tr. 

965 ... 1444 
Somersetshire JJ. (1822), 1 D. & 

R. 443 ... 133 
Somerton (1827), 7 B. & C. 463 

606, 628 
Somervile (temp. Eliz.), 1 Ander- 
son, 104 ... 1064 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Sottomayer v. De Barros (1879), 

5 P. D. 94 ... 1299 
Souter (1818), 2 Stark. ' (N. P.) 

424n. ... 100 

' South (1907), 71 J. P. 191 633 

Soutliampton (1852), 18 Q. B. 841 

1375, 1378 

— (1886), 17 Q. B. D. 

424 ... 121, 1374, 1375, 
1376, 1378, 1379 

— (1887), 19 Q. B. D. 

590 ... 1373 

— & Essex ; (Earls) 

(1600), 1 St. Tr. 

1333 ... 1069, 1070 

Souttiern (1821), R. & R. 444 1386 

Southerton (1805), 6 East, 126 ... 1212, 

1214, 1215, 1287 

Southey (1865), 4 F. & F. 864 ... 17, 170 

— V. Nash- (1837), 7 C. & P. 

632 ... 485 
Southport (Mayor) (1901), 65 J. P. 

184 ... 1351 
South Wales Miners' Federation 
V. Glamorgan Coal Co. [1905] 

A. C. 239 ... 1423 

Sowerby [1894] 2 Q. B. 173 694 

Spalding (1842), C. & Mar. 568 ... 1399 

Spanner (1872), 12 Cox, 155 667 

Sparkes (1790), Peake (3rd ed.), 

109, cit. ... 472 

— (1858), 1 F. & F. 388 ... 459 

Sparrow (1788), 2 T. R. 198 138 

Spears (1798), 2 East, P. C. 568 

48, 531, 604 

Speed (1882), 15 Cox, 24 699 

Spence v. Doodeword (1908), 6 
Austr. C. L. R. 406 

47n., 543 

— V. Schulenburgh (1806), 

7 East, 357 ... 472 

Spencer (1783), 2 East, P. C. 712 641 

— (1815), R. & R. 299 608 

— (1824), 1 C. & P. 260 ... 421, 425 

— (1828), 3 C. & P. 420 ... 704 

— (1837), 7 C. & P. 776 ... 387 

— (1856), Dears. & B. 131 753 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 525 877 

'Spicer (1845), 1 Den. 82 546 

Spilter (1832), 5 C. & P. 333 876 

Spilling (1838), 2 M. & Rob. 107 ... 876 
Spilsbury (1835), 7 C. & P. 187. ..375, 390 

— [1898] 2 Q. B. 615 83, 87 

— D. Micklelhwaite (1808), 

1 Taunt. 146 ... 1004 

Spiro (1900), 64 J. P. 794 702 

Spokes 0. Grosvenor Hotel Co. 

[1897] 2 Q. B. 124 ... 369, 418, 469 
Sponsonby (1784), 1 Leach, 332 ... 836 

Spragg (1760), 2 Burr. 928 225 

' — (1760), 2 Burr. 993 ... 1422, 1424 

Sprague (1899), 63 J. P. 233 1309 

Spratling [1911] 1 K. B. 77 ... 260, 263, 

343 
Spriggs (1834), 1 M. & Rob. 357 

664, 666 



PAGE 

Squire (1799), 1 Russ. Cr. (7th ed.), 

93, 668, 671, 912 ... 22, 24, 
871 872 

— (1818), R. & R. 349 607, 618 

Stacey v. Whitehurst (1865), 34 

L. J. M. C. 94 ... 1458 
Stafford (Lord) (1680), 7 St. Tr. 

1218, 1461 ... 354 

— (1713), K. B. Rolls 1074 

— (Marquis) v. Coyney 

; (1827), 7 B. & C. 257 ... 1362 
Stafford Prison (Governor of), Bx 
parte Emery [1909] 2 K. B. 81 

" 13, 169, 170, 171 
Staffordshire JJ. (1819), 1 Chit. 

(K. B.) 217 ... 132 
Staffordshire and Derbyshire 
County Councils, Re (1890), 

54 J. P. 566 ... 1375 
Stainer (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

230 ... 610 
Staines L. B. (1888), 52 J. P. 215 216 
Stallard, Ex parte (1868), L. R. 

3 Ch. App. 408 ... 1265 

Stallion (1833), 1 Mood. 398 741 

Stanbury (1861), L. & C. 128 694 

Stancliffe (1869), 11 Cox, 318 298 

Standley (1816), R. & R. 305 ... 355, 1437 
Stanger (1871), L. R. 6 Q. B. 352 ... 135 
Stanley [1920] 2 K. B. 235 1475 

— V. Powell [1891] 1 Q. B. 

86 ... 870, 933 
Stannard (1837), 7 C. & P. 673 

205, 492 

— (1863), L. & C. 349 1329 

Stanton (1851), 5 Cox, 324 163 

— (1911), 6 Cr. App. R. 198 389 

Staples (1738). Andr. 228 131 

Stapleton (1680), Sir T. Raym. 367 197 

— V. Stapleton (1736), Cas. 

(K. B.) temp. Hardw. 

277 ... 472 

Stapylton (1857), 8 Cox, 69 1424 

Starey v. Chilworth Gunpowder 

Co. (1889), 24 Q. B. D. 90 ... 1272 

Starling (1664), 1 Sid. 174 1420 

Statham (1773), 1 Leach, 357, cit. 48 

Staub (1909^ 2 Cr. App. R. 6 1038 

Staunton (1827), 1 Ir. Law Rec. 

(O. S.) 7 ... 134 
Stead u. Ackroyd [1911] 1 K. B. 

57 1339 

Stedman (1704), Post. 292 '..'. 882 

Steel (1787), 1 Leach, 451 ... 13, 169, 170 

— (1876), 1 Q. B. D. 482. .139, 1253n. 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 289 ... 1269 

— u. Prickett (1819), 2 Stark. 

(N. P.) 463 ... 1355 

— 0. Smith (1817), 1 B. &Ald. 

94 ... 47 
Steele (1872), 12 Cox, 168 377 

— V. Brannan (1872), L. R. 

7 C. P. 261. ..401, 1124, 1163, 1319 

— u. Midland Ry. Co. (1866), 

L. R. 1 Ch. App. 275 ... 406 
Steer (1848), 18 L. J. (M. C.) 30 ... 345 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Stenson (1871), 12 Cox, 111 ... 361, 1427 
Stephens (1839), 2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

1189 ... 1218 

— (1866), L. R. 1 Q. B. 702 

4.58, 1314, 1359 

— (1871), 11 Cox, 669 203 

— (1888), 16 Cox, 387 ... 361, 620 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 52 519 

— V. Myers (1830), 4 C. & 

P. 349 ... 930 

Steplienson (1841), 5 Jur. 341 121 

— (1862), L. & C. 165 ... 431 

— (1884), 13 Q. B. D. 331 

2, 5, 7, 141, 142, 1345 

— (1904)," 68 J. P. 524.. .690, 699 

— [1912] 3 K. B. 341 ... 1033 

— i;. Langston (1804), 1 
Hagg. (Consist. Rep.) 

379 ... 1387 

Sterne (1787), 1 Leacli, 473 1439 

Stevens (1834), 1 Mood. 409 908 

— (1844), 1 Cox, 83 705 

— (1904), 4 N. S. W. State 

Rep. 727 ... 377n. 

— 1^. Sampson (1879), 5 Ex. 

D. 53 ... 1124 
Stevenson (1791), 2 Leach, 546.. .102, 209, 

222 

^^ (1861), 3 F. & F. 106 ... 2, 888, 

1287, 1314 

— (1905), 69 J. P. 84 671 

— (1907), Vict. L. R. 475 1411n. 
Steventon (1802), 2 East, 362.. .1202, 1422 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 55.. .350, 1359 
Steward (1690), 2 East, P. C. 702 639 

— (1831), 2 B. & Ad. 12 

130, 136 
Stewart (1814), R. & R. 288 ... 1109, 1431 

— (1818), R. & R. 363 ... 823, 1435, 

1436 

— (1840), 12 A. & E. 773 ... 1345 

— (1845), 1 Cox, 174 197, 519 

— (1876), 13 Cox, 296 402, 441 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 175 1474 

Stiginani (1867), 10 Cox, 552 486 

Stirling v. Vaughan (1809), 11 

Eas», 619 ... 426 
Stock (1810), R. & R. 185 ... 658, 660, 661 

— (1825), 1 Mood. 87 530 

Stockdale v. Hansard (1837), 3 St. 

Tr. (N. S.) 723 ... 1120, 1123 
Stocken ■/. Collin (1841), 7 M. & 

W. 529 ... 1120 
Stocker (1695), 1 Salk. 342, 371 ... 802 
Stockley (1772), 1 East, P. C. 310 

898, 904 
Stocks [1921] 2 K. B. 119... 26, 684, 1306 
Stockwell (1902), 66 J. P. 376 

1211n., 1322n. 
Stoddart [1901] 1 K. B. 177 ... 1340, 1343 

— (1909), 73 J. P. 348 ... 38, 304, 

334, 336, 349, 
397, 695 

— V. Hawke [1902] 1 K. B. 

353 ... 1340 



PAGE 

Stoddart u. Sagar [1895] 2 Q. B. 

474 ... 1343 

Stokes (1831), 5 C. & P. 148 1179 

— (1833), 6 C. & P. 151 222 

— (1852), 3 C. & K. 185 13, 17' 

Stolady (1859), 1 F. & F. 518 1188 

Stone (1796), 6 T. R. 527 207, 355, 

1065, 1066, 1073,. 
1075, 1418 

— (1830), 4 C. & P. 379 1213 

— (1854), Dears. 251 1184 

— (1908), 21 Cox, 653 1338 

— (1910), 6 Cr. App. R. 89 ... 1045 

— V. Blackburn (1793), 1 Esp. 

37 452 

— ... Marsh (1827), 6 B. & C. 

551 ... 291 

— V. Metcalf (1815), 1 Stark. 

(N. P.) 53 ... 446 
Stonehouse v. Elliott (1795), 6 

T. R. 315 ... 1003 
Stcnnell (1845), 1 Cox, 142 ... 423, 1469 
Stopford (1870), 11 Cox, 643 ... 914, 939 
Stormonth (1897), 61 J. P. 729.. .875, 1437 

Storr (1765), 3 Burr. 1698 7, 1233 

Story's (Dr.) Case (1571), 1 St. 

Tr. 1087 ... 1065 
Stowell (1841), 1 Dowl. (N. S.) 320 99 

— (1843), 5 Q. B. 44 29 

Stratford (Lord) (1640), 3 St. Tr. 

1381 ... 354 

Strahan (1855), 7 Cox, 85 149, 633 

Strange (1843), Greaves, Crim. 

Cons. Acts (2nd ed.). Ill ... 553 
Stranger v. Searle (1793), 1 Esp. 

14 ... 446n. 
Stratton (1779), 1 Doug. 239 ... 99, 128, 

881 

— (1809), 1 Camp. 549n. ... 1421 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 35 226 
Streek (1826), 2 C. & P. 413 ... 102, 209, 

222 
Streeter [1900] 2 Q. B. 601 ... 539, 727, 

728 

— <;. Bartlett (1848), 5 C. C. 

562 ... 420 

Stretch a835), 3 A. & E. 503 484 

Stretford (1706), 2 Ld. Raym. 1169 1364 

Stride [1908] 1 K. B. 617 545 

Stringer (1842), 1 C. & K. 188 ... 640, 645 

Stripp (1856), Dears. 648 381 

Stroner (1845), 1 C. & K. 650 486 

Stroud (1629), 3 St.. Tr. 235 1117 

Stroulger (1886), 17 Q. B. D. 327 ... 99 
Stuart [1894] 1 Q. B. 310 614 

— V. Bell [1891] 2 Q. B. 341 ... 1251 
Stubbs (1855), Dears. 555 344, 455 

— V. Director of Public Pro- 
secutions (1890), 24 Q. B. D. 577 285 

Studd (1866), 10 Cox, 258 345 

— (1866), 14 W. R. 806 1232 

Studds (1911), 75 J. P. 248 268 

Studdy V. Sanders (1823), 2 D. & 

R. 347 ... 472 
Studer (1916), 85 L. J. (K. B.) 1017 688 
Sturge (1854), 3 E. & B. 734 1360 



TABLE OF CASES. 



CXlll 



PAGE 

Sturges 0. Bridgman (1S79), 11 

Ch. D. 852 ... 1312 
Sturgcss (1913), 9 Cr. App. 120 ... 515 
Sturla u. Freccia (1880), 5 App. 

Cas. 643 ... 374, 402, 820 
Slytche (1901), 20 N. Z. L. R, 

744 ... 1372n. 
Sullens (1826), 1 Mood. 129 ... 532, 604 
Sullivan - (1836), 7 C. & P. 641 ... 893 

— (1838), 8 A. & E. 831 ... 196 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 209 ... 940 

— (1868), 11 Cox, 44 ... 1117, 1118, 

1122, 1126, 1216 

— (1874), Ir. Rep. 8 C. L. 

404 ... 457 

— (1910), 6 Cr. App. R. 4 ... 340 

— (1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 201, 

256 ... 1472, 1474, 1475 
Summers (18691, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

182 ... 343 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 11 1474 

— V. Moseley (1834), 2 Cr. 

. & M. 477 ... 479 
Sunderland (1837), 2 Lew. 109 ... 1301 
Sussex Peerage Claim (1844), 6 St. 
Tr. (N. S.) 79 ... 405, 1297, 1298. 1307 

Suler (1867;, 10 Cox, 577 701 

Sutton (1734), 2 Sir. 1074 1111 

— (1767), 4 Burr. 2116 100 

— (1816), 4 M. & Sel. 532 ... 404, 

410, 1249 

— (1828), 8 B. & C. 417 ... 195, 198 

— (1832), 5 B. & Ad. 52 1373 

— (1835), 3 A. & E. 597 ... 12, 1369, 

1373 

— (1836), 2 Mood. 29 548 

— (1838), 8 A. & E. 516 1366 

— (1877), 13 Cox, 648 1385 

Swain (1838), 2 M. & Rob. 112 ... 195 
Swallow (1813), 2 Russ. Cr. (7th 

ed.) 1070 ... 665 

Swan (1751), Fost. 104 153 

Swatlfins (1831), 4 C. & P. 548 ... 201, 
395, 753 
Sweeney (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 70 1472 
Sweenie (1858), 8 Cux, 233 (Sc.) ... 1021 
Sweelapple v.. Jesse (1832), 5 B. & 

Ad 27 1248 
Sweeting (1766), 1 Ea.st, P.'c. 457 1011 
Swendsen (1702), 14 St. Tr. 559 ... 1008 
Swindall (1846), 2 C. & K. 230.. .891, 893, 
1437, 1439 
Swinnerlon (1842), C. & Mar. 593 

394, 396 

— u. Stafford (Marquis) 

(1810), 3 Taunt. 91 444 

Swinson (1900), 64 J. P. 72 529 

Swinton v. MoUoy (1783), 1 T. R. 

537, cit. ... 1006 
Sydney Municipal Council v. 

Bourke [1895] A. C. 433 ... 1347 

Sydsertf (1847), 11 O. B. 245 1423 

Sykes c. Beadon (1879), 11 Ch. D. 

170 ... 1344 

Syme (19111, 27 T. L. R. 562 ... 336, 1237 

— . (1915), 79 J. P. 40 219, 338 



Symondson (1S96), 60 J. P. 6-15 ... 880 
Syres (1909), 73 .1. P. 13 227, 339 



TA.VFFE D. Downes (1812), 3 St. 

Tr. (N. S.) 1317 ... 10U2 

Taccy (1821). R. & R. 452 708, 769 

Taff Vale Rail. Co. v. Pontypridd 

U. D. C. (1905), 93 L. T. 126 1362 

Tatts (1850), 4 Cox, 169 609 

Tait (1861), 2 F. & F. 5-53 433 

Talbot i\ Hodson (1816), 7 Taunt. 

251 ... 445 
Tally (1875), 82 Cent. Crim. Ct. 

Soss. Pap. 518 ... 1202 

Tancock (1876), 13 Cox, 217 150 

Tandy (1799), 2 Leach, 833 1105 

— (Napper) (ISOO), 27 St. Tr. 

1191 ... 1064 
Tankard [1894] 1 O. B. 548 ... 541, 610 

Tannet (1818), R. He R. 351 855 

Taphn (1780). 2 East, P. C. 712 ... 039 
Tarlton u. Fisher (1781), 2 Doug. 

671 ... loot 
Tarrant (1767), 4 Burr. 2106 ... 133, 1418 
Tatam (1921), 15 Cr. App. R. 132 12 

Tate (1871), 12 Cox, 7 1185 

— [1908] 2 K. B. 680 336, 455, 

1047, 1051 
Taltersat (1806), 1 B. & P. (N. R.) 

93 ... 363, 834 
Taunton v. Costar (1797), 7 T. R. 

431 ... 1231 
Taylor (1675), 3 Kcb. 621 1162 

— (1742), 2 Sir. 1167 1315 

— (1759), 1 Leach, 49 741 

— (1771), 5 Burr. 2793 878 

— (1785), 1 Leach, 356 48 

— (1785), 1 Leach, 360 1439 

— (1790), Peake (3rd ed.), 14 

453, 477, 478 

— (1803), R. & R. 03 605 

— (1820), R. & R. 418 077 

— (1S21-5), 3 B. & C. 502, 612 

153, 1.5S 

— (1834), 2 Lew. 215 870 

— (1839), 8 C. & P. 720 494 

— (18391. 8 C. & P 733 387 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 672 894 

— (1841), 9 Dowl. 600 98 

— (1843), 1 C. & K. 213 ... 811, 837 

— (1848), 3 Cox, 84 376 

— (1851), 5 Cox, 138 743 

— (1859), 1 F. & F. 511 ... 3, 688, 

752 1431 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 544 '. 606 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 340 102 

— (1869), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

194 ... 212, 941 

— (1874), 13 Cox, 77 19, 381 

— (1875), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

147 ... 1445, 1430 

— (1882), 15 Cox, 8 102 

— (1883), 15 Cox, 265 697, 1420 

— [1895] 1 Q. B. 25 152, 694 



CXIV 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Taylor (1901), 05 J. P. 457 710 

— (1903), 37 Ir. L. T. Rep. 28 8G6 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 168 

200, 1470 

— [1911] 1 K. B. 674 ... 305, 533, 

598, 642 

— [1912] A. C. 347 819 

— (1915), 11 Cr. App. R. 198 334 

— V. Caldwell [1916] 1 K. B. 

371 ... 1340 

— u. Forsler (1825), 2 C. & 

P. 195 ... 471 

— V. Goodwin (1879), 4 Q. B. 

D. 228 ... 954 

— ... Hawkins (1851), 16 

Q. B. 308 ... 1250 

— V. Monk [1914] 2 K. B. 817 1341 

— V. Smelten (1883), 11 Q. B. 

D. 207 ... 1343 
Teal (1809), 11 East, 307 ... 124, 474, 47.-3 

— (1809-10), 13 East, 4 120 

Tempest (1858), 1 F. & F. 381 ... 208 
Templar (1836), 1 Nev. & P. 91 ... 113 

Tew (1855), Dears. 429 73, 476 

Tewkesbm-y (Mayor) (1868), L. R. 

3 Q. B. 629 ... 402 

Thallman (1863), L. & C. 326 1317 

Theadorus (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 

269 ... 397 
Theriault (1894), 32 New Bruns- 
wick, 504 ... 886/1. 
Tliettord (Mayor) v. Norfolk 
County Council [1898] 2 Q. B. 468 269 

Thoving, 3 1-Iarg. St. Tr. 79 1065 

Thibault c. Gibson (1843), 12 M. & 

W. 88, 94 ... 40 
Thick (1907), Oueensland State 

Rep. 198 ... 1326n. 

Tliirgood (1898), 03 J. P. 442 893 

Tliistlewood (1820), 33 St. Tr. 681 1069 

Thoman (1871), 12 Cox, 54 800 

Thomas (1730), Cas. (K. B.) temp. 

Hardw. 278 ... 240 

— (1784), 1 Leach, 330 645 

(1800), 2>East, P. C. 934 ... 54 

— (1815), 4 M. & Sel. 442 

111, 113 

— (1823), 3 D. & R. 621 100 

— (1827), Carr. Supp. 295 ... 677 

— (1830), 4 C. & P. 237 764 

— (1834), C. & P. 353 386 

— (1837), 7 A. & E. 608 135 

— (1837), 7 C. & P. 345 389 

— (1837), 7 C. & P. 817 ... 20, 438, 

884 

— (1841), 9 C. & P. 741 516 

— (1843), 1 Cox, 52 376 

— (1853), 6 Cox, 403 607 

— (1857), 7 E. & B. 399 ... 1350 

— (1863), L. & C. 313 ... 346, 1155 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 535 ... 1262, 1263, 

1264 

— (1875), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

141 ... 211, 1106 

— (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 36 ... 17 

— Re [1894] 1 Q. B. 747 1204 



PACE 

Thomas c. David (1836), 7 C. & P. 

351 ... 48.'j 

— V. Houghton [1911] 2 K. B. 

959 ... 1290 

— V. Jones [1921] 1 K, B. 22 457 

— V. Newton (1827), M. & 

M. 48n. ... 469 

— V. Pritchard [1903] 1 K. B. 

209 ... 129 
Thompson (1781), 2 East, P. C. 

515... 667 

— (1783), 1 Leach, 291 ... 386 

— (1784), 1 Leach, 338 ... 676 

— (1796), 2 Leach, 771 ... 659 

— (1825), 1 Mood. 78... 533, 597 

— (1825), 1 Mood. 80 ... 882, 

899, 1002 

— (1832), 3 Tyr. 53 95 

— (1841), 2 M. & Rob. 355 

1399, 1400 

— (1843), 1 Cox, 43 287 

— (1846), 1 Cox, 268 76 

— (1850), 1 Den. 549 538 

~ (1851), 16 O. B. 832 ... 8, 64, 

210, 1157, 1418, 1425 

— (1862), L. & C. 225. ..532, 641 

— (1862), L. & C. 233 697 

— (1863), 3 F. & F. 824 ... 469 

— (1869), 11 Co.x, 362 671 

— (1872), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

377... 408 

— (1876), 13 Cox, 181... 431, 486 

— [1893] 2 O. B. 12; 17 

Cox, 641 ... 385, 386, 389, 390 

— (1900), 04 J. P. 456 

1319, 1324 

— (1909\ 2 Cr. App. R. 

112... 34IJ 

— (1910), D Cr. App. R. 

9... 1270 

— [1910] 1 K. B. 040 393 

— [1914] 2 K. B. 99 

53. 54, 101, 335, 1044 

— [1917] 2 K. B. 030...304, 487n. 
— . u. Director of Public 

Prosecutions [1918] A. 

C. 221 ... 1052 
Thomson (1795), i Russ. Cr. (7th 

od.) 1304 ... • 42 

— (1905), 70 J. P. 6... 1305, 1300 

— [1912] 3 K. B. 19 

356, 359. 370, 374 
Thorley v. Kerry (Lord) (1812), 4 

Taunt. 355 ... 1245 
Thorn (1841), C. & Mar. 206 ...812,813 
Thornhill (1838), 8 C. & P. 575 

379, 487 
Thornley (1915), 11 Cr. App. R. 

270... 310 

Thornton (1850), 4 Ex. 820 120 

Thorp (1096), 5 Mod. 221 1416 

Thorpe (1829), 1 Lew. 171 879 

— (1858), Dears. & B. 562... 616 

— V. Priostnall [1895] IQ. B. 

159... 979 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Threlfall (1914), 10 Cr. App. R.' 

112... 1191 
Threlkeld d. Smith [1901] 2 K. B. 

531 ... 553 

Thring (1832), 5 C. & P. 507 423 

Thrower (1672). 1 Vent. 208 7 

Thurborn (1849), 1 Den. 387 ...512,527 
Tibbits & Windust [1902] 1 K. B. 

77... 3, 131, 1121, 1125, 1217, 

1252, 1415, 1417, 1422 

Tibshelf (1830), 1 B. & Ad. 190 ... 1300 

Tldeswell [1905] 2 K. B. 273 531 

Tierney (1804), R. & R. 74/ 1134 

Tilley (1795), 2 Leach, 662 1171 

Tilson (1858), 1 F. & F. 54 1296 

Timmins (1836), 7 C. & P. 499 ... 893 

— (1860), Bell, 276 1010 

Timothy (1858), 1 F. & F. 39 1428 

— V. Fenn (1910), 74 J. P. 

123 ... 419 

— u. Simpson (1835), 1 Cr. 

M. & R. 757 ... 900, 1003 
Tinclder (1781), 1 East, P. C. 354; 

1 Den. V. ...377,455 
Tindall (1837), 6 A.. & E. 143 

1313, 1357, 1358 

Tippet (1823), R. & R. 509 395 

Tippin (1689), 2 Salk. 494 86 

Tite (1861), L. & C. 29 611, 613 

Titley (1880), 14 Cox, 502 926 

Tiverton (Mayor) (1723), 8 Mod. 

186... 130 

Tivey (1844), 1 Den. xviii. 63 789 

Toaldey (1866), 10 Cox, 406 207n. 

Todd (1711), 2 East, P. C. 653 48 

Tolfree (1823), 1 Mood. 243 538 

ToUeli, (1841), C. & Mar. 112 ... 538, 539 
Tolson (1864), 4 F. & F. 103 1294 

— (1889), 23 O. B. D. 168 

10, 24, 25, 26, 401, 1305 
Tomey (1909), 2 Cr. App. R. 329 

457, 459 
Tomlinson (1835), 7 C. & P. 183 ... 967 

— [1895] 1 Q. B. 706 684 

— V. Brittlebank (1833), 

4 B. & Ad. 630 ... 1248 
Tonge (1662), 6 St. Tr. 225 

396, 1064, 1067 

Tongue (1860), Bell, 289 608 

Tonks [1916] 1 K. B. 443 162,961 

Tooke (Home) (1794), 25 St. Tr. 

1, 127 ...354,365,422 

— (1794), 1 East, P. C. 98 1066 

Toole (1867), 11 Cox, 75 (/r.) 1155 

Tooley (1710), 2 Ld. Raym. 1296 ... 898 
Topham (1791), 4 T. R. 126 

1122, 1249 
Toppin u. Marcus [1908] 2 Jr. Rep. 

423... 26, 723 
Topping (1856), Dears. 647 

1292, 1295, 1300 

Torpey (1871), 12 Cox, 45 22,23 

Toshack (1849), 1 Den. 492 803 

Tottenham (1835), 7 C. & P. 237 ... 753 
Tpwers (1874), 12 Cox, 530 873 

A.C.P. 



PAGE 

Towle (1816), R. & R. 314 

59, 1439, 1443 
Townley (1746), 18 St. Tr. 1329 

1064, 1067 

— (1863), 3 F. & F. 839 17 

— (1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

315...543, 544, 547 
Townsend (1841), C. & Mar. 178 

402, 589 

— (1846), 1 Den. 167 ...607, 60S 

— (1866), 10 Cox, 356' ... 1184 
Townshend (1780), 2 Doug. 421 ... 1367 

— (1884), 15 Cox, 466..-. 635 
Train (1862), 2 B. & S. 640 ... 1313, 1354 
Trainer (1864), 4 F. & F. 105 893 

— (1906), 4 Austr. C. L. R. 

126... 396- 
TraHord (1831),. 1 B. & Ad. 874... 56 
Tranter (Reason &) (1722), 16 St. 

Tr. 1 ... 378 
Trapshaw (1786), 1 Leach, 427 ... 663 

Travers (1726), 2 Str. 700 453 

Treadgold (1879), 48 L. J. (M. C.) 

102 ... 605, 618 
Trebeck v. Crondall [1918] 1 K. B. 

158... 1004 
Trebilcock (1858), Dears. & B. 453 

219n., 345, 513 

Treble (1810), R. & R. 164 805 

Treeve's Case (1796), 2 East, P. C. 

819... 720 
Tremaine or Tremearne (1826), 5 

B. & C. 254 ... 195, 208, 1373 

Trenfield (1858), 1 F. & F. 43 833 

Trevelli (1882), 15 Cox, 289 206 

Trilloe (1842), C. & Mar. 650 874 

Trist V. Johnson (1833), 1 M. & 

Rob. 259 ... 369 

Tristram [1898] 2 Q. B. 371 1346 

TroUope d. London Building 
Trades Federation (1893), 72 

L. T. 342... 1284 
Troman v. Hodkinson [1903] 1 K. 

B. 30... 1340 
Trowter (1722), 1 East, P. C. 356... 378 
Trueman [1913] 3 K. B. 164 ... 247, 1244 
Truman (1795), 1 East, P. C. 470..'. 1298 

— (1847), 2 Cox, 306 608 

Truscott u. Carpenter (1697), 1 

Ld. Raym. 229... 934 

Trusty (1783), 1 East, P. C. 418... 645 
Tuberfield (1864), 34 L. J. M. C. 

20... 354 

Tucker (1767), 4 Burr. 2046 99 

— (1826), 1 Mood. 134 685 

— (1844), 1 Cox, 73 664,666 

— (1876), 2 Q. B. D. 417 ... 1325 
Tuckwell (1841), C. & Mar. 215... 1436 
TuUay u. Reed (1828), 1 C. & P. 

6... 934 
Tulley D. Corrie (1867), 10 Cox, 

640... 947 
Tunbridge (1822), 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

1368... 1163 
Turberville (1849), 4 Cox, 13 814 

h* 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Turner (1664), 1 Sid. 171 668 

— {incert.), Comb. 407, 408 

cit. ... 886 

— (1784), 1 Leach, 305 663 

— (1790), 1 Leach, 536 48 

— (1811), 13 East, 228 1421 

— (1812), 15 East, 570 119 

— (1824), 3 B. & C. 160 119 

— (1838), 2 Mood. 42 1095 

— (1839), 8 C. & P. 755 920 

— (1848), 2 C. & K. 732 421 

— (1849), 3 Cox, 304 1385 

— (1864), 4 F. & F. 339 879 

— (1870), 11 Cox, 551 611 

— (1872), 12 Cox, 313 ... 1399, 1400 

— (1886), C. C. C. Sess. Pap. 

Sept. 17, 1886... 1020 

— (1889), 24 L. J. N. 466, 469, 

479 ... 104, 173 

— [1904] 1 K. B. 181 ... 232, 1266 

— [1910] 1 K. B. 346 198,343, 

414, 635, 1470, 1472, 1473, 1474 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 203... 922 

— V. Pearte (1787), 1 T. R. 

717 ... 452 

Turton (1854), 6 Cox, 386 170 

Turweston (1850), 16 Q. JB. 109 ... 1359 
Tutchin (1704), 14 St. Tr. 1095 

1118, 1119 
Twigg (1919), 14 Cr. App. R. 71 ... 337 

Twisleton (1668), 1 Lev. 257 1012 

Twiss [1918] 2 K. B. 853 ... 219, 364, 1052 

Twose (1879), 14 Cox, 327 25,754 

Two Sicilies (King) v. Willcox 

(1850), 19 L. J. (Ch.) 488... 1080 
Twyn (1663), 6 St. Tr. 513n. ...1065, 1066 

Twynham (1921), 85 J. P. 48 306 

Twyning (1819), 2 B. & Aid. 386 

400, 1.304 
Tydeman u. Thrower [1914] 2 K. 

B. 494 ... 250 
Tyler (1823), 1 C. & P. 129 387 

— (1835), 1 Mood. 428 1237 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 616 ... 21, 1439 

— [1891] 2 O. B. 588 "9 

Tylney (1848), 1 Den. 319 471,807 

Tyree (1869), L. R. 1 C. C. R. , 

177 ... 344, 609 

Tyrie (1782), 21 St. Tr. 815 1075 

Tyrone JJ. [1909] 2 Ir. Rep. 763 ... 242 

Tyrrell [1894] 1 Q. B. 710 1030 

Tyson (1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

107... 1185, 1186 



UEZELL (1851), 2 Den. 274 1385 

UUee, Re (1886), 54 L. T. 286 1298 

Ulmer (1850), 4 Cox, 442 431 

Underwood (Bailey and) (1913), 9 

Cr. App. R. 94 ... 1427 
United Kingdom Electric Telegraph 
Co. (1862), 31 L. J. (M. C.) 166 

1354, 1355, 1356 
United States v. Gale (1883), 109 

U. S. 65 ... 73n. 



PAGE 

United States u. Hamilton (1816), 
1 Mason (U. S.) 

152 ... 33 
— 0. Perez (1824), 9 

Wheaton, 579... 221 
Unwin (1839), 7 Dowl. Pr. Cas. 

578... 113 

Upchurch (1836), 1 Mood. 465 ... 388 

Upfold V. Lett (1804), 5 Esp. 100 ... 816 

Upington o. Solomon (1879), 9 

Buchanan (Cape Sup. Ct.), 240.. 868n. 

Upton (1851), 5 Cox, 298 786 

Upton-on-Severn (1833), 6 C. & P. 

133 ... 1360 
Upton St. Leonards (1847), 10 Q. B. 

827 ... 130, 440 
Usill u. Brearley (1878), 3 C. P. D. 

206... 1125 
— V. Hales (1878), 3 C. P. D. 

319... 1125 



VAGLIANO'S Case [1891] A. C. 

107... 810 
Vaillant u. Dodemeadi (1743), 2 

Atk. 524... 471 
Vallancey o. Fletcher [1897] 1 Q. B. 

265 ... 1165 
Vamplew (1862), 3 F. & F. 520 

11, 870 
Van Butchell (1829), 3 C. & P. 

629 ... 375, 876 
Vandercomb (1796), 2 Leach, 708 

153, 159, 160, 667 
Vane (Sir H.) (1662), 6 St. Tr. 119 

21, 38, 51, 1055, 1064, 1066, 1067 
Van Muyen (1806), R. & R. 118 ... 513 

Vann (1851), 2 Den. 325 1311, 1345 

Van Omeron v. Dowick (1809), 2 

Camp. 42... 411 
Vantandillo (1815), 4 M. & Sel. 

73... 1311 
Varley (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 125... 351 
Vasey v. Lally [1905] 2 K. B. 748... 787 
Vaughan (1696), 13 St. Tr. 485 

395, 480, 485, 651, 1056, 1067, 1069, 
1074, 1076 

— (1769), 4 Burr. 2494 

, 130, 1205, 1418 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 276 ... 816 

— V. Martin (1796), 1 Esp. 

440 ... 490 

Vautin, Re [18991 2 Q. B. 549 298 

Vaux's Case (1590), 4 Co. Rep. Ub. 

158,-160, 225, 1435 
Veale (1915), 11 Cr. App. R. 114 ... 339 
Vegelahn v. Guntner (1896), 167 

Mass. 92 ... 1284 
Vellhusen v. Ormsby (1789), 3 T. R. 

315... 647 

Verelst (1813), 3 Camp. 432 402 

Verney (1909), 73 J. P. 288 ... 230,334 

Villeneuve (1778), 3 T. R. 104 696 

Villensky [1S92] 2 Q. B. 597 732 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Vilmonl o. Bentley, 18 Q. B. D. 

327... 297 
See Bentley u. Vilmont. 
Vincent (1838), 9 C. & P. 91 

486, 1218, 1224 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 275 ... 1427 

Vint a801), 27 St. Tr. 637 ... 127, 1246 

Virrler (1840), 12 A. & E. 317 220 

Vivian (1844), 1 Den. 35 814 

Vizetelly v. Mudies, Ltd. [1900] 2 

Q. B. 170... 1249; 1250 

Vodden (1853), Dears. 229 220 

Voisin (1918), 1 K. B. 531; 13 Cr. 

App. R. 89 ...336, 392 

yoke (1823), R. & R. 531 358,909 

Vos (1895), 6 Queensland L. J. 

215 ... 407, 1000 
Vreones [1?91] 1 Q. B. 360 

3, 720, 721, 1198 

Vyse (1839), 1 Mood. 218 570 

— (1862), 3 F. & F. 247 18 



WADDINGTON (1800), 1 East, 

167... 112 

— (1800), 1 East, 143 ... 225 

— (1822), 1 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 1339 ... 127, 130, 
1160, 1162 

— 0. Cousins (1836), 7 

C. & P. 595 ... 447n. 
Wade (1825), 1 Mood. 86 223,454 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 549 512 

— V. Broughton (1814), 3 V. 

& B. 172 ... 4, 1418, 1428 
Wadsworth (1694), 5 Mod. 13 100 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 557... 540 

Wagstaff (1819), R. & R. 398 683 

Vi^agstafle (1868), 10 Cox, 530 ... 895n. 
Wainwright (1875), 13 Cox, 171 

205, 371, 495 
Waite (1742), 1 Leach, 28 532 

— (1743), 1 Wils. (K. B.) 22... 131 

— [1892] 2 Q. B. 600 ... 11, 12, 962, 

1019, 1023, 1029 
Wakefield (Gibbon) (1827), 2 Lew. 

279 ... 452 467 

— (Mayor, etc.), (1887)', 20 ' 

Q. B. D. 810... 1351 

— (1827), 2 Lew. 1 1418 

Wakefield [1918] 1 K. B. 216 ... 179, 222 
Wakefield's Case (1736), Cas. 

(K. B.) temp. Hardw. 313 ... 484 
Wakeley [1920] 1 K. B. 888 ...66,1031 

Wakeling (1823), R. & R, 504 698 

Wakeman (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 18 537 

— V. Robinson (1823), 1 

Bing. 213... 933 
Wakley v. Cooke (1847), 16 M. & 

W. 822 ... 138 
— ^. — (1849), 4 Ex. 

511 ... 143 
Walcot (1696), 1 Eng. Rep. 87 ... 1060 
Waldegrave Peerage Claim (1837), 

4 CI. & F. 649 ... 1299 
Waldo (1903), 67 J. P. 103 ;. 180 



PAGE 

Waldridge u. Kennison (1794), 1 

Esp. 143... 446 
Waldron d. Coombe (1810), 3 

Taunt. 162... 416 
Walford (1839), 8 C. & P. 767 439 

— (1899), 34 L. J. N. 116 

' 909 923 

— (1907), 71 J. P. 215 ...'... '362 
Walkden (1845), 1 Cox, 282 ...930,945 
Walkem (1908), 14 Canada Cr. Cas. 

122 ... 1447 
Walker (1773), 1 Leach, 97 1170 

— (1799), 3 Esp. 21 1252 

— (1824), 1 C. & P. 320 ... 891, 892 

— (1827), 1 Mood. 155 542 

— (1843), 8 C. & P. 446 163 

— (1843), 2 M. & Rob. 212 ... 372n. 

— (1854), Dears. 358 900 

— (1858), Dears. & B. 600 ... 612 

— -(1859), 1 F. & F. 534 432 

— (1875), L. R. 10 Q. B. 355 6 

— (1901), 65 J. P. 72 296 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 231.. 1472 

— Ex parte (1889), 22 Q. B. 

D. 384 ... 1407 

— V. Baird [1892] A. C. 491 411 

— !). Beauchamp (Countess) 

(1834), 6 C. & P. 552 ... 413 

— u. Brewster (1867), L. R. 

5 Eq. 25 ... 1312, 1354 

— ,,. London (Mayor) (1869), 

L. R. 4 Q. B. 371 

293, 297, 298 

— u. Matthews (1881), 8 

Q.B.D. 109... 297 
Walkley (1833), 6 C. & P. 175 ... 386 
Wall (1800), 2 East, P. C. 953 ... 804 

— (1802), 28 St. Tr. 51 ...869, 885, 886 

— (1907), 21 Cox, 401 (Ir.) ■ ... 1285 

— V. Macnamara (1779), 1 T. 

R. 536, cit. ... 1005 
Wallace (1841), C. & Mar. 200 

41, 750, 751 

— (1866), 10 Cox, 500 411 

— (1898), 19 N. S. W. Rep. 

(Law.) 155... 378n. 

— u. Hardacre (1807), 1 

Camp. 45 ... 1210n. 
Waller (Sir Hardress) (1660), 
Kelyng (ed. Loveland), 

p. 13 ... 379 

— [1910] 1 K. B. 364 

635, 1473, 1474 

— u. Loch (1881), 7 Q. B. 

D. 619... 1251 
Wallingford v. Mutual Benefit 

Society (1880), 5 App. Cas. 685... 1344 
Wallis (1703), 1 Salk. 334 1439 

— (1832), 1 Mood. 344 744 

— V. Delancey (1790), 7 T. R. 

266n. ... 445 

Walls (1845), 2 C. & K. 214 639 

Walne (1870), 11 Cox, 647 703 

Walsby u. Anley (1861), 30 L. J. 

(M. C.) 121 ... 1280 

Walsh (1812), R. & R. 215 532 



TABLE OF CASES. 



Walsh (1824), 1 Mood. 14 533 

Waishe (1876), Jr. Rep. 10 C. L. 

511 ... 1234 
Walter (1799), 3 Esp. 21 1121 

— (1881), 14 Cox, 579 (Ir.)... 121 
Walters (1688), 12 St. Tr. 113 877 

— (1824), 1 Mood. 13 680 

— (1836), 5 C. & P. 138 1263 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 164 ... 871 |, 

— V. Green [1899] 2 Ch. 

696... 1284 

— V. Mace (1819), 2 B. & 

Aid. 756 ... 351 

— V. W. H. Smith & Son, 

Ltd. [1914] 1 K. B. 

595 ... 1003 

Walton (1862), L. & C. 288 684,688 

Wandsworth (1817), IB. & Aid. 

63 ... 1373 
Wann (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 135... 337 
Warburton (1871), L. R. 1 C. C. 

R. 274 ... 1417, 1419, 1421, 1422 
Ward (1727), 2 Str. 747 720, 802 

— (1834), 6 C. & P. 366 

423, 427, 1197 

— (1836), 4 A. & E. 384 

1313, 1357, 1358 

— (1848), 2 C. & K. 759 486 

— (1864), 10 Cox, 42 58 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 573 208,222 

— (1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

356... 910, 942 

— (1900), 64 J. P. 776 520 

— (1912), 7 Cr. App. R. 180 ... 340 

— [1915] 3 K. B, 696 671 

— Re (1861), 30 L. J. (Ch.) 

775 ... 140 

— V. Lloyd (1843), 6 M. & G. 

785 ... 1210n. 

— u. — (1843), 7 Scott (N. R.) 

499 ... 291 

— V. Wells (1809), 1 Taunt! 

461... 445 
Warden (1897), 9 Queensland L. J. 

49... 191n. 

— u. Fermor (1809), 2 Camp. 

282 445 

Wardle (1842), C. & Mar. 647 208 

Wardroper (1860), Bell, 249 23 

Warickshall (1783), 1 Leach, 263 ... 394 

Waring (1899), 63 J. P. 788 1364 

Warman (1846), 1 Den. 183 938 

Warner (1833), 1 Mood. 380 901 

Warre (1725), 2 Str. 698 62 

Warren (1844), 1 Cox, 68 746 

— (1865), 10 Cox, 359 604 

— (1907), 71 J. P. 566 59 

— (1909), 73 J. P. 359. ..202, 459 

— (1919), 14 Cr. App. R, 4.. 307 

— V. Anderson (1839), 8 

Scott, 384 ... 446 

— V. Warren (1834), 1 Cr. 

M. & R. 250... 1120,1249 
Warriner u. Giles (1720), 2 Str. 

954 ... 418 



PAGE 

Warringham (1851), 2 Den. 447n. 

386, 388 
Warshaner (1836), 1 Mood. 466... 52 
Warter o. Warter (1890), 15 P. 

D. 152... 1299 
Wartnaby (1835), 2 A. & E. 435... 114 
Warwick (Lord) (1699), 13 St. Tr. 

939,1015... 164 
Wason, Ex parte (1869), L. R. 

4 Q. B. 573... 69 

— V. Walter (1869), L. R. 

4 Q. B. 73 ...1123, 1125 

Waterage (1846), 1 Cox, 338 921 

Waters (1834), 6 C. & P. 328 894 

— (1848), 1 Den. 356 51,871 

— (1873), 12 Cox, 390 1177 

— u. Phillips [1910] 2 K. B. 

465... 555 

Watkins (1910), 74 J. P. 3S2 254 

Watkinson (1725), 2 Str. 1122 472 

— (1872), 12 Cox, 271 ... 1265 
Watson (1705), 2 Ld. Raym. 856 

1315, 1366 

— (1757), 1 Wils. (K. B.) 41 

133, 1418 

— (1788), 2 T. R. 199 ... 132, 134, 

1216, 1247 

— (1793), 2 Leach, 640 520 

— (1808), 1 Camp. 215 ... 38, 1120 

— (1817), 32 St. Tr. 1 ... 354, 473, 

474, 475, 488, 
492, 1065, 1066 

— (1821), R. & R. 468 1182 

— (1834), 6 C. & P. 653.. .207, 496 

— (1847), 2 Cox, 376 1317 

— (1857), Dears. & B. 348 

699, 715 
30 Ir. L. T. R. 135 



— (1913), 23 Cox, 543 463 

— [1916] 2 K. B. 385 ... 729, 1452, 

1454 
.— V. Christie (1800), 2 B. & 

P 224 933 

Watt (1906), 20 Cox, 852 354 

Watts (1704), 1 Salk. 357 1315, 1366 

— (1798), 2 Esp. 675 1357 

— (1821), R. & R. 436 805, 806 

— (1826), 2 C. & P. 486 ... 1311, 1312 

— (1850), 2 Den. 14 604, 614 

— (1863), L. & C. 339 434 

Waudby [1895] 2 Q. B. 482 ... 940, 1440 
Waugh (1909), Vict. L.> R. 379.. .38n., 695 

Wavell (1829), 1 Mood. 224 713 

Wavertree (1841), 2 M. & Rob.' 

353 ... 1366 
Weatherston u. Hawkins (1786), 

1 T. R. 110 ... 1250 
Weaver (1873), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

85 ... 413, 443, 1029, 1031 

— V. Bush (1798), 8 T. R. 78 934 

— V. Ward (1627), Hob. 134 933 
Webb (1722), 2 Str. 1068 112 

— (1764), 3 Burr. 1468 99, 100 

— (1811), 14 East, 406 134 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Webb (1819), 1 Stark. Ev. (3rd 

ed.) 189 ... 485 

— (1829),, 3 B. & B. 228 805 

— (1834), 1 M. & Rob. 405 ... 876 

— (1835), 1 Mood. 431 ... 513, 579 

— (1848), 1 Den. 338... 343, 344, 1317 

— ■ (1865), 4 F. & F. 862 202 

— (1867), 11 Cox, 133 455 

— (1893), 9 T. L. R. 199 610 

— (1904), 140 Cent. Crim. Ct. 

Sess. Pap. 627 ... 8, 994 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 112 ... 340 

— V. Beavan (1883), U Q. B. 

D. 609 ... 1246 

Webber [1913] 1 K. B. 33 1473 

Webster (1789), 3 T. R. 388 ... 133, 135, 

136 

— (1859), 8 Cox, 187 1191 

— (1861), L. & C. 77 540 

— (1885), 16 O. B. D. 134 ... 1026 
Wedderburne (1746), 18 St. Tr. 

425 ... 222, 354, 1066, 1067 
Wedge (1832), 5 C. & P. 298. ..1029, 1031 
Wednesbury (Mayor, etc.) v. 
Lodge Holes Colliery Co. [1908] 

A. C. 323 ... 1364 
Weekes (1866), 10 Cox, 224 ... 537,' 538 

Weeks (1861), L. & C. 18 360, 1112 

Weinberg (1898), 33 L. J. N. 239 1296 
Weiner v. Harris [1910] 1 K. B. 

285 297 

Weir (1823), 1 B. & C. 288 899 

Weisz (1920), 15 Cr. App. R. 85 ... 337 
Welbourn (1792), 1 East, P. C. 

358, 360 ... 375, 376 
Welch (1846), 1 Den. 199 ... 606, 608, 618 

— (1851), 2 Den. 78 1103 

— (1875), 1 Q. B. D. 23 ... 741, 790, 

800 
Weld V. Hornby (1806), 7 East, 

195 ... 1312 
Wellard (1884), 14 Q. B. D. 63 .'.'. 1317 
Wellings (1824), 1 C. & P. 315, 

454, 457 ... 606 

— (1878), 3 Q. B. D. 426 ... 431 
Wellock V. Constantine (1863), 

2 H. & C. 146 ... 292 
Wells (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 197 ... 339 

— (1910), 5 Cr. App. R. 33 ... 1475 

— V. Abrahams (1872), L. R. 

7 Q. B. 554 ... 291, 292 

Welman (1853), Dears. 188 707 

Welsh (1827), 1 Mood. 175 37, 158 

— (1828), MS.: Car. Supp. 56 159 

— (1869), 11 Cox, 336 881, 883 

Weltje (1809), 2 Camp. 142 ... 1215, 1216, 

1217 
Welton (1862), 9 Cox, 297 431 

— V. Raffles (1919), 26 Cox, 

534 ... 1334 
Wemyss o. Hopkins (1875), L. R. 

10 O. B. 378 ... 156, 160 

Wenborn (1842), 6 Jur. 267 208 

Wenham (1866), 10 Cox, 222 ... 416, 712 
Wenmouth (1860), 8 Cox, 348 675 



PAGE 

Wennall v. Adney (1802), 3 B. & 

P. 247 ... 973 
Wentworth (Lord) (1559), 4 St. Tr. 

314 ... 1074 

Wesley (1859), 1 F. & F. 528 902 

West (1831), 2 Deacon Cr. L. 1518 769 

— (1847), 1 Den. 258 815 

— (1848), 2 C. & K. ^4 873 

— (1854), Dears. 402 529 

— (1856), Dears. & B. 109 52 

— (1858), Dears. & B. 575 698 

— [1898] 1 Q. B. 174 ... 65,1025, 1031 

— (1910), 4 Cr. App. R. 179 

209 1023 
Westbeer (1739), 1 Leach, 12 ..." 216, 
455, 542 
Westbury v. Powell (incert.), 

Cro. Eliz. 664, cit. ... 7 

Westfall (19121, 76 J. P. 335 ... 335, 349, 

463, 464 

— (1921), 85 J. P. 116 1474 

Westlake v. Westlake [1910] P. 

167 ... 1301 

Westley (1868), 11 Cox, 139 163 

West Mark (1840), 2 M. & Rob. 

305 ... 1362, 1368 
Weston (1724), 1 Str. 623 56, 99 

— (1770), 4 Burr. 2507 ... 29, 1360, 

1365 

— (1879), 14 Cox, 346 ... 204, 887, 

896 

— [1910] 1 K. B. 17 339 

West Rand Co., Ltd. [1905] 2 K. B. 

- 391 ... 121 
Westropp (1851), 2 Ir. C. L. Rep. 

217 ... 1234 
Westwood (1822), R. & R. 495.. .658, 681 

— (1913), 8 Cr. App. R. 

273 ... 1474 
Wetherell (1819), R. & R. 381 ... 77, 109 
Wetherston v. Edgington (1809), 

2 Camp. 94 ... 446 
Whalley (1847), 2 C. & K. 376 ... 207 
Whalley's Case (1874), L. R. 9 

Q. B. 219 ... 1202, 1217 
Wharton (Duke of) (1728), Baga 

de Seoretis ... 1074 

— (Peerage Claim) (1844), 

12 CI. & F. 295 ... 425 
Whateley (1829), 4 Man. & Ry. 

431 ... 132 ' 
Wheat (and Stocks) [1921] 2 K. B. 

119 ... 26, 684, 1306 
Wheater (1838), 2 Mood. 45, 51 

382, 384 
Wheatland (1838), 8 C. & P. 238 ... 1191 

Wheatly (1761), 2 Burr. 1125 721 

Wheeldon (1839), 8 C. & P. 747 ... 669 
Wheeler (1829), 3 C. & P. 585 672 

— (1852), Cent. Crim. Ct. ... 171 

— (1866), 14 W. R. 848 (Ir.) 617 

— (1916), 12 Cr. App. R. 159 460 

— [1917] 1 K. B. 283 1185 

Wheeley (1838), 8 C. & P. 250 382 

Wheeling (17891, 1 Leach, 311n. ... 395 
Whelan (1881), 14 Cox, 595 (Ir.) ... 206 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Whiley (1804), 2 Leach, 983 ... 360, 363, 

834, 1104 

Whitaker [1914] 3 K. B. 1283.. .1205, 1421 

— V. Pomfret [1902] 1 K. B. 

661 ... 1290 

— u. Wisbey (1852), 6 Cox, 

1Q9 207 232 
Whitchurch (1890), 24 Q. B. D. ' 

420 ... 924, 1417, 1418 
Whitcomb (1823), 1 C. & P. 124 ... 1208 
White (1757), 1 Burr. 333 1311, 1312 

— (1783), 1 Leach, 252 676 

— (1786), 1 Leach, 430 454, 478 

— (1800), 1 Phill. Ev. (7th ed.) 

406 ... 390 

— (1806), R. & R. 99 1438 

— (1808), 30 St. Tr. 1131 ... 132, 1216 

— (1811), 3 Camp. 98 203 

— (1823), R. & R. 508 395 

— (1839), 8 C. & P. 742 610 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 344 531 

— (1847), 1 Den. 208 802, 811 

— (1853), Dears. 203 545 

— • (1860), 3 E. & E. 137 142 

— (1865), 4 F. & F. 383, 384 

367, 400 

— (1871), L. R, 1 C. C. R. 311 

977, 978 

— [1910] 2 K. B. 124 ... 4, 215, 865, 

908, 915, 1432, 1433n. 

— (1912), 23 Cox, 190 528, 530 

— V. Garden. (1851), 10 C. B. 

919 ... 525 

— V. Parkin (1810), 12 East, 

578 ... 450 

— u. Spettigue (1845), 13 M. & 

W. 603 ... 291, 292, 297, 1212 
Whitehead (1824), 1 C. & P. 67 ... 1427 

— (1845), 7 Q. B. 582 62 

— (1848), 3 C. & K. 202 877 

— (1866), L, R, 1 C. C. R. 

33 ... 345, 452 
Whitehorn Bros. v. Davison [1911] 

1 K. B. 463 ... 516, 525 
Whitehouse (1852), 6 Cox, 38, 45 

1420, 1424 

— (1852), 6 Cox, 129 ... 1420 

— (1852), Dears. 1 ... 1372n. 

— V. Hugh [1906] 1 Ch. 

253 ... 1362 
Whitelocke i/. Musgrove (1833), 

1 Cr. & M. 511 ... 445 
Whiteman (1854), Dears. 353 ... 575, 794 

— (1909), 73 J. P. 102 ... 339 
Whitfield (1850), 3 C. & K. 121 ... 171 

— o. S. E. R. (1858), E. B. 

& E. 115'... 10 
Whithorne (1828), 3 C. & P. 394 ... 901 
Whiting (1837), 7 C. & P. 771 ... 492 

Whitley (1908), 72 J. P. 272 732 

Whitmarsh (1898), 62 J. P. 680, 

711 ... 375, 888 
Whitmore v. Farley (1881), 45 

L. T. 99 ... 1209n. 
Whitney (1824), 1 Mood. 3 789 



PAGE 

Whitney (1835), 7 C. & P. 208 ... 1363, 

1367, 1375 

Whittaker (1848), 1 Den. 310 1385 

— (1859), 2 F. & F. 1 84 

Whittingham (1801), 2 Leach, 912 615 

— (1840), 9 C. & P. 234 

772, 773 
Whitworth (1858), 1 F. & F. 382 376 

I Whybrow (1861), 8 Cox, 438 1197 

Whyte (1851), 5 Cox, 290 805 

Wicker (1854), 18 Jur. 252 431 

Wickham (1839), 10 A. & E. 34.. .704, 710 

— Ex parte (1894), 10 

T. L. R. 226 ... 852 
Widdop -(1872), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

3 ... 383 

Wigg (1706), 2 Salk. 460 5, 100 

Wiggins (1867), 10 Cox, 562 486 

Wiggs (1785), 1 Leach, 378n 886 

Wight (1895), 59 J. P. 746 146 

Wihen v. Law (1821), 3 Stark. 

(N. P.) 63 ... 413 

Wilbain (1864), 9 Cox, 448 (Jr.) ... 447 
Wiibourne (1917), 12 Cr. App. R. 

280 ... 373, 1033 

Wilcox (1803), R. & R. 50 802 

Wild (1725), 1 Str. 57 722 

— (1835), 1 Mood. 452 11, 389 

— (1837), 2 Lew. 214 887, 888 

Wildman (1872), 12 Cox, 354 ... 77, 109 

Wiley (1850), 2 Den. 37 728 

Wilford (1823), R. & R. 517 ... 48, 661 
Wilkes (1770), 4 Burr. 2527; 19 St. 

Tr. 1075 ... 56, 86, 127, 232, 
233, 1318, 1323 

— V. Hungerford Market Co., 

2 Bing. (N. C.) 281 ... 1309 
Wilkins (1789), 1 Leach, 520 ... 48, 524 

— (1861), L. & C. 89 947 

— Ex parte (1895), 18 Cox, 

161 ... 1285 

— (1921), 16 Cr. App. R. 96 

1474, 1475 

— ^. Gill (1903), 20 T. L. R. 

3 ... 1213 
Wilkinson (1598), 1 Hale 508 ... 534 

— (1821), R. & R. 470 ... 540 

— (1867), 10 Cox, 537 ... 619 
Wilks (1767), 2 East, P. C. 957 ... 805 

— (1855), 5 E. & B. 690 112 

— (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 16 

^ 362 525 

Willett (1795), 6 T. R. 294 ' 135 

Willetts (1906), 70 J. P. 127 1422 

Williams (1639), 1 Hale, 522 662 

— (1712), 1 Salk. 384 ... 22, 1328 

— (1757), 1 Burr. 385 138 

— (1762), 3 Burr. 1317 132 

— (1775), 1 Leach, 114 813 

— (Rhenwick) (1790), 1 

Leach, 529 ... 233, 950 

— (1797), 26 St. Tr. 653 ... 1162 

— (1810), 2 Camp. 506.. .38, 1120, 

1235 

— (1811), 2 Camp. 646.. .353, 1121 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

■Williams (1822), 5 B, & Aid. 595 

131, 136, 1119 

— (1823), 2 L. J. (0. S.) 

K. B. 30 ... 131, 1217 

— (1824), 4 Man. & Ry. 471 

1232 1233 

— (1825), 1 Mood. 107 ... 547, 548 

— (1833), 1 Mood. 387 900 

— (1834), 6 C. & P. 390 ... 522 

— (1834), 6 C. & P. 626 ... 619 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 320 ... 453 

— (1836), 7 C. & P. 354 ... 711 
(1838), 8 C. & P. 284 ... 469 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 286 ... 1021 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 434 ... 451, 

807, 836 

— (1842), C. & Mar. 259 ... 1088, 

1105, 1108 
(1843), 1 C. & K. 195 ... 533 

— (1844), 1 Den. 39 ... 911, 912, 

1435 

— (1845), 1 Cox, 289 459 

— (1845), 7 Q. B. 250 6 

— (1848), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

775 ... 1220, 1222 

— (1850), 2 Den. 61 344 

— (1853), 6 Cox, 343 ... 490, 494 

— (1857), 7 Cox, 351 704 

— (1862), 9 Cox, 338 (Ir.) ... 794 

— (1870), 18 W. R. 806 

225, 260 

— (1871), 11 Cox, 684 ... 920, 921 

— (1871), 12 Cox, 101 433 

— (1878), 14 Cox, 59 1385 

— [1893] 1 Q. B. 320 ... 12, 962, 

1019, 1023, 1029, 1433 

— (1898), 62 J. P. 310 698, 

1037, 1038 

— (1899), 19 Cox, 239 736 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 2 

234 339 
~ (1910), 26 T. L. R. 290 ...' 997 

— (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 49 1475 

— (1913), 77 J. P. 240 ... 336, 490 

— (1920), 14 Cr. App. R. 

135 ... 338 

— V. Bayley (1866), L. R. 

1 H. L. 200 ... 1210n., 1456 

— V. Burgess (1840), 12 A. 

& E. 635 ... 65 

— V. Glenister (1824), 2 B. 

& C. 699 ... 1166 

— V. H. E. I. Co. (1802), 

3 East, 192 ... 2, 367, 1315 
I/. Jones (1736), 2 Str. 

1049 ... 934 

— V. Quebrada Rail. Co. 

[1895] 2 Ch. 751 ... 471 

— V. Williams (1882), 20 

Ch. D. 659 ... 1345 

— Star Newspaper Co. 

(1908), 24 T. L. R. 297 473 
Williamson (1807), 3 C. & P. 635 876 

— (1820), 3 B. & Aid. 

582 ... 135 

— (1844), 1 Cox, 97 894 



PAGE 

Williamson (1869), 11 Cox, 328.. .699, 701 
Willingale v. Norris [1909] 11 

K. B. 57 ... 6 
Willis (1710), 15 St. Tr. 613 ... 380, 395 

— (1833), 1 Mood. 375 515 

— ri916] 1 K. B. 933 456 

— V. Maclachlan (1876), 1 Ex. 

D. 376 ... 935 

— V. Young [1907] 1 K. B. 448 1344 
Willman v. Worrall (1838), 8 C. & 

P. 380 ... 445, 446 

Willmont (1914), 78 J. P. 352 218 

Willot (1871), 12 Cox, 68 696 

Willoughby (1783), 2 East, P. C. 

944 ... 811 
, — (1791), 1 East, P. 'C. 

288 ... 882 
— (1913), 32 N. Z. L. R. 

1295 359 
Willoughby's Case (1588), Cro. 

Eliz. 90 ... 7 
Wiltshire (1880), 6 Q. B. D. 366 

400, 401, 1302, 1303 

Wilmett (1848), 3 Cox, 281 1140 

Wilshaw (1841), C. & Mar. 145 

433, 440 
Wilson (1799), 8 T. R. 357 1233 

— (1806), R. & R. 115 664 

— (1834-5), 1 A. & E. 627; 

3 A. & E. 817 ... 1230, 1233 

— (1837), 8 C. & P. Ill 520 

— (1839), 9 C. & P. 27 615 

— (1844), 6 Q. B. 620 101 

— (1847), 1 Den. 284 ... 806, 834 

— (1852), 18 Q. B. 348 1362 

— (1856), Dears. & B. 127 ... 923 

— (1856), Dears. & B. 157 ... 398 

— (1858), Dears. & B. 558 ... 847 

— (1861), 8 Cox, 453 430 

— (1862), 3 F. & F. 119 1293 

— (1874), 12 Cox, 622 75 

— (1879), 5 Q. B. D. 28 ... 13, 1264 

— [1909] 2 K. B. 756 234 

— (1912), 8 Cr. App. R. 20 

1474, 1475 
(1913), 9 Cr. App. R. 124 

337, 488, 709 

— (1915), 11 Cr. App. R. 251 

362, 462 

— u. Greaves (1757), 1 Burr. 

240 ... 1163 

— u. Rastall (1792), 4 T. R. 

753 ... 467, 471 

— 0. Stewart (1863), 32 L. J.. 

(M. C.) 198 ... 1438 

Wilton (1858), 1 F. & F. 309 432 

Wilts (1705), 6 Mod. 307 1374, 1377 

Wiltshire JJ. (1863), 8 L. T. (N. S.) 

242 ... 1212 
Windhill I.. B. n. Vint (1890), 

45 Ch. D. 351 ... 1209n., 1210n., 
1211, 1357 
Windsor (1864), 4 F. & F. 361 ... 388 
Re (1865), 34 L. J. (M. C.) 

163 ... 803 
Wink (1834), 6 C. & P. 397 372n. 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

Winkel (1912), 76 J. P. 191 390, 392 

Winkworth (1830), 4 C. & P. 444 040 

— (1908), 1 Cr. App. R. 

129 ... 460 

Winslow (1860), 8 Cox, 397 358 

Winsor (1865), L. R. 1 O. B. 289, 

390 ... 210, 218, 221, 221n., 223, 
224, 336, 347, 457, 459 

Winter (1815), R. & R. 295 743 

— V. Bancks (1901), 19 Cox, 

687 295 
Wintle, Re (1870), L. R. 9 Eq. 373 414 

Winwick (1799), 8 T. R. 454 898 

Wiseman (1716), Fortesc. 91 1047 

— (1902), 71 L. J. (K. B.) 

128 ... }263 

Witchell (1798), 2 East, P. C. 830 696 

Withal (1773), 1 Leach, 88 668 

Witham i-. Lewis (1744), 1 Wils. 

(K. B.) 48 ... 347, 348 

Withers (1784), 1 East, P. C. 233 882 

— (1789), 3 T. R. 428 226 

— (1831), 1 Mood. 294 938 

— (1849), 4 Cox, 17 100 

Withinglon L. B. o. Manchester 

(Mayor) [1893] 2 Ch. 19 ... 1313 
Witt (1829), 1 Mood. 248 662 

— V. Witt (1863), 3 Sw. & Tr. 

143 ... 373 

Wolff (1914), 10 Cr. App. R. 107 ... 337 

Wollaston (1872), 12 Cox, 180 ... 1032, 

1048, 1050 

— V. Hakewill (1841), 3 

Scott (N. R.) 593 ... 452 

Wollez (1860), 8 Cox, 337 297, 298 

Wolstenholme (1869), 11 Cox, 313 619 
Womersley (1836), 2 Lew. 162 ... 289 
Wong Chcy (1910), 6 Cr. App. R. 

59 304 
Wood (1796), 2 East, P. C. 732.. .526, 640 

— (1830), 1 Mood. 278 938 

— (1831), 3 B. & Ad. 657 13.32 

— (1841), 5 Jur. 225 37 

— (1848), 3 Cox, 453 527 

— (1856), Dears. & B. 1 1385 

— (1859), 1 F. & F. 470 ... 902, 967 

— (1877), 14 Cox, 46 372 

— (1912), 76 J. P. 103 678 

— [1920] 2 K. B. 179 462 

— Ex parte Atcherley (1908), 

73 ,1. P. 40 ... 142 

— V. Bowron (1866), L. R. 

2 Q. B. 21 ... 1280 
— , V. Burgess (1890), 24 Q. B. 

D. 162 ... 1273 

— V. Drury (1699), 1 Ld. 

Raym. 734 ... 445 

— u. Veal (1822), 5 B. & Aid. 

454 ... 1361 
Woodburn & Coke (1722), 16 St. 

Tr. 54 ... 878, 888, 939 

Woodcock (1789), 1 Leach,- 500... 375, 376, 

377, 378, 434, 467 

— V. Houldsworth (1846), 

16 M. & W. 124 ... 590 
Woodfall (1770), 5 Burr. 2661 ... 216, 347 



PACE 

Woodfield (1887), 16 Cox, 314 1383 

Woodhall (1872), 12 Cox, 240 ... 211, 644 
Woodhead (1836), 1 M. & Roh. 

549 ... 577, 768 

— (1847), 2 C. & K. 520 486 
Woodley (1834), 1 M. & Rob. 390 ... 471 • 

— (1920), 14 Cr. App. R. 135 338 
Woodman (1879), 14 Cox, 179 698 

— (1909), 73 J. P. 286 ... 339 
Woodroffe v. Williams (1815), 6 

Taunt. 19 ... 420 
Woodrow (1798), 2 T. R. 731 ... 133, 1386 
Woods (1853), 6 Cox, 224 204, 491 

— (1921), 85 J. P. 276 885 

Woodward (1785), 1 Leach, 253n. 676 

— ri831), 1 Mood. 323 ... 753 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 561 ... 24 

— (1862), L. & C. 122 ... 729 

— V. Cotton (1834), 1 Cr. 

M. & R. 44 ... 405 
Woolcock (1833), 5 C. & P. 516 

1219 1227 
Wooldridge (1784), 1 Leach, 307 

1098, 1103 
Woolford's Estate (Trustee of) v. 

Levy [1892] 1 Q. B. 772 ... 1206 
WooUer (1817), 2 Stark. (N. P.) 

Ill ... 211) 
Woolley (1850), 4 Cox, 251, 255. ..607, 608 

— (1850), 1 Den. 559 695, 697 

— (1909), 3 Cr. App. R. 57 233 

Woolmer (1832), 1 Mood. 334 899 

Woolnoth 0. Meadows (1814), 5 

East, 463 ... 1247 

Woolston (1729), 2 Str. 834 1162 

Wootton V. Dawkins (1857), 2 C. B. 

(N: S.) 412 ... 9.52 

Worker (1827), 1 Mood. 165 967 

World (The) (1876), 13 Cox, 305 ... 136 

Worrall (1836), 7 C. & P. 516 574 

— (1890), 16 Cox, 737 1205' 

Worrell's Case (incerl.), Trem. 

106 ... 721 
Wortley (1846), 1 Den. 162 672 

— (1851), 2 Den. 333 612, 618 

Worton [1895] 1 Q. B. 227 1340 

Wright (1758), 1 Burr. 543 5, 99" 

— (1799), 8 T. R. 293 ... 131, 1124 

— (1821), R. & R. 456...19, 451, 490' 

— (1832), 3 B. & Ad. 681 ... 1355 

— (1834), 7 C. & P. 159 599 

— (1841), 9 C. & P. 754 874 

— (1849), 14 Q. B. 148 1424 

— (1858), Dears. & B. 431 

541, 614, 619 

— (1860), 2 F. & F. 320 55' 

— (1866), 4 F. & F. 967 ... 495, 1023' 

— (1894), 28 Jr. L. T. Rep. 

131 ... 1301 

— (1916), 5 Cr. App. R. 131 464 

— V. Wallasey L. B. (1887), 

18 Q. B. D. 783 ... 681 
Wroughton (1735), 3 Burr. 1683 

135, 1164, 1166 

Wroxton (1833), 1 B. & Ad. 640 ... 1300' 

Wyatt (1703), I Salfc. 380 120S 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PACE 

VVyall (1870), aO L. J. (M. C.) 

S3 ... 215, 1033 

— [1901] 1 K. B. 188 ... 356, 362, 

71<1, 717, 1270 

— V. BaLoman (1830), 7 C. & 

P. 586 ... M5 

— V. Gore (1816), Holt (N. P.) 

299 ... 1239 
Wych ./. Meal (1734), 3 P. Wms. 

310 ... 9 

Wycherley (1838), 8 C. & P. 262 ... 228 

Wykes (1738), Andr. 238 132 

Wylde (1834), C C. & P. 380 485 

Wylie (1804), 1 B. & P. (N. R.) 

92 ... 360, 363, 834 
{And see Whiley.) 

— (1919), S3 J. P. 295 123 

Wynian (1918), 13 Cr. App. R. 163 337 

Wymark (1593), 5 Co. Rop. 73a ... 443 

Wymer (1830), 4 C. & P. 391 48 

Wynn (1802), 2 East, 226 99 

— (1848), 1 Den. 365 591 

— (1887), 16 Cox, 231 537 

Wynne (1786), 1 Leach, 413 528 

Wyton (19101, 5 Cr. App. R. 287 ... 1340 



YANDELL (1792), 4 T. R. 521 ... 80 
Yardley v. Arnold (1842), 10 M. & 

W. 141 ... 452 

Yates (1827), 1 Mood. 170 570 

— (1841), C. & Mar. 132 ... 1187, 1191 

— . (1872), 12 Cox, 233.. .99, 1119, 124S 

— (1884), 11 Q. D. D. 750 136 

— (1SS5), 14 Q. B. D. MS 136 

Ycadon (1862), L. & t. 81 ... 212. 219, 

344, 347, 929 

Yend (1833), « C. & P. 176 547 

Yeoman (1904), 20 T. L. R. 266 ... 1404 

Yeoveley (1838), 8 A. & E. 806 ... 127 



PACIi 

Ycwin (1811), 2 Camp. 038 474 

York (1748), Fosl. 70 11 

— (1848), 1 Den. 335 529 

Yorkshire (W. R.) JJ. (1837). 7 A. 

& E. 583 ... i)7i 
Yorkshire (W. R.) (Inhabs.) (1770), 

5 Burr. 2594 ... 1374, 1375 

— (1788), 2 East, 353n 1373 

— (1802), 2 East, 342 1374 

— (1806), 7 East, 588.. .1374, 1376 

— (1S13), 2 Dow. (H. L.) 1 

1374, 1376, 1377 

— (1821), 4 B. & Aid. 623 

1366, 1374 
Young (1758), 1 Burr. 556 132 

— (1788), 3 T. R. 98.. .56, 59, 694, 696 

— (1801), 2 East, 14, oil. ... 130, 

1201, 1205 

— (1838), 8 C. & P. 644 ... 878, 1438 

— (1846), 1 Den. 194 590, 592 

— (1847), 2 Cox, 291 468 

— (1850), 3 C. & K. 106 434 

— (1866), 10 Cox, 371 879, 1219 

— (187S), 14 Cox, 114 1019 

— (1901), 2 Ontario L. R. 228 260 

— (1914), 23 Cox, 624 1475 

— V. Peck (1912), 23 Cox, 270 1284 
■Younger c. Honner (1843), 1 C. & 

K. 51 ... 447n. 
Younghusband (1835), 4 Nev. & M. 

850 ... 134 
Y'risarri u. Clement (1826), 3 Bing. 

432 ... 1249 
Yscuado (1851), 6 Cox, 380 175 



ZENOBIO u. Axtell (1795), 6 T. R. 

162 ... 1119 

Zulueta (1843), 1 C. & K. 215 ... 32, 653 

— (1843), 1 Cox, 20 173 



ADDENDA AND CORRIGENDA. 



Page 222, 


line 8 : 


Page 286, 


line 16 : 


Page 292, 


line 1 . , 


Page 298, 


line 5 : 


Page 336, 


line 36 : 


Page 373, 


line 32 : 


Page 460, 


line 32 : 


Page 461, 


line 18 : 


Page 934, 


line 13 : 


Page 957, 


line 12 : 


Page 1065 


, line 15 


Page 1202 


, line 16 



Page 1209n. . 



Page 1210r 


I. ; 


Page 1249, 


line 4 : 


Page 1249, 


line 11 


Page 1318, 


line 26 


Page 1371, 


line 17 


Page 1383, 


line 39 


Page 1428, 


line 25 


Page 1513, 


line 6 : 


Page 1513, 


line 7 : 



Hill V. Yates, for 12 East, 229, read 10 East, 229. 

; R. V. Kelsey, for 2 Dowl. read 1 Dowl. 

for White V. Spettigue, for 11 M. & W. read 13 M. & W. 

Leicester v. Cherryman, for [1909] 1 K. B. read [1907] 2 K. B. 

R. V. Rvtter, for 25 T. B. read 25 T. Li. R. 

R. V. Norcott, insert after Norcott [1917] 1 K. B. 347. 

R. V. Hadwen, for 22 J. P. read 66 J. P. 

R. y. Rhodes, for (1889) read (1899). 

for Anon. 2 Law. read 2 Lew. 

for B. 71 read s. 17 in heading of indictment. 
: R. V. Freind, for 12 St. Ti-. read 13 St. Tr. 
: R. V. Silverman, for 14 Canada Cr. Cas. read 12 Canada 
Or. Cas. 
for Whitmore v. Failey read Farley, and for ref. 2 W. E. 

read 29 W. E. 
Re Parliinson, for 56 L. T. read 76 L. T. 

R. V. Topham, for 4 Tr. E,. read 4 T. B. 
. Vizetelly v. Mudies, Ltd., for [1900] 1 Q. B. read" 2 Q. B. 
: R. V. Curl, for 2 St. Tr. 788 read 2 Str. 788. 
: R. V. Lordsm-ere, for 10 Cox reod 16 Cox. 
: Cureton v. /?., /or " supra " read 1 B. & S. 208. 
: R. V, Beall, for 24 L. J. iJ. read 34 L. J. N. 

for c. 100, s. 35, read c. 97. s. 35. 
for c. 100, s. 36, read c. 97, s. 36. 



BOOK I. 



PLEADING, PRACTICE, AND EVIDENCE 
GENERALLY. 



PART I. 
PLEADING AND PEACTICE GENEEALLY. 



CHAPTEE I. 



INDICTMENT. 



Sect. 1. What it is, and when it lies, p. 1. 

2. Against whom it lies, p. 9. 

3. Form of it, p. 27. 

4. Caption, p. 61. 

5. Within what Time the Bill must be preferred, p. 63. 

6. Finding the Indictment, p. 67. 

7. Process to compel appearance on, p. 78. 

8. Bail on, p. 87. 

9. In what cases quashed, p. 98. 

10. When and where tried, p. 101. 

11. Certiorari, p. 110. 

12. Power of the Attorney-General over Prosecutions , p. 122. 



Sect. 1. 

INDICTMENT, WHAT IT IS, AND WHEN IT LIES. 

AN" indictment " is a written or printed accusation of crime, made at 
-^^ the suit of the King, against one or more persons, and preferred to, and 
presented upon oath by, a grand jury ; a " bill of indictment " is such written ov 
printed accusation before it is so presented. 

A.C.P. 1 



2 INDICTMENT. 

It is the ordinary common law remedy for all treasons and felonies, for 
imisprisions of treason and felony, and for misdemeanors of a public nature : 
2 Hawk. u. 25, ss. 1, 4. In the case of treason and felony it is now the sole 
remedy except (1) impeachment, now very rarely resorted to : (2) a coroner's 
inquisition in cases of murder or manslaughter (see post, p. 140) : (3) the sum- 
mary remedy permitted in certain cases of felony and misdemeanor under the 
Summary Jurisdiction Acts, 1879 (42 &_43 Vict. c. 49), and 1899 (62 & 63 Vict. 
c. 22), and the Children Act, 1908 (8 Edw. 7, c. 67), s. 128 (2), as amended by 
the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1914 (4 & 5 Geo. 5, c. 58), s. 15. In 
the case of misdemeanors, there is also an alternative remedy by way of 
criminal information, post, p. 127. As to the preparation of the indictment, 
see post, p. 27 ; aa to preferring it to the grand jury, and the procedure of the 
grand jury, see post, p. 74 et seq. 

Breaches of common law duty.] — An indictment lies at common law for a 
breach of duty, which is not a mere private injury, but an outrage on the moral 
duties of society. Perhaps the most important example is the neglect to provide 
sufficient food, medical aid or other necessaries, for a person unable to provide 
for himself, and for whom the defendant is obliged by duty or contract to 
provide, where such neglect injures the health of that person, whether the person 
injured be of extreme age (iJ.- v. Marriott, 8 C. & P. 425; R. v. Instan [1893] 
1 Q. B. 450; 62 L. J. (M. C.) 86), or of tender years (R. v. Frimd, E. & E. 20; 
fl. V. Hogan, 2 Den. 277; 20 L. J. (M. C.) 219; B. v. Phillpot, Dears. 179; 
22 L. J. (M. C.) 113; B. Y. Chandler, Dears. 453; 24 L. J. (M. C.) 109; B. v. 
Ryland, L. E. 1 C. C. E. 99; 37 L. J. (M. C.) 10; 10 Cox, 882; R. v. Bugg, 
12 Cox, 16 (C. C. E.); B. v. Jones, 19 Cox, 678; 67 L. J. (Q. B.) 41; R. v. 
Senior (1899) 1 Q. B. 283, 289; 68 L. J. (Q. B.) 175), or is the defendant's 
servant (R. v. Ridley, 2 Camp. 650 : B. v. Smith, L. & C. 607; 34 L. J. 
(M. C.) 153), or apprentice (B. v. Self, 1 Leach, 137; 1 East, P. C. 226; B. v. 
Smith, 8 C. & P. 153), or is a, lunatic (B. v. Pelham, 8 Q. B. 959; 15 L. J. 
(M. C.) 106). The common law is strengthened by statutory provisions, e.g., 
24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 26 (servants and apprentices); 53 & 54 Vict. c. 5, s. 322 
(lunatics); 8 Edw. 7, u. 67, s. 12 (persons under 16). An indictment also lies 
for any. act of wilful negligence, whereby human life or health is endangered, 
such as shipping dangerous combustibles without informing the >ship-ma8ter : 
TMUiams v. H. E. I. Co., 3 East, 192; or exposing for sale, or possessing with 
intent to sell, provisions unfit for human food . B. v. Mackarty, •& East, 133, 
141, cit. ; 2 Ld. Eaym. 1179 ; 3 Ld. Eaym. 487 • R. v. Dixon, 3 M. & Sel. 11; 
R. V. Haynes, 4 M. & Sel. 214 : R. v. Stevenson, 3 E. & F. 106 : Shillito v. 
Thompson, 1 Q. B. D. 12 ; 45 L. J. (M. C.) 18. It also lies for acts intended 
to interfere with or pervert the course of justice, e.g., for disposing of a dead 
body so as to prevent the coroner from holding an inquest upon it where an 
inquest ought to be held : R. v. Price, 12 Q. B. D. 247 ; 53 L. J. 
(M. C.) 51: R. V. Stephensm, 13 Q. B. D. 381; 53 L. J. (M. C.) 176; 
but not for burning a dead body iustead of burying it, unless it be so done as 
to cause a public nuisance : R. v. Price, supra; for manufacturing false evidencfe 
for the purpose of misleading a judicial tribunal, although the evidence is ndt 



WHEN IT LIES. 3 

in fact used : R. v. Vre&nes [1891] 1 Q. B. 360; 60 L. J. (M. O.) 62; 17 Cox, 
267 ; or for attempting to pervert the course of public justice by publishing 
articles in a newspaper affecting the conduct or character of persons awaiting 
trial . R. v. Tibbits and Windust [1902] 1 K. B. 77 ; 71 L. J. (K. B.) 4 ; 
20 Cox, 70, and cases there cited : R. v. Parke [1903] 2 K. B. 432 ; 72 L. J. 
(K. B.) 839; R. V. Davies [1906] 1 X. B. 32; 78 L. J. (K. B.) 363. 

It also lies for all nuisances of a public nature, though occasioned by an act 
in itself innocent, if the creation of the nuisance is the probable consequence 
of the act. R. v. Moore, 3 B. & Ad. 184; and see 1 Hawk. c. 75, ss. 6, 7. 
Under this head falls the remedy against a common innkeeper who refuses 
either to receive a traveller as guest in his house or to find him victuals or 
lodging on being tendered a reasonable price : see R. v. Rymer, 2 Q. B. D. 136 ; 
46 L. J. (M. C.) 108 ; 13 Cox, 378 ; 2 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 1887. 

Intention to commit offences.] — Mere intention to commit an offence is not 

indictable, except in the case of high treason, as to which it is said that under 
25 Bdw. 3, St. 5, c. 2, voluntas reputatur pro facto ; but in all cases where the 
intent to commit a crime is manifested by any overt act, the party may be 
indicted for an attempt to commit the offence. 1 Deacon, Cr. L. 643 : R. v. 
Scofield, Cald. 397 • R. v. Higgins, 2 Bast, 5, 21; R. v. Chapman,'! Den. 432; 
18 L. J. (M. C.) 152 ; 3 Cox, 467 ; R. v. Taylor, 1 P. & F. 511 : R. v. Duckworth, 
[1892] 2 Q. B. 83; 17 Cox, 495; and see 1 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 140. 

Attempts to commit crimes.] — Every attempt to commit a felony or mis- 
demeanor is a misdemeanor at common law, whether the crime attempted is 
one by statute or at common law. R. v. Hensler, 11 Cox, 570 (C. C. E.) : R. y. 
Roderick, 7 C. & P. 795, Parke, B. . R. v. Martin, 2 Mood. 123; 9 C. & P. 213, 
215 : R. V. Ransford, 13 Cox, 9 (C. C. E.) : R. v. Cartwright, E. & E. 107 n. : 
R. V. Butler, 6 C. & P. 368. This doctrine has been applied to an attempt to 
commit suicide. R. v. Doody, 6 Cox, 463; R. v. Burgess, L. & C. 258; 9 Cox, 
302; 32 L. J. (M. C.) 185. 

It is said that there cannot, ex vi termini, be an attempt to commit perjury : 
but an attempt to suborn perjury is indictable (1 & 2 Geo. 5, c. 6, s. 7) ; so are 
■certain attempts to bribe (6 Edw. 7. o. 34, s. 1). 

To constitute an attempt the act done must be immediately connected with 
the commission of the offence. R. v. Eagleton, Dears. 515; 24 Lj J. (M. C.) 
168, Parke, B. : R. v. Cheeseman, L. & C. 140; 31 L. J. (M. C.) 89; 9 Cox, 
100 : R. V. Roberts, Dears. 639; 26 L. J. (M. C.) 17. (a). Thus, the procuring 
of indecent prints with intent to sell them is an indictable misdemeanor; but 
the merely keeping and preserving them with that intent is not. Dugdale v. R., 

(o) In R. V. Balcer, 28 N. Z. L. R. 536, the Court had to consider the criminal respon- 
sibility of a man who had written to another a letter explaining how to open a safe 
by the use of explosives. No particular safe was in the contemplation of either man 
when the letter was written; but the recipient subsequently tried to open a safe in 
accordance with the directions in the letter. The Court held both men equally guilty, 
the writer of the letter apparently as having counselled or procured the particular 
Attempt. 



4 INDICTMENT. 

1 E. & B. 435; Dears. 6i; 22 L. J. (M. C.) 50. Care must be taken to dis- 
tinguish an attempt from an intention, R. v. Landow, 23 Cox, 457; 77 J. P. 
364; 29 T. L. E. 375; and from mere acts of preparation. B. v. Bobinsm 
[1915] 2 K. B. 342; 84 L. J. (K. B.) 1149; 79 J. P. 303; 31 T. L. E. 313. 

Attempts to commit certain crimes are punishable by statute; e.g., attempts 
to murder (24 & 25 Vict. u. 100, ss. 11-15); to commit unnatural offences 
(24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 62; 48 & 49 Vict. c. 69, o. 11) ; or offences against girls 
under thirteen, or between thirteen and sixteen (48 & 49 Vict. c. 69, sa. 4, 5); 
or incest (8 Edw. 7. c. 45, s. 1 (3) ). 

Under 14 & 15 Vict. o. 100, s. 9, any person indicted for felony or mis- 
demeanor may be convicted of the attempt to commit the offence charged, if the 
jury is satisfied that the offence was not completed. See R. v. McPherson 
Dears. & B. 197; 26 L. J. (M. C.) 134; 7 Cox, 281 : R. v. Hapgood, L. E. 1 
C. C. E. 221. It is therefore unusual to prefer an indictment for the attempt 
to commit an offence {e.g., to obtain money by false pretences) where the full 
offence is charged. 

In R. V. White [1910] 2 K. B. 124; 79 L. J. (K. B.) 854; 26 T. L. E. 466; 
4 Or. App. E. 267, on an indictment for murder. Darling, J., directed the jury 
that they might convict of an attempt to murder, and on their finding a verdict 
of guilty of attempt to murder the prisoner was sentenced to penal servitude 
as for a statutory felony within 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, ss. 11-15. This ruling 
was upheld on appeal on the ground that the offences described in sa. 11-15 fell 
within the definition of attempts to murder, and that on an indictment for 
murder it was admisaible under 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, a. 9, to convict of such 
attempt. 

Incitement.] — To solicit or incite another to commit a felony or misdemeanor 
is an indictable misdemeanor at common law, even though the solicitation or 
incitement has no effect. R. v. Higgins, 2 Bast, 5; R. \. Scofield, Cald. 397 : 
R. V. Quail, 4 P. & P. 1076 : R. v. Gregory, L. E. 1 C. C. E. 77 ; 36 L. J. 
(M. C.) 60; 10 Cox, 459; and see 3 Chit. Cr. L. 688; Steph. Dig. Cr. L. (6th ed.) 
39. This includes an offer of a bribe to a person to commit an offence. Wade v. 
Broughton, 3 V. & B. 172 : and an attempt to incite to the commission of felony 
or misdemeanor is also an indictable misdemeanor at common law. B. T. 
Ransford, 13 Cox, 9 (0. C. E.). It is immaterial whether the principal offence 
is one existing by the common law or is created by statute. See also 1 Buss. 
Cr. (7th ed.) 203; R. v. Campbell [1908] Victoria L. E. 136. 

Incitements to commit certain Crimea are pvmiahable by statute, e.g., inciting 
to mutiny (37 Geo. 3, c. 70) ; to murder (24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, a. 4) ; to offences 
againat Poat Office laws (8 Edw. 7, c. 48, s. 69); to offences against the Of6cis(l 
Secrets Acts, 1911 (1 & 2 Geo. 5, c. 28, o. 4, and 1920 (70 & 71 Geo. 5, c. 75, b. 7.) 

Disobedience to statutes.] — Where a statute declares any act or omiasion to 
be treason, felony, misprision of treason or misdemeanor, an indictment lies 
in respect of such act or omission. And even though a statute does not use 
express terms describing the nature of the Offence, if it prohibits a matter of 
public grievance to the liberties and securities of the subject, or commandfl a 



WHEN IT LIES. 5 

matter of public convenience (such as the repairing of highways or the like), 
all acts or omissions contrary to the prohibition or command of the statute are 
misdemeanors at common law, punishable by indictment, unless such method 
of procedure manifestly appears to be excluded by the statute. 2 Hawk. c. 25, 
s. 4; R. V. Davis, Say. 163; R. v. Sainsbury, 4 T. E. 461; R. v. Price, 11 A. & 
B. 727 : R. v. Stephenson, 13 Q. B. D. 331; 53 L. J. (M. C.) 176 : R. v. Hall 
[1891] 1 Q. B. 747 ; 60 L. J. (M. C.) 124. In R. v. Kenyan [1901] 36 L. J. 
Newsp. 871, an indictment was framed for contravening s. 3 of the Disused 
Burial Grounds Act, 1884 (47 & 48 Vict. c. 72) by building on a disused Eoman 
Catholic burial-ground. Phillimore, J., seems to have considered the indict- 
ment good, and the defendants pleaded guilty, and were sentenced to 
imprisonment. The remedy usually sought is injunction (see Re Ponsford and 
Newport District School Board [1894] 1 Ch. 454; 63 L. J. (Ch.) 278). If a 
statute specifies a mode of proceeding otherwise than by indictment, then, it 
the matter is already indictable at common law, and the statute merely intro- 
duces a different mode of prosecution and punishment, the remedy is alternative, 
and the prosecutor has the option of proceeding either by indictment at 
common law, or by the mode specified by the statute. Castle's case, Cro. Jac. 
644 : R. V. Robinson, 2 Burr. 799, 805 : R. v. Wigg, 2 Ld. Eaym. 1163; 2 Salk. 
460 : R. Y. Balme, 2 Cowp. 648 : R. v. Richard Garlile, 3 B. & Aid. 161 : and 
see 2 Hale, 191; 1 Saund. 135, and notes; Craies on Statute Law (4th ed.), 
pp. 283 et seq.; Maxwell on Statutes (5th ed.), p. 299. If a statute prohibits 
under a penalty an act which was formerly lawful, and a subsequent statute 
(R. V. Boyall, 2 Burr. 832), or the same statute (in a, subsequent substantive 
clause), provides a mode of proceeding for the penalty otherwise than by indict- 
ment, the prosecutor may, notwithstanding, proceed by indictment upon the 
prohibitory clause, as for a misdemeanor at common law, or he may at his option 
proceed in the manner provided by the statute. 2 Hale, 171 : iJ. v. Wright, 
1 Burr. 543; and see R. v. Jones, 2 Str. 1146 : R. v. Harris, 4 T. E. 202; 2 E. 
E. 358 : fl. v. Buchanan, 8 Q. B. 883; 16 L. J. (Q. B.) 227 : R. v. Hall [1891] 

1 Q. B. 747, 770; 50 L. J. (M. C.) 124, Charles, J. : Saunders v. Holborn 
District Board [1896] 1 Q. B. 64, 69 ; 64 L. J. (Q. B.) 101. But if the manner 
of proceeding for the penalty is contained in the same clause which prohibits 
the act, the mode of proceeding given by the statute must be pursued, and no 
other; for the express mention of any other mode of proceeding impliedly 
excludes that of indictment. R. v. Robinson, 2 Burr. 799, 806 : R. v. Buck, 

2 Str. 679 : R. v. Hall, supra : R. v. Lovibond, 19 W. E. 753. Where a statute, 
in one clause, declares an act to be a public nuisance, it is indictable, though 
a subsequent clause subjects it to a pecuniary penalty recoverable by " informa- 
tion, bill, plaint, or action at law," or makes it abateable. R. v. Grawshaw , 
Bell, 303; 30 L. J. (M. C.) 58; 8 Cox, 375 : R. v. Gregory, 5 B. & Ad. 666; 

3 L. J. (M. C.) 26. It is now an established rule of construction that " where 
an act or omission constitutes an offence under two or more Acts of Parliament, 
or both under an Act and at common law, whether any such' Act was passed 
before or after" January 1, 1890, the offender shall, "unless the contrary 
intention appears, be liable to be punished under either or any of those Acts, 
or at common law, but shall not be liable to be punished twice for the same 



& INDICTMENT. 

offence." 52 & S3 Vict. c. 63 {Interpretation Act, 1889), ss. 33, 42. If, in the 
case of a common-law misdemeanor, a new mode of punishment or new mode 
of proceeding merely is directed, without altering the class or nature of the 
offence, the new punishment or new mode of proceeding is alternative, and the 
offender may be indicted as before for the common-law misdemeanor {B. v. 
Bichard CarliU, 3 B. & Aid. 161) ; and the mere declaration that an offence 
shall be felony which was so at common law does not create a new offence. 
Williams v. iJ., 7 Q. B. 250, 253, Patteson, J. But if a later statute expressly 
alters the quality of an offSnce, e.g., by making it a misdemeanor instead of a 
felony, or a felony instead of a misdemeanor, the offence cannot be proceeded 
for under the earlier statute. Michell v. Brown, 1 E. & B. 267 ; 28 L. J. 
(M, C.) 53. This result equally follows if the words " feloniously " or " deemed 
to be a felony " are used in the later Act. R. v. Johnson, 3 M. & Sel. 539, 
556; Bayley, J. : B. v. Solomons, 1 Mood. 292; overruling R. v. Gale, 1 Mood. 
11. . And if a later statute describes an offence created by a former statute, 
and affixes to it a different punishment, varying the procedure, and giving an 
appeal where there was no appeal before, the prosecutor must proceed for the 
offence under the later statute. Michell v. Brown, supra. And where a statute 
makes the doing of an act felonious, if a subsequent statute makes it penal only, 
the later statute is a, virtual repeal of the former, so far as relates to the 
punishment of the offence. 1 Hawk. c. 40, s. 5 : iJ. v. Davis, 1 Leach, 271. 
As to the effect of a statute treating as a felony an act or omission which 
before was a misdemeanour at common law, see R. v. Cross, 1 Ld. Eaym. 711 : 
B. V. Payne [1906] 1 E. B. 388; 75 L. J. (K. B.) 114 : R. v. Garland [1910] 
1 K. B. 154; 79 L. J. (K. B.) 239; 3 Cr. App. E. 199. 

Disobedience to rules and orders made under statutory authority.] — ^Dis- 
obedience to an order relating to quarantine, made by the King in Council under 
statutory authority, has been held to be an indictable misdemeanor at common 
law. R. V. Harris, 4 T. E. 202, explained in R. v. Hall [1891] 1 Q. B. 747, 
765; 60 L. J. (M. C.) 124. Where a statute, the matter of which concerns the 
public in general, delegates to commissioners the power to make orders under 
it, disobedience to an order made by them in pursuance of such power is an 
indictable misdemeanor at c«mmon law. R. v. Walker, L. E. 10 Q. B. 355; 
44 L. J. (M. C.) 169. And where a statute gives power to make regulations, 
a regulation made under the power becomes for the purposes of obedience or 
disobedience a provision of the statute. Willingale v. Norris [1909] 1 K. B. 
57, 64; 78 L. J. (K. B.) 69. Where a corporation was authorized by a public 
statute to make a towing-path on the side of a river, it was held to be an indict- 
able misdemeanor at common law to obstruct the corporation in the execution 
of the powers given it by the statute. R. v. Smith, 2 Doug. 441. Disobedience 
to an order of a court of competent jurisdiction is a misdemeanor indictable at 
common law. R. v. RoUnson, 2 Burr. 799, 804 : R. v. Mortlock, 7 Q. B. 459 : 
R. V. Brishy, 1 Den. 416; 18 L. J. (M. C.) 157 • R. v. Jeyes, 3 A. & E. 416 : 
R. v. Johnson, 4 M. & Sel. 515; 1 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 542. It was an indictable 
misdemeanor to obstruct a coroner in the execution of the duties imposed upon 
him by 4 Edw. 1, st. 2 (stat. de officio ooronatoris). R. v. Price, 12 Q. B. D; 



WHEN IT LIES. 7 

247; S3 L. J. (M. C.) 51 : E. v. Stephenson, 13 Q. B. D. 331; 53 L. J. (M. C.) 
176 ; and the same would probably be held in the case of an obstruction of the 
coroner in the execution of the duties imposed upon him by The Coroners Act, 
1,887 (5,0. & 61 Vict. 0. 71), which repeals and replaces the old statute. As to 
failure by overseers to account to a poor law auditor, see R. v. Crossley, 
10 A. & E. 132; 8 L. J. (M. C.) 81. 

Private injuvies-] — ^An indictment will not lie for a mere private injury 
against an individual: as for enticing away his apprentice; R. v. Daniel, 
1 Salt. 380; entering his close, digging the ground, erecting a shed thereon, 
wpelling him and keeping him out of possession; R. v. Storr, 3 Burr. 1698; 
R. V. Bake, lb. 1731; pulling the thq,toh off a dwelling-house, of which he was 
in peaoeBrble possession; R. v. Atkins, lb. 1706; or for a private cheat; R. v. 
Osborn, lb. 1697; or for excluding commoners by enclosing, Willoughby's case, 
[1588] Cro. Uliz. 90, or the like. The remedy for injuries of this description 
is by action only, unless they in some measure concern the King, or are 
accompanied by circumstances which amount to a breach of the peace. Anon., 
3 Sajb. 187. Nor will an indictment lie for the infringement of a right common, 
not to all his majesty's subjects, but only to the inhabitants of a, particular 
district. 1 Havpk. i;. 76, ». 1 ; Co. Jjitt. 56 a : Westhmry v. Powel, cited in 
Fineux v. Hovenden, Cro. Eliz. 664 ; R. v. Thrower, 1 Vent. 208; 3 Keble, 28 : 
Austin's ease, 1 Vent. 189. So an indictment will not lie for the infringement 
of rights which are merely private, though regulated by a public statute; iS. v. 
Richards, 8 T. E. 634; and see Com. Big. Indictment (D.); nor for an act 
prohibited by a private statute, which tends merely to the damage of a particular 
individual. R. v. Pawlyn, 1 Sid. 208; nor will it lie for a mere breach of the 
bye-laws or customs of a corporation. R. v. Sharpies, 4 T. E. 777 : R. v. 
Gorge, 3 Salk. 189. See Com. Dig. Indictment- (E.)-; 1 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.), 16. 

Offences indictable at election ol accused.] — ^An offence punishable on sum- 
mary conviction before justices, other than an assault, may, at the option of 
the accused, under certain circumstances be converted into an indictable offence, 
ijnder the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879 (42 & 43 Viet. c. 49, s. 17), which 
enacts as follows : " (1.) A person when charged before a court of summary 
jurisdiction, with an offence, in respect of the commission of which an offender 
is liable on summary conviction to be imprisoned for a term exceeding three 
months, and mhich is not an assault, may, on appearing before the court, and 
before the charge is gone into but not afterwards, claim to be tried by a jury ; 
and thereupon the court of summary jurisdiction shall deal with the case in all 
respects as if the accused were charged with an indictable offence and not with 
an offence punishable on summary conviction, and the offence shall as respects 
the person ao charged be deemed to be an indictable offence, and if the person 
so charged is. committed for trial, or bailed to appear for trial, shall be prosecuted 
accordingly, and the expenses of the prosecution shall be payable as in cases 
of felony. . . (3.) This section shall not apply to the case of a child unless 
the parent or guardian of the child is present;" but if he is, " the claim under 
this sectiou may be made by such parent or guardian." The expression 



8 INDICTMENT. 

" child " now means a person of 7 and under 14 years (8 Edw. 7, c. 67, s. 128 
(1).) A list of the offences to which this provision applies is given in Douglas, 
Summa,ry Jurisdiction Procedure (9th ed.), 148. The section only applies when 
the justices on summary conviction can pass a sentence of more than three 
months' imprisonment, and does not apply where the proceeding may result in 
a detention for a longer period than three months {e.g., the conviction of a person 
summarily of being an incorrigible rogue, and his commitment to Quarter 
Sessions for sentence). R. v. Evans and Connor, 30 T. 1/. B. 326 ; 10 Cr. 
App. E. 53. There are several other enactments, such as the Explosives Act, 
1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 17), a. 92; the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 
1875 (38 & 39 Vict. u. 86), o. 9; the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876 
(39 & 40 Vict. o. 77), ». 15; and the Merchandise Marks Act, 1887 (50 & 51 
Vict. c. 28), s. 2, sub-s. 6, which expressly enable a defendant, when accused 
of an offence punishable on summary conviction under those statutes, to insist 
upon a trial on indictment. It is the duty of the Court of Summary Juris- 
diction before going into the case to inform the accused of his right so to elect -. 
and failure to do so invalidates the subsequent summary proceedings. R. v. 
Gockshott [1898] 1 Q. B. 682; 67 L. J. (Q. B.) 467: R.v. Beesby [1909] 
1 K. B. 849; 78 L. J. (K. B.) 482, which overrules R. v. Fowler, 64 L. J. 
(M. C.) 9. Wlien the election has been made the justices deal with the case as 
a charge of an indictable offence (see R. v. Mitchell, ex parte Livesey [1913] 
1 K. B. S61; 82 L. J. (K. B.) 153; 23 Cox, 273; 77 J. P. 148); and they may 
commit not merely for the offence charged as to which the election was made, 
but for any indictable offence disclosed by the depositions. R. v. Brown [1896] 
1 Q. B. 119, 127. 

Effect of repeal on pending proceedings.] — Prior to 1889 by the unqualified 
repeal of the statute on which an indictment was framed, though it took place 
after the finding of the bill, (but before plea pleaded,) the proceedings fell to the 
ground and no judgment could be pronounced. R. Y. Denton, 18 Q. B. 761; 
Dears. 3; 21 L. J. (M. C.) 207 : see R. v. Mawgan in Meneage, 8 A. & E. 496; 
7 L. J. (M. C.) 98. Where a prisoner was indicted for privately stealing from a 
shop against 10 W. 3, u. 12 (10 & 11 W. 3, c. 23, Kuffhead), which was repealed 
after the offence was committed, but before the prisoner was tried, by 1 G-. 4, 
c. 117, B. 1 (rep.), it was held that the prisoner could not be sentenced under the 
repealed Act. R. v. M'Kenzie, E. & E. 429. But it has been held that an 
indictment for conspiracy to violate a statute, being a common law offence, will 
lie after the repeal of the statute, or in respect of an offence committed before 
the repeal. R. v. Thompson, 16 Q. B. 832; 20 L. J. (M. C.) 183. As to 
statutes passed since 1889, the Interpretation Aot, 1889 (52 & 63 Vict. c. 63), 
s. 38 (2), provides that where an Act " repeals any other enactment, then 'unless 
the contrary intention appears, the repeal shall not . . . (d) affect any penalty, 
forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed against 
any enactment so repealed, or (e) affect any investigation, legal proceeding, 
or remedy in respect of any such . . penalty, forfeiture or punishment as 
aforesaid;" and that "any such investigation, legal proceeding, or remedy 
may be instituted, continued or enforced, and any such penalty, forfeiture or 



AGAINST WHOM IT LIES. 9 

punishment may be imposed as if the repealing Act had not been passed." 
See R. V. Webb [1904] 140 C. C. Sess. Pap. 627, Walton, J.; 1 Euss. Cr. 
(7th ed.), p. 7. Particular clauses to the like effect were common in prior 
statutes : as to their effect, see R. v. Smith, L. & C. 131 ; 31 L. J. (M. C.) 105. 



Sect. 12. 

AGAINST WHOM AN INDICTMENT' LIES. 

An indictment lies against all persons who actually commit, or who procure, 
or assist in, the commission of any crime, or who knowingly harbour a traitor 
or felon; for each, in contemplation of law, is guilty, and liable to punishment 
according to the part which he takes in the perpetration or concealment of the 
offence. In the case of felony offenders are classed as principals in the first or 
in the second degree or accessories before or after the fafit. In the case of 
misdemeanors all persons who aid, abet, counsel or procure the offence are 
treated as principal offenders. 

Nnmber and gender.] — By s. 1 (2) of the Interpretation Act, 1889 
(52 & 53 Vict. c. 63), when an enactment relates to an offence punishable on 
indictment or on summary conviction, unless the contrary intention appears, 
words importing the masculine gender include females, and words in the 
singular include the plural, and words in the plural include the singular. [This 
re-enacts part of 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 28, s. 14,] 

Corporations.] — By s. 2 (1) of the Interpretation Act, 1889, " in the construc- 
tion of every enactment relating to an offence punishable on indictment or sum- 
mary conviction, whether contained in an Act passed before or after '* January 1, 
1890, "the expression "person' shall, unless a contrary intention appears, include 
a body corporate." See B. v. Tyler [1891] 2 Q. B. 588, 594; 61 L. J. (M. C.) 
38, Bowen, L.J. A contrary intention would be inferred in the case of treason, 
felony, or misdemeanors involving personal violence : Pharmaceutical Society 
V. London d Provincial Supply Association, 5 App. Gas. 857, 869; 49 Ij. J. 
(Q. B.) 736 : R. v. Greait West Laundry Co., 13 Manitoba, 66 : and in cases 
where the only penalty for the offence is imprisonment or corporal punishment. 
See Pearks, Gunston <t Tee v. Ward [1902] 2 K. B. 1, 11, Channell, J.; 
71 L. J. (K. B.) 656. Hawke v. Hulton, Ltd. [1909] 2 K. B. 93; 78 L. J. 
(K. B.) 633. A corporation aggregate has been held incapable of perjury. Wych 
V. Meal, 3 P. Wms. 310; 24 E. E. 1078. But a corporation aggregate may 
be indicted, by its corporate name, for breaches of public duty, whether in the 
nature of nonfeasance, such as the non-repair of highways or bridges which 
it is their duty to repair : R. v. Birmingham & Gloucester Rail Co., 2 Q. B. 
47; 9 C. & P. 469; or of misfeasance, such as the obstruction) of a highway 
by a railway company, in a manner not authorized by their Act of Parliament. 
R. V. Great North of England Rail. Co., 9 Q. B. 315; 16 L. J. (M. C.) 16 : 



10 INDICTMENT. 

Att.-Gen. v. London <t North Western Rail. Co. [1900] 1 Q. B. 78. It would 
seem, also, that a corporation may be indicted by its corporate name, and fined, 
for a libel published by its order. See Pharmaceutical Society v. London i 
Provincial Supply Association, supra, at p. 870, Lord Blackburn : Eastern 
Counties Bail Co. v. Broom, 6 Ex. 314 : Whitfield v. South-Eastern Bail Co., 
E. B. & E. 115 ; 27 L. J. (Q. B.) 229. Trial of an indictment against a corpora- 
tion cannot take place befca:e a court of oyer and terminer or gaol-delivery or 
quarter sessions. See post, p. 111. 

Capacity,] — The capacity to commit crime presupposes an act of under- 
standing and an exerbise of will; and "the full definition of every crime 
contains expressly or by implication a proposition as to a state of mind. In 
all cases whatever, competent age, sanity, and some degree of freedom from 
coercion are assumed to be essential to criminality." B. v. Tolson, 23 Q. B. D. 
168, 187; 58 L. J. (M. C.) 97, Stephen, J. 



EXEMPTIONS AND EXCUSES. 

Aliens.] — ^British law is not construed as applying to the acts of aliens on 
land outside the King's dominions or at sea except within British territorial 
waters, or on British ships, or in cases of piracy jure gentium. 

A British subject cannot naturalize himself as a subject of a foreign state 
at war with this country so as to exempt himself from criminal liability 
for treason. B. v. Lynch [1903] 1 K. B. 444; 20 Cox, 468; 67 J. P. 41. 
And an alien resident within the King's dominions is guilty of treason if he 
joins an invading force of his own countrymen, when the King's forces have 
temporarily retired, for strategical or other reasons. De Jager v. Att.-Gen. 
for Natal [1907] A. C. 326. 

An alien 'friend is subject to indictment for offences committed in England 
(B. V. Esop, 7 C. & P. 456 : B. v. Barronet, 1 E. & B. 1; 22 L. J. (M. C.) 
26), or upon British ships within the admiralty jurisdiction (see post, p. 31), 
and for piracy jure gentium. Att.-Gen. of Hong Kong v. Kwok u, Sing, 
L. E. 5 P. G. 179, 199 : 1 Hawk. c. 17, ». 5. This liability; appears not to 
extend to aliens who have diplomatic immunity. See Diplomatic Privileges 
Act, 1708 (7 Anne, c. 12) . Law Mag. and Eeview (Nov. 1894), p. 43. Sed 
contrA, see case of Pantaleon da Sa, 5 St. Tr. 461, and cf. 2 St. Tr. 881, n.; 
IPost. 187. The burden of proof that the accused is an alien appears to lie 
upon him. See B. v. Lindsay, 14 St. Tr. 987, 994 : B. v. Macdonald, 18 St. 
Tr. 857 ; except perhaps where the offence is committed outside the realm : 
but see B. v. Jameson [1896] 2 Q. B. 525; 65 L. J. (M. C.) 218. The 
liability of an alien enemy is not clearly ascertained. See B. v. Molieres, 
Post. 188, n. ; B. Y. Johnson, 6 East, 583, 693; Ellenborough, C.J. ; 1 Hawk, 
c. 17, 3. 6. 

Infants undeif seven.] — Infants under the age of discretion are not pimishable 
by any criminal prosecution whatever; 1 Hale, 27 : 1 Hawk. u. 1, s. 1 : and see 



EXCUSES: INFANCY. 11 

Mirror, c. 4, s. 16 (Selden Soe. Publ., vol. 7) ; 1 Eusa. Cr. (7th ed.) 58 (/). A 
child under the age of eeven years, cannot be guilty of any criminal offence; for, 
under that age an infant is, by incontrovertible presumption of law, doli 
incapax, and cannot be endowed with any discretion. Eeg. 309 b ; 1 Hale, 27, 
28 ; 4 Bl. Com. 23 : Mirror, c. 4, s. 6 ; Post. 349 : Reniger v. Fogossa, 1 Plowd. 1 . 
R. V. GaHeT [17.74] 1 Cowp. 220, 223 : Marsh v. Loader, 14 C. B. (N. S.) 
536 : 1 Euss. Cr. (7tb ed.) 58. 

Infants between seven and fourteen.] — Between the ages of seven and fourteen 
years a child is presumed not to have reached the age of discretion and to be doli 
incapax ; but this presuinption may be rebutted by strong and pregnant 
evidence of a mischievous discretion, expressed in the maxim malitia supplet 
cetatem; for the capacity to commit crime, do evil and contract guilt, is not 
so much measured by years and days, as by the strength of the delinquent's 
understanding and judgment. 4 Bl. Com. 23 : 1 Hale, 25, 27. Thus, it has 
been said that an infant eight years of age might be indicted for murder, and 
hanged on conviction ; Dalt. u. 147 ; and an infant between the age of eight 
and nine years was executed for arson, it appearing that he was actuated by 
malice and revenge, and had perpetrated the offence with craft and cunning. 
1 Hale, 25 n. So a girl of thirteen was burnt for killing her mistress; 1 Hale, 
26; and where an infant nine years of age killed an infant of the like age, 
and confessed the felony, it appearing upon examination that he had hid 
both the blood and the body, the justices were of opinion that he might 
lawfully be hanged, but respited the judgment that he might be pardoned. 
Fitz. Cor. 67. See R. v. York, Post. 70; 4 Bl. Com. 24: R. v. Wild, 
1 Mood. 452. Under the present law sentence of death may not be pro- 
nounced or recorded against a person under sixteen (8 Edw. 7, c. 67, a. 108). 
In criminal proceedings against a person under fourteen, the evidence of a 
mischievous discretion, to rebut the primd facie presumption of law arising 
from nonage, should be clear and strong, beyond all doubt and contradiction. 
4 Bl. Com. 23 : 1 Hale, 26, 27 : R. v. Vamplew, 3 P. & F. 520. R. v. Gfmie, 
83 J. P. 136. Where a child between the age of seven and fourteen years is 
indicted for felony, two questions are to be left to the jury : first, whether le 
cMnmitted the offence; and secondly, whether at the time he had a guilty 
knowledge that he was doing wrong. R. v. Owen, 4 C. & P. 236 : R. v. Smith, 
1 Cox, 260; and see R. v. Gorrie, supra. The fact that the child did the acts 
constituting the elements of the offence is not in itself any evidence whatever 
of the guilty state of mind which is essential for conviction. R. v. Kershaw, 
18 T. L. E. 367 ; 37 L. J. Newsp. 120, Bucknill, J. An infant under fourteen 
is presumed by law to be unable to commit a rape, and therefore cannot be 
found guilty of it as a principal in the first degree ; for though in other felonies 
malitia supplet cetatem, yet, as to this particular act, the \a,w. presumes him 
impotent, as well as wanting in discretion. This presumption was not affected 
by 9 G-. 4, c. 31, ss. 16, 17 (rep.), which first made the offence complete upon 
proof of penetration, without evidence of emission; R. v. Groorribridge, 7 C. & P. 
582; nor by the present enactment, 24 & 36 Vict. c. 100, ». 63, by which 9 G-. 4, 
c. 31, is eupeiseded . R. v. Waite [1892] 2 Q. B. 600; 61 L. J. (M. C.) 189; 17 



12 INDICTMENT. 

Cox, 554. Nor is any evidence admisBible to show that the defendant had in 
fact arrived at the full state of puberty, and could commit the offence. B. v. 
Philips, 8 C. & P. 736 : R. v. Jordan, 9 C. & P. 118 : B. v. Brimilow, Id. 366; 

2 Mood. 122. In R. Y. Brimilow it was held that the boy had been properly 
convicted of an assault under 1 Vict. u. 85, o. 11 {rep.). Nor can a boy under 
fourteen be convicted of an assault with intent to commit a rape. R. v. 
EldershaiD, 3 C. & P. 396. This doctrine has been extended to other offences 
involving carnal knowledge. R. v. "Waite, supra. But a boy under fourteen 
may be a principal in the second degree in a rape, or like offence, if he aids 
and assists in the commission of the offence, and it appears that he had a 
mischievous discretion ; for the excuse of impotency will not apply in such 
a case. 1 Hale, 630 : R. v. Eldershaw, 3 C. & P. 396. See R. v. Allen, 
1 Den. 364; 2 C. & K. 869; 18 L. J. (M. C.) 72; 3 Cox, 270 : B. v. Williams 
[1893] 1 Q. B. 320; 62 L. J. (M. C.) 69. "Whether where there is evidence of 
guilty knowledge he may be held to be an accomplice appears to be doubtful. 
See R. V. Cratchley, 9 Cr. App. E. 232; and fl. v. Tatam, 15 Cr. App. E. 132. 

In R. V. Sutton, 3 A. & E. 597; 5 N. & M. 353, there are dicta to the 
effect that under certain circumstances an infant under fourteen might be 
liable to indictment in respect of public duties arising out of his occupation 
of property. 

Infants of fourteen or OYer.] — The incapacity of infants to commit crime 
ceases upon their attaining the age of fourteen years, at which age they are 
presumed by the law to be doli capaces, and capable of distinguishing good 
from evil, and are, with respect to their criminal actions, subject to the same 
rule of construction as others of more mature age. 1 Hale, 25 ; Doct. and 
Stu. c. 26; Co. Litt. 79, 171, 247; Dalt. c. 147; 1 Hawk. c. 1, n. (1). But 
for the purposes of punishment a distinction is drawn between adults and 
young persons (of fourteen and under sixteen), and juvenile adults (of sixteen 
and under twenty-one). See 8 Edw. 7, c. 67, ss. 102, 103, and 8 Edw. 7, 
c. 59, 8S. 1-4. 

In some misdemeanours and offences which are not capital an infant is said 
to be privileged by reason of his nonage, if under twenty-one, because laches 
is not to be attributed to him. Co. Litt. 357 ; 4 Bl. Com. 22. But inasmuch 
as an infant is liable in tort, it is difficult to understand the grounds of this 
early distinction as to misdemeanours when an infant over seven could be 
liable for felony. And an infant who is indicted for any notorious breach of 
the peace, as riot, forcible entry, battery, or for perjury or cheating, or the 
like, is equally liable as a person of full age; because, upon his trial, the 
court, ex officio, ought to consider whether he was doli capdx, and had discre- 
tion to do the act with which he is charged. 1 Hale, 20, 21; 4 Bl. Com. 22; 

3 Bac. Abr., Infancy (H.). An infant", though incapable of making a contract 
of bailment, has been held liable to indictment for larceny as a bailee. R. v. 
M'Donald, 15 Q. B. D. 323. But an infant cannot lawfully be adjudicated 
bankrupt, and consequently cannot be convicted as a bankrupt of an offence 
under s. 159 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1914 (4 & 5 Geo. 5, c. 59), which depends 
on the existence of bankruptcy and the existence of valid debts by the infant. 



EXCUSES: INSANITY. 13 

R. V. Wilson, 5 Q. B. D. 28; 49 L. J. (M. C.) 13; Lovell v. Beauchamp 
[1894] A. C. 607 ; 63 L. J. (Q. B.) 802. 

Summary remedy.] — Under the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879 (42 & 43 Vict, 
c. 49), as amended by the Children Act, 1908 (8 Bdw. 7, u. 67), s. 128 (1), 
power '\a given to try summarily, for any indictable offence committed in Eng- 
land except homicide, a child under fourteen if the child's parent or guardian 
consents to this course (s. 10), and for certain indictable offences a young 
person over fourteen but under sixteen, if the young person consents (s. 11). 
Similar provisions are made as to offences in Ireland by 47 & 48 Vict. o. 19, 
BS. 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, as amended by ss. 133, 134 of the Children Act, 1908. 

Persons ol unsound mind.] — Every person at the age of discretion is, unless 
the contrary is proved, presumed by law to be sane, and to be accountable for 
his actions. R. v. Oxford, 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 497 ; 9 C. & P. 525 : R. v. Stokes, 
3 C. & K. 185 : R. v. Layton, 4 Cox, 149. The presumption in probate cases 
is the other way, as the person propounding the will must prove the testator 
competent. Banks v. Goodfellow, l! E. 5 Q. B. S49; 39 L. J. (Q. B.) 237. 
Therefore a grand jury ought not to ignore a bill of indictment on the ground 
of the insanity of the accused. R. v. Hodges, 8 C. & P. 195. But if there is 
an incapacity, or defect of the understanding, as there can be no consent of 
the will, the act is not punishable as a crime. 

This species of non-volition is classified by Coke (Litt. 247) and Hale (1 Hist. 
P. C. 29) as either natural, accidental, or affected; and as either perpetual or 
temporary ; and is by them reduced to three general heads : 1. A nativitate, vel 
dementia naturalis ; 2. Dementia accidentalis , vel adventitia; 3. Dementia 
affectata. 

1. Dementia naturalis is idiocy, or natural fatuity. An idiot is one who is 
of non-sane memory from hia birth, by a perpetual infirmity, without lucid 
intervals : Co. Litt. 247 ; and those are said to be idiots who cannot count 
twenty, or tell the days of the week, who do not know their fathers or mothers, 
or the like ; but these instances are mentioned as tests of insanity only, and are 
not always conclusive ; and although idiocy or natural fatuity is in general 
sufficiently apparent, the question, whether idiot or not, is a question of fact 
triable by a jury, Bac. Abr., Idiot (A); Bro. Abr., Idiot, 4; and ought to be 
clearly made out, in order to exempt the accused from punishment. R. v. 
Arnold, 16 St. Tr. 695, 704; 1 Euas. Cr. (7th ed.), 63. A person deaf and 
dumb from his birth, who has no means of learning to discriminate between 
right and wrong, or of understanding the penal enactments of the law, as 
applicable to particular offences, is an idiot; but if it can be shown that he has 
the use of understanding, which many of that condition discover by signs, then 
he may be tried, convicted, and punished, although great caution should be 
observed in such proceedings. 1 Hale, 34; Moore (K. B.) 4, pi. 12; Eitzh. 
N. B. 233. See R. v. Jones, 1 Leach, 102 : R. v. Steel, Id. 451 : R. v. Dyson 
[1831] Parke, J., York Spring Ass,, 7 C. & P. 305 n. ; Matthews' Dig. 410 : 
R. \. Pritchard, 7 C. & P. 303 . R. v. Berry, 1 Q. B. D. 447; 45 L. J. (M. C.) 
123-; 18 Cox, 187; R. v. Governor of Stafford Prison, Ex parte Emery [1909] 
2 K. B. 81 ; 78 L. J. (K. B.) 629. 



14 INDICTMENT. 

In the Mental Deficiency Act, 1913 (3 & 4 Geo. 5, c. 28), s. 1, idiots ate 
defined as being persons bo deeply defective in mind from birth or from an 
early age as to be unable to guard themselves against common physical 
dangers. 

2. Adventitious insanity, or dementia accidentalis, proceeds from various 
causes, and is of several kinds or degrees ; it is either partial (an insanity upon 
some one subject, the party being sane upon all others), or total; permanent 
(usually called madness), or temporary, viz., at certain periods and vicissitudes 
only, with lucid intervals (usually denominated lunacy). 3 Bac. Abr. 16. 

The distinction between lunacy and madness made by Hale and Coke is not 
now observed, and the one word "insanity" covers both classes of mental 
aberration. 

In the Lunacy Act, 1890 (53 & 54 Vict. c. S) " lunatic " is defined as meaning 
an idiot or person of unsound mind (s. 341). But the tests applied for the 
purposes of that Act are not the same as the tests of insanity from the point of 
view of criminal responsibility. See Woo.d-Eenton on Lunacy, 5. 

3. Dementia affectata. See Drunkenness, post, p. 19. 

Where the deprivation of understanding and memory is total, fixed and 
permanent, it excuses all acts; so likewise a man labouring under adventitious 
insanity is, during the frenzy, entitled to the same indulgence, in the same 
degree with one whose disorder is fixed and permanent. Beverley's case, 
4 Co. Eep. 125; Go. Litt. 247; 1 Hale, 31. But difficulty arises in distinguish- 
ing between a total aberration of intellect and a partial or temporary delusion 
notvrithstanding which the patient may be capable of distinguishing right 
from wrong ; in which case he will be guilty in the eye of the law, and 
amenable to punishment. Partial insanity, says Lord Hale, is the condition 
of many, especially of melancholy persons, who generally discover their defects 
in excessive fear and grief, and yet are not wholly destitute of the use o£ 
reason; and this partial insanity eeems not to excuse them in the commission 
of any crime. 1 Hale, 30. Doubtless, he adds, most persons that are felons 
of themselves, and others, are under a degree of partial insanity when they 
commit these offences ; it is very difficult to define the invisible line that divides 
perfect from partial insanity; but it must rest upon circumstances duly to be 
weighed and considered both by the judge and the jury, lest, on the one side, 
there be a kind of inhumanity towards the defects of human nature, or, on the 
other side, too fflreat an indulgence given to great crimes. He concludes by sug- 
gesting, as the best measure, that such a person as, labouring under melancholy 
distempers, hath yet as great understanding as ordinarily a child of fourteen 
years hath, is such a person as can be guilty of treason or felony. 
1 Hale, 30, 412. 

Considerable uncertainty has been shown by the judges as to the application 
or acceptance of Hale's rules. In R. v. Arnold, 16 St. Tr. 695, 764, and R. v. 
Earl Ferrers, 19 St. Tr. 885, it was ruled that a man could not be acquitted 
on the ground of insanity unless he was totally deprived of understanding and 
memory, and did not know what he was doing any more than an infant or a 
brute or wild beast. In R. y. Hadfield, 27 St. Tr. 1281, the test accepted was, 
that if a man is completely deranged so that he knows not what he does, if he 



EXCUSES: INSANITY. 15 

is lost lo all sense so that be cannot distinguisti good from evil, and cannot 
5'lidge of the consequences of his acJtions, then he cannot be guilty of crime, 
because the will, which to a certain extent is the essence of every crime, is 
wanting. In R. v. BelUngham, Collinson, Lun. 636, add., and B. v. Bowler j 
Id. 673; 1 Buss. Cr. (7th ed.), 64, 65, the test applied was whether, when the 
act was done, the prisoner was capable of distinguishing right from wrong or 
was under the influence of any delusion which rendered bis mind insensible of 
the nature of his act. Cf. B. v. Parker, Collinson, Lun. 477. And in B. v. 
Oxford, i St. Tr. (N. S.) 497 ; 9 C. ft P. 525, the ruling was in substance the 
same. In B. v. Offord, 5 C. & P. 168,. it was ruled, that, to excuse a man from 
punishment upon the ground of insanity, it must be proved distinctly that he 
was not capable of distinguishing right from wrong at the time he did the act, 
and did not know it to be an offence against the laws of God and nature. The 
rule now generally adopted is based on the answers of the judges to the House 
of Lords given in consequence of Macnaughton's case, 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 847,; 
10 CI. & P. 200; 8 Eng. Eep. 718. Tindal, C.J., at the trial directed the jury : 
■" If upon balancing the evidence in your minds you should think the prisoner 
a person capable of distinguishing right from wrong with respect to the act 
of which he stands charged, he is then a responsible agent." This involves the 
proposition that if there be a partial degree of reason, a competent use of it 
sufficient to have restrained those passions which produce the crime ; if there 
be thought and design, a faculty to distinguish the nature of actions, to discerii 
the difference between moral good and evil, — then he will be responsible for 
his actions. See R. v. Higginson, 1 C. & K. 129. On this direction the jury 
returned a verdict of not guilty. In consequence of the direction and verdict 
a discussion took place in the House of Lords, and a series of questions was 
propounded to and answered by the judges, in relation to the law respecting 
alleged crimes committed by persons afflicted with insane delusions. Below 
are given the questions asked of the judges and the answers of all except 
Maule, J., who gave a more qualified answer. ' 

Question 1. — " What is the law respecting alleged crimes committed by 
persons afflicted with insane delusion in respect of one or more particular 
subjects or persons : as, for instance, where at the time of the commission of 
the alleged crime the accused knew he was acting contrary to law, but did the 
act complained of with a view, under the influence of insane delusion, of 
redressing or revenging some supposed grievance or injury, or of producing 
some public benefit?" 

Answer. — " Assuming that your lordships' inquiries are confined to those per- 
sons who labour under such partial delusions only, and are not in other respects 
insane, we are of opinion, that, notwithstanding the party did the act complained 
of with a view, under the influence of insane delusion, of redressing or revenging 
some supposed grievance or injury, or of producing some public benefit, he is 
nevertheless punishable, according to the nature of the crime committed, if he 
knew,' at the time of committing such crime, that he was acting contrary to law, 
by which expression we understand your lordships to mean the law of the land." 
4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 980. The words italicized appear to have special reference to 
'the cases of Hadfield, Bellihgham, and Macnaughton. 



16 INDICTMENT. 

Question 2. — " What are the proper questions to be submitted to the jury 
when a person alleged to be afflicted with insane delusion respecting one or 
more particular subjects or persons, is charged with the commission of a crime, 
(murder, for example,) and insanity is set up as a defence?" 

Question 3. — " In what terms ought the question to be left to the jury aa 
to the prisoner's state of mind at the time when the act was committed?" 

Answers. — To the second and third questions : — " That the jury ought to be 
told in all eases that every man is presumed to be sane, and to possess a 
sufficient degree of reason to be responsible for his crimes, until the contrary 
be proved to their satisfaction; and that, to establish a defence on the ground 
of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of 
the act, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from 
disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was 
doing, or, if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong. 
The mode of putting the latter part of the question to the jury on these occa- 
sions has generally been, whether the accused, at the time of doing the act, 
Tcnew the difference between right and wrong, which mode, though rarely,- if 
ever, leading to any mistake with the jury, is not, as we conceive, so accurate 
when put generally, and in the abstract, as when put as to the party's know- 
ledge of right and wrong in respect to the very act with which he is charged. 
If the question were to be put as to the knowledge of the accused, solely and 
exclusively with reference to the law of the land, it might tend to confound the 
jury, by inducing them to believe that an actual knowledge of the law of the 
land was essential in order to lead to a conviction, whereas the law is adminis- 
tered upon the principle that every one must be taken conclusively to know it 
without proof that he does know it. If the accused was conscious that the act 
was one which he ought not to do, and if that act was at the same time con- 
trary to the law of the land, he is punishable; and the usual course, therefore, 
has been to leave the question to the jury, whether the party accused had a 
sufficient degree of reason to know that he was doing an act that was wrong: 
and this course, we think, is correct, accompanied with such observations and 
explanations as the circumstances of each particular case may require." 
4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 931. The words italicized appear to distinguish between the 
physical .character and legal aspect of the act done. See Mayne, Ind. Cr. Law 
(4th ed.), p. 178. 

Question 4. — " If a person, under an insane delusion, as to the existing 
facts, commits an offence in consequence thereof, is he thereby excused?" 

Answer. — " The answer must, of course, depend on the nature of the 
delusion ; but making the same assumption as we did before, that he labours 
under such partial delusion only, and is not in other respects insane, we think 
he must be considered in the same situation as to responsibility as if the facts 
with respect to which the delusion exists were real. For example, if, under 
the influence of his delusion, he supposes another man to be in the act of 
attempting to take away his life, and he kills that man, as he supposes in 
self-defence, he would be exempted from punishment. If his delusion was that 
the deceased had iuflicted a serious injury to his character and fortune, and he 



EXCUSES : ■ INSANITY. 17 

killed him in revenge for such supposed injury, he would be liable to punish- 
ment." i St. Tr. (N. S.) 939. See B. v. Townley, 3 F. & F. 839. 

Question 5. — " Can a medical man, conversant with the disease of insanity, 
who never saw the prisoner previously to the trial, but who was present during 
the whole trial, and the examination of all the witnesses, be asked his opinion 
as to the state, of the prisoner's mind at the time of the commission of the 
alleged crime, or his. opinion whether the prisoner was conscious, at the time 
of doing the act, that he was acting contrary to law, or whether he was labour- 
ing under any and what delusion at the time?" 

Answer. — " We think the medical man, under the circumstances supposed, 
cannot in strictness be asked his opinion in the terms above stated, because 
each of those questions involves the determination of the truth of the facts 
deposed to, which it is for the jury to decide : and the questions are not mere 
questions upon a matter of science, in which case such evidence is admissible. 
But where the facts are admitted or not disputed, and the question be.comes 
substantially one of science only, it may be convenient to allow the question 
to be put in that general form, though the same cannot be insisted on as a 
matter of right." 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 932. 

These answers have in the main been accepted as laying down the law of 
England as to the definition of insanity with reference to criminal responsibility. 
B. V. Townley, 3 P. & F. 839 : B. v. Southey, 4 F. & F. 864 : R. v. Leigh, 
4 F. & F. 915 : B. v. Smith, 5 Cr. App. E. 123 : B. Y. Alexander, 23 Cox, 604 ; 
9 Cr. App. E. 139; and see 1 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.), 68-82. But they have been 
the subject of much consideration and criticism by legal and medical writers. 
{See 2 Stephen, Hist. Cr. Law, 124-186; Mayne, Ind. Crim. Law (4th ed.), 
pp. 169 et seq. ; Wood-Eenton on Lunacy, 885, 914.) Sir James Stephen was of 
opinion (2 Hist. Cr. Law, 186) that Macrmughton's case admitted, as a further 
exemption, the proposition " that a person should not be punished for any 
act when he is deprived by disease of the power, of controlling his conduct, 
unless the absence of control has been caused by his own default." So far ae 
this admits the medical theory of uncontrollable impulse, it conflicts with the 
following cases : B. v. Stohes, 3 C. & K. 185, Eolfe, B. . B. v. Barton, 3 Cox, 
275, Parke, B. : R. v. Burton, 3 F. & F. 772, "Wight#ian, J. : B. v. Dove 
[1884] Bramwell, B. ; 3 Stephen Hist. Cr. Law, 429: Wood-Eeiiton, Lunacy, 
900 ; and with the opinions of the judges appointed to report on the Draft Code 
of 1878; and with recent decisions of the Court of Criminal Appeal. See B. v. 
Thomas, 7 Cr. App. E. 36 : B. v. Coelho, 10 Cr. App. E. 210, at p. 212 : B. v. 
Aughet, 13 Cr. App. E. 101, at p. 106 : R. v. Holt, 15 Cr. App. E. 10 : B. v. 
Quarmby, 15 Cr. App. E. 163; but it is supported as a legal proposition by 
dicta of Denman, C.J., in B. v. Oxford, 9 C. & P. 525; and Lawrance, J., in 
R. V. Duncan, Wood-Eenton, Lunacy, 901, 908; and see B. v. Hay, 22 Cox, 
268; 75 J. P. 480; B. Y. Fryer, 24 Cox, 403; B. v. Jolly, 83 J. P. 296, Bray, J. ; 
Tuke, Diet. Psych. Med., vol. 1, p. 314; Journal of Mental Science, vol. 43, 
p. 420; Mercier, Criminal Eesponsibility (ed. 1906), p. 167; Taylor, Medical 
Jurisprudence (7th ed.) : Pari. Pap. 1908, c. 4202 : and Brown's case [1907] 
9 Fraser (Just. So.) 67, 76. 

Moral insanity — i.e., disorder of the moral rather than of the mental powers 

A.c.P. 2 



18 INDICTMENT. 

—when a man's iMellectual faculties are sound and be knows quite well what 
lie is doing, but his moral sense is affected or diseased, is not yet accepted in 
England as falling within the rules in Macnaughton's case. R. v. Haynes, 
1 F. & F. 666 ; B. v. Law, 2 F. & F. 836 {and see Wood-Eenton, Lunacy, 909) : 
R. V. Burton, 3 F. & F. 772. (a) 

The words " nature and quality of the act " in the answer to Questions 2 
aftd 3 do not mean the physical act and the morality of the act respectively, btlt 
apply alone to the physical character^ and were not intended to distinguish 
between the physical and the moral aspects of the act. R. v. Codere, 12 Cr. 
App. E. 21. 

Ptool of insanity.] — Whether tbe prisoner was sane or insane in the legal 
■sense at the time the act was committed is a question of fact triable by the 
jury, and is dependent upon the previous and contemporaneous acts of the party. 
Evidence of insanity of ancestors or blood relations is admissible. R. v. Ross 
Tucket, 1 Cox, 103 : R. v. Vyse, 3 F. & F. 247. 9o is evidence of illness 
exhausting the brain. R. v. Law, 2 F. & F. 836. Medical evidence is not 
essential. R. v. Dart, 14 Cox, 143. Mere absence of any evidence of motivfe 
for a crime is not a sufficient ground upon which to infer mania. R. v. Haynes, 
1 F. & F. 666, Bramwell, B. : R. v. Dixon, 11 Cox, 341. A medical witness 
may be asked whether, assuming certain facts, proved by other witnesses, to be 
true, they, in his opinion, indicate insanity, but not whether, having 

(a) Colonial and American Views.']— The tendency of judges and legislators in the 
tJnifced States and the British Colonies is not to accept the dicta in Macnaughton's cage 
as an adequate definition of insanity with reference to criminal responsibility. In the 
Queensland Code of 1S99 (s. 27), drafted b^ the Et. Hon. Sir Samuel Griffith, C.J., of 
that Colony, after consideration of the English authorities and Continental and 
American legislation, the view of Sir J. Stephen is" in substance adopted. The article 
runs : " A person is not criminally responsible for an act or omission if at the time of 
doing the act or making the omission he is in such a state of mental disease Or natural 
mental infirmity as to deprive him of capacity to understand what he is doing or of 
capacity to control his actions, or of capacity to know that he ought not to do the 
act or make the omission." 

And in R. V. Hay [1*9] 16 Cape of Good Hope Rep. (SUp. Ct.) 290, the Et. Hon. Sir 
H. de Villiers, C.J., after hearing a full argument dealing with the law of England 
and the United States and the Eoman-Dutch law, laid down as the law of the Cape, 
and as the tendency of legal opinion elsewhere, the following rules which also in sub- 
stance coincide with the opinibn of Sir J. Stephen: — 
" (1) Where the defence of insanity is interposed in a criminal trial the capacity to 
distinguish between right and wrong is not the sole test of responsibility in 
all cases. 
" (2) In the absence of legislation to the contrary courts of law are bound to recognize 
the existence of a form of mental disease which prevents the sufferer from 
controlling his conduct and choosing between right and wrong, though he 
may have the mental capacity to distinguish between right and wrong. 
" (3) The defence of insanity is established if it be proved that the accused had by 
reason of such mental disease lost the power of will to control his conduct 
in reference to the particular .act charged as an offence. 
" (4) The capacity of the accused to control his own conduct must be presumed till 

the contrary is proved." 
For a strict statement of the law according to Macnaughton's case, see R. V. Jessamine, 

19 Canadian Cr. Cases, 214, Eiddell, J. 



EXCUSES: INSANITY. 19 

heard the whole evidence, he is of opinion that the prisoner at the 
time he committed the alleged act was of unsound mind. Id. R. v. 
Frances, 4 Cox, 57, Alderson, B., and Cresewell, J. : R. v. Wright, E. & K; 
456 : R. V. Searle, 1 M. & Rob. 75. But a medical witness, who never saw 
the prisoner previously to the trial, but who was present during the whole 
trial and the examination of the witnesses, cannot, in strictness, be asked his 
opinion as to the state of the prisoner's mind at the time of the commission 
of the alleged crime, or his opinion whether the prisoner was conscious, at the 
time of doing the act, that he was acting contrary to law, or whether he 
was labouring under any and what delusion at the time, because each of these 
questions involves the determination of the truth of the matter deposed to, 
which it is for the jury to decide. (See the answer to the fifth question in B. v. 
Macnaughton, ante, p. 17). Nor can such a witness, although present in 
court during the whole trial, be asked whether, from the evidence he has heard, 
he is of opinion that the prisoner at the time he did the act was insane, nor 
whether the act with which the prisoner is charged was in his opinion an act 
of insanity, for these are the very points to be decided by the jury. R. v. 
Frances, supra : R. v. Wright, supra. Counsel will not be allowed, upon a 
question of insanity, to quote in his address to the jury the opinions of medical 
writers as expressed in their books. R. v. Crouch, 1 Cox, 94 : R. v. Taylor, 
13 Cox, 77, Brett, J. 

Insanity being matter of defence, the onus of establishing it lies upon the 
defendant. B. v. Oliver Smith, 6 Cr. App. E. 19. Where evidence to establish 
insanity has been called for the defence, the prosecution may call rebutting 
evidence. B. v. Smith, 8 Cr. App. E. 72. And where it is clear from the cross- 
examination of witnesses for the prosecution that the defence of insanity will 
be raised, and it is ascertained that no evidence will be called to establish this 
defence, the Crown may, before closing its own case, call evidence to negative 
insanity. R. v. Ahramovitch, 76 J. P. 287; 107 L. T. 416; 7 Cr. App. E. 145. 

Drunkenness.] — ^Drunkenness, which produces a perfect though temporary 
frenzy or insanity (usually denominated d&mentia affectata or acquired mad- 
ness), was formerly held not to excuse the commission of any crime; and an 
offender under the influence of intoxication could derive no privilege from a 
madness voluntarily contracted, but was regarded as equally answerable to 
the law as if he had been in the full possession of his faculties at the tftne ; 
1 Hale, 32 : Co. Litt. 247 • 1 Hawk. u. 1, s. 6 : Reniger v. Fogossa, 1 Plowd. 
1. But legal opinion has altered on this subject, and now insanity produced 
by drunkenness, even though temporary, is a defence just as it is when it is 
produced by other causes. Evidence of drunkenness which renders the accused 
incapable of forming the specific intent essential to constitute the crime charged > 
must be taken into consideration with the other facts proved in order to 
determine whether or not he had such intent. But evidence of drunkenness 
falling short of this, and merely establishing that the mind of the accused 
was affected by drink, bo that he more readily gave way to some violent passion, 
does not rebut the presumption that a man intends the natural consequences 
of his acts. Director of Public Prosecutions v. Beard [1920] A. C. 479. In a 



20 INDICTMENT. 

limited class of case, e.g., in charges of murder directly arising from acts of 
violence done with intent to do grievous bodily harm, where it is established 
that the accused was drunk at the time of committing the acts, the presumption 
that he intended the natural consequences of his act may be rebutted by 
ehowing his mind to have been incapable of knowing that what he was doing 
was dangerous, i.e., likely to inflict serious injury, and the crime thereby 
reduced to manslaughter. R. v. Meade [1909] 1 K. B. 895 ; 78 1;. J. (K. B.) 
476. But this is not a rule of general application, and does not apply to 
charges of murder where the violent act is done in furtherance of what is in 
itself a felony Of violence, e.g., rape. In such a case drunkenness can be no 
defence, unless it is of such a degree as to cause incapability of forming the 
intention to commit the particular felony. So where the accused ravished a 
girl of thirteen years of age, and in furtherance of the act of rape placed his 
hand upon her mouth and his thumb upon her throat, thereby causing death 
by suffocation, and the only defence was drunkenness, it was held to be murder, 
there being no evidence of a state of drunkenness sufilcient to negative the 
intent to commit the rape. Director of Public Prosecutions v. Beard, supra. 

There is a distinction between the defence of insanity in the true sense 
produced by excessive drinking and the defence of drunkenness which produces 
a condition such that the drunken man's mind becomes incapable of forming 
a specific intention, and the test of criminal responsibility which is applied to 
the former should not be applied to the latter defence. Director of Public 
Prosecutions v. Beard, supra (a). 

Drunkenness and consequent delusions may assist to make out a defence 
of provocation or self-defence. B. v. Thomas, 7 C. & P. 817 : B. v. 
Pearson, 2 Lew. 144 : B. v. Monkhouse, 4 Cox, 55 : B. v. Gamlen, 1 F. & F. 
90. The Scotch and Irish rulings on this subject are collected in Wood-Eenton on 
Lunacy, 912, 913. If the primary cause of the frenzy is involuntary, or it has 
become habitual and confirmed, this species of insanity will excuse the offender to 
the same extent as any other form of insanity. Thus, for instance, if a man 
through the unskilfulness of his physician, or the contrivance of his enemies, 
takes that which produces a temporary frenzy, he will not, whilst under the influ- 
ence of the frenzy, be accountable for his actions. Nor will he be liable to be 
punished for any crime perpetrated under the influence of insanity which is 
habitual and fixed, though caused by frequent intoxication, and originally con- 
tracted by his own act. 1 Hale, 32. And delirium tremens, caused by drinking, 
if it produces such a degree of madness, although only temporary, as to render a 
person incapable of distinguishing right from wrong, relieves him from criminal 
responsibility for any act committed by him while under its influence. B. v. 

(a) See R..T. Egan [1897] 23 Vict. 1. R. ,159, as to whetheT and when a woman can 
be convicted of murder or manslaughter by overlying her child when she has taken it 
to bed with her while she is drunk (see 8 Edw. 7, c. 67, s. 13). In R. V. Glen, 9 Queens- 
land L. J. 140, a verdict of guilty coupled with a rider that the prisoner was In drink 
and did not know what he was doing was held to be a finding that he had no ammui 
fuTandi: cf. R. v. Mathieson [1906] 25 N. Z. L. E. 879; 1 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 89. This 
point has not been decided in England (R. v. Chapman, i Cr. App. R. 54). In H. >. 
Corhett [1903] Queensland State Eep. 246, Grifttth, C.J., said, " Drunkenness is never 
a defence unless it amounts to unsoundness of mind." 



EXCUSES: COERCION. 2X 

Davis, 14 Cox,' 563, Stephen, J. The doctrine of criminal responsibility in 
case of drunkenness due to alcohol is equally applicable to mental or bodily 
conditions caused by the drinking of narcotics or non-alcoholic stimulants, or 
exciting drugs, or their hypodermic injection. 1 Hale, 32. 

The Inebriates Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 60), provides for reformatory 
treatment of persons convicted on indictment who are habitual drunkards. The 
term "habitual drunkard " means " a person who, not being amenable to any 
jurisdiction in lunacy, is notwithstanding, by reason of habitual intemperate 
drinking of intoxicating liquor, at times dangerous to himself or herself or to 
others, or incapable of managing himself or herself, and his or her affairs." 
See Eaton v. Best [1909] 1 K. B. 632; 78 L. J. (K. B.) 425. This definition 
appears to apply only to the habitual use of alcohol, and not to include the 
use of narcotics. See Wood-Renton, Lunacy, 954. The Act of 1898 does not 
appear to accept the view that drunkenness falling short of insanity is a defence 
on -a charge of crime, but gives the courts latitude in the treatment of crimes 
directly or indirectly due to drunkenness, by permitting the reformative sentence 
as an alternative to the ordinary punishment for crime. Gf. 8 Edw. 7, c. 67, 
s. 26, as to offences by habitual drunkards against persons under sixteen. 

Compulsion or coercion.] — The same principle which excuses those who have 
no mental will in the perpetration of an offence, protects from the punishment 
of the law those who commit crimes in subjection to the power of others, and 
not as the result of an uncontrolled free action proceeding from themselves. 
4 Bl. Com. 27 : 1 Hale, 44, 51. Thus, if A. by force takes the hand of B. in 
which is a weapon, and therewith kills C, A. is guilty of murder, but B. is 
excused ; but if a merely moral force is used, as threats, duress of imprisonment, 
or even an assault to the peril of his life, in order to compel him to kill C, it 
is no legal excuse. 1 Hale, 434; 1 East, P. C. 225. M' Growther' s case. Post. 
13 ; 18 St. Tr. 391 : B. v. Gordon, 1 East, P. C. 71 : R. v. Tyler, 8 C. & P. 616. 
This protection also exists in the public and private relations of society ■ public, 
as between subject and prince, obedience to existing laws being a, sufficient 
extenuation of civil guilt before a municipal tribunal ; and private, proceeding 
from the matrimonial subjection of the wife to the husband, from which the 
law preeumes coercion, which, in many cases, excuses the wife from the con- 
sequences of criminal misconduct. The private relations which exist between 
parent and child, and master and servant, will not, however, excuse or exten- 
uate the commission of any crime , of whatever denomination ; for the command 
is void in law, and can protect neither the commander nor the instrument. 
1 Hale, 44, 516. Obedience to usurped power is an excuse only where actual 
physical compulsion is used or directly available. See M'Growther's case, 
supra: Sir H. Vane's case, 6 St. Tr. 119; Kel. (J.) 14: AxteU's case, Kel. 
(J.) 13. 

Married women. — The mere fact that two persons jointly charged with crime 
are married does not create any presumption that the wife was coerced by the 
husband to commit the crime. Brown v. Att.-Gen. of N.Z. [1898] A. C. 234, 
237; 67 L. J. (P. C.) 7 : fl. v. Mary Baines [1900] 69 L. J. Q. B. 681; 19 Cox, 



22 INDICTMENT. 

6i24 ; 64 J. P. 408; But, as a general rule, if a crime be committed by a feme 
covert in the presence of her husband, the law presumes that she acted under his 
immediate coercion, and excuses her from punishment ; 1 Hale, 45, 516 ; 1 Hawk, 
c. 1, 8. 9; R. V. Garoubi, 23 Cox, 177; 76 J. P. 262; 28 T. L. B. 248; B. M. 
Green, 78 J. P. 170; 30 T. L. E. 170; 9 Cr. App. E. 288. This protection, how- 
ever, is not to be allowed in crimes which are mala in se, and prohibited by the 
law of nature, nor in such as are heinous in their character, or dangeroue in their 
consequences; 1 Hale, 45, 47, 48; 1 Hawk. c. 1, s. 11 ; 4 Bl. Com. 29; 1 Harg. 
St. Tr. 28 : B. v. Squire, 1 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 93, 912. It seems not to apply 
to murder, R. v. Manning, 2 C. & K. 903, u. ; R. v. Alison, 8 C. & P. 418; 
but has been applied to burglary and larceny (B. v. Knight, 1 C. & P. 116); 
to forgery {R. v. Hughes, 2 Lew. 229); to felonious assaults {R. v. Smith, 
Dears. & B. 558); and to robbery {R. v. Torpey, 12 Cox, 45). In some cases 
the presumption has been extended to misdemeanors : e.g., uttering base coin, 
R. V. Connolly, 2 Lew. 229; Matth. Dig. 262 : R. v. Price, 8 C. & P. 19; and 
see R. V. Torpey, supra. But the contrary appears to have been held by all 
the judges in R. v. Cruse, 8 C. & P. 541 ; 2 Mcx)d. 63; andthisi is the prevailing 
opinion. See R. v. Ingram, 1 Salk. 384. So a married woman may be indicted 
jointly with her husband for keeping a bawdy-house, R. v. Williams, 1 Salk. 
384; 10 Mod. 63; or a gaming-house, R. v. Dixon, 10 Mod. 335; for these are 
offences connected with the government of the house, in which the wife has 
a principal share. 1 Hawk. c. 1, s. 12. So also they may be jointly convicted 
of an assault. R. v. Cruse, supra. And if, in the absence of her husband, the 
wife commits an offence, even by his order or procurement, her coverture will 
be no excuse; Anon., 2 East, P. C. 559 : R. v. Morris, E. & E. 270; 2 Leach, 
1096; 1 Hawk. u. 1, s. 11; even though he appears at the very moment after 
the commission of the offence; and no subsequent aot of his, though it may 
render him an accessory to the felony of his wife, can be referred to what was 
done by his wife in his absence. B. v. Hughes, 1 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 94, 99; 
2 Lew. 229. This presumption of coercion of the wife by the husband may 
be rebutted by evidence ; though it is doubtful whether a confession by a wife 
in presence of her husband should be received as such evidence. R. v. Laugher, 
2 C. & K. 225. And if it appears that the wife was principally instrumental 
in the commission of the crime, acting voluntarily, and not byi constraint of 
her husband, although he was present and concurred, she will be guilty and 
liable to punishment. 1 Hale, 516 : R. v. Cohen, 11 Cox, 99; 16 W. E. 941 : 
R. V. Garoubi, supra. Thus, a married woman who swore falsely that she was 
next of kin to a person dying intestate, and so procured administration to the 
effects, was held responsible for the offence, though her husband was with her 
when she took the oath. R. v. Dicks, 1 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 97. So where a 
husband delivered a threatening letter ignorantly, as the agent of the wife, 
she alone was held to be punishable. R. v. Hammond, 1 Leach, 444. And 
where the wife in the absence of her husband induced the prosecutor by false 
representations to meet her at a place, where the husband, the wife being 
present but taking no active part, by threats of violence induced the prosecutsr 
to execute a valuable security, and the husband and wife were jointly indicted 
for that offence under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, ». 48 [rep.], Brett, J., directed the jury 



EXCUSES: COERCION. 23 

that if they should be of opinion that the wife in the husband's absence took 
an independent part in carrying out the crime, the fact of her being the wife 
would not absolve her. R. v. John, 13 Cox, 100, Where stolen goods are 
received by a married woman in the absence of her husband, and are concealed 
in his house, without his knowledge, she may be indicted and punished for 
the offence; but if the husband's ignorance of the transaction is not satisfactorily 
proved, the law will, in most cases, impute the receiving to him. Dalt. o. 157. 
"Where husband and wife were convicted jointly of receiving stolen goods, it 
was held that the conviction of the wife could not be supported, though she 
had been more active than her husband, because it had not been left to the 
jury to ■ s^y whether she received the goods in the absence of her husband. 
R. V. Archer, 1 Mood. 143; R. v. Matthews, 1 Den. 596; 4 Cox, 214 : R. v. 
McClarenS, 3 Cox, 425. See R. v. Wardroper, Bell, 249; 29 L. J. (M. C.) 116. 
But in R. V. Mary Raines (69 L. J. Q. B. 681; 19 Cox, 524; 64 J. P. 408), 
where a husband and wife were jointly indicted for receiving stolen goods, and 
there was evidence of & separate receiving by the wife in the absence of her 
husband, it was held that she was properly convicted in accordance with the 
provisions of 24 & 25 Vict. u. 96, a. 94 (rep.). And it is submitted that a married 
woman is indictable for receiving since the Married Women's Property Act, 
1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 75), if she knowingly deals with goods stolen by her 
husband in a business carried on by her under her own name. At common law 
she is not indictable for receiving from her husband goods stolen by him. R. v. 
Brooks, Dears. 184 : 22 L. J. (M. C.) 121; and see R. v. Archer, 1 Mood. 143. 
Husband and wife were jointlj* charged with felonious wounding, with intent 
to disfigure, and to do grievous bodily -harm. The jury found that the wife 
acted under the coercion of the husband, and that she did not personally inflict 
any violence on the prosecutor. On this finding the wife was held entitled to 
an acquittal. R. v. Smith, Dears. & B. 553; 27 L. J. (M. C.) 204. And where 
the prisoner, a married woman, was indicted together with her huaband, who 
was not in custody, for a robbery with violence, in which she had herself taken 
a very active part, and the jury returned as their verdict that they were of 
opinion that the whole matter was pre-arranged by the husband, and that 
the wife acted under his coercion and control at the time, it was held to amount 
to "■ verdict of not guilty. R. v. Torpey, 12 Cox, 45. Where upon an indict- 
ment for robbery with violence, D. and his wife were found guilty, the jury 
finding, however, that the wife had acted under her husband's compulsion, this 
was held to amount to a verdict of not guilty as to the wife. R. v. Dykes, 
15 Cox, 771, Stephen, J. It has frequently been said in recent cases that the 
doctrine of coercion by the husband should not be extended. R. y. Court, 7 Cr. 
App. E. 127, 129; R. v. Green, 78 J. P. 170; 91 Cr. App. E. 228. Husband and 
wife cannot alone be found guilty of conspiracy, for they are considered in 
law as one person, and are presumed to have but one will. 1 Hawk, c. 72, 
=. 8. 

If a married woman incites her husband to the commission of a felony, she 
is an accessory before the fact; 1 Hale, 516; 2. Hawk. c. 29, s. 34: R. v. 
Manning, 2 C. & K. 903, n. ; but ghe cannot be treated as an accessory after 
the fact for receiving her husband, knowing that he has committed treason 



24 INDICTMENT. 

or felony; 1 Hale, 47 : B. v. Goode, 1 C. & K. 185; nor for concealing a felon 
jointly with her husband; Id. ; 1 Hawk. u. 1, o. 10. And she is not answerable 
for her husband's breach of duty, however fatal, though she is privy to hie 
misconduct, if no duty is cast upon her, and she is merely passive. B. v. 
Squire, 1 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.), 93, 912. 

If a married woman, indicted jointly with her husband, is described in the 
indictment as his wife, she need not prove her marriage, but will be entitled 
to protection if it appears that she acted under his coercion ; B. v. Knight, 
1 C. & P. 116 ; but the mere description will be no ground for dismissing the 
indictment as to the wife, for the indictment is joint and several, according to 
the facts as they may appear. 1 Hale, 46. If she is described as a single 
woman, she must prove her marriage; B. v. Jones, Kel. (J.) 37; and such 
evidence must be given as will satisfy the jury of her marriage, although it is 
not absolutely necessary that the actual marriage should be proved. R. v. 
Atkinson, 1 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 100 : B. v. Hassall, 2 C. & P. 434 : B. v. 
Woodward, 8 C. & P. 561 . R. v. McGinnes, 11 Cox, 391. Evidence of cohabi- 
tation and reputation will be sufficient. Morris v. Miller, 4 Burr. 2057, Lord 
Mansfield, C.J. 

Ignorance of law.] — Ignorance of the law will not excuse from the conse- 
quences of guilt any person who has capacity to understand the law. 1 Hale, 
42 : B. V. Crawshaw, Bell, 303; 30 L. J. (M. C.) 58; 8 Cox, 375. If the 
offence is committed in England, a foreigner cannot be excused because he 
does not know our law. B. v. Esop, 7 C. & P. 456 ; R. v. Barronet, 1 E. 4; B. 1 ; 

22 L. J. (M. C.) 25. And the same applies if it is committed in an English ship 
on the high seas, which is in law part of the territory of England. B. v. Lopez, 
B. V. Sattler, Dears. & B. 525; 27 L. J. (M. C.) 48. Where, however, a 
defendant was indicted for maliciously shooting at A. B. upon the high seas, 
and the offence was perpetrated within a few weeks after the passing of 39 G.' 3, 
c. 37, and before notice of it could have reached the place where the offence 
was committed, the judges held, that as he could not have been tried before 
that Act was passed, and as he could not have heard of it, he ought to be 
pardoned. B. v. Bailey, E. & E. 1 : and see Burns v. Nowell, 5 Q. B. D. 
444, 454. 

Ignorance or mistake of fact.] — Ignorance or mistake of fact may in some 
cases be allowed as an excuse for the inadvertent commission of a crime, 
where the accused acted under an honest and reasonable belief in a state of 
things which if true would have justified the act done. " At common law an 
honest and reasonable belief in the existence of facts, which if true would 
make the act for which the prisoner is indicted an innocent act, has always 
been held to be a good defence. This doctrine is embodied in the somewhat 
uncouth maxim, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea. Honest and reason- 
able mistake stands in fact on the same footing as absence of the reasoning 
faculty as in infancy, or perversion of that faculty as in lunacy." B. v. Tolson, 

23 Q. B. D. 168, 181 ; 58 L. J. M. C. 97, Cave, J. For instance, if a man, 
intending to kill a, thief in his own house, kills one of his own family, he will 



MENS RE A. 25 

be guilty of no offence. 1 Hale, 42, 43 ; 4 Bl. Com. 27 ; R. v. Levett, Cro. Car. 
538 cit. But this rule proceeds upon a supposition that the original intention 
was lawful ; for if an unforeseen consequence ensues from an act which was in 
itself unlawful, and in its original nature wrong and mischievous, the actor 
is criminally responsible for whatever consequences may ensue. 4 Bl. Com. 27. 

" Mens rea." (a) ] — The general rule of law is that a person cannot be 
convicted in a proceeding of a criminal nature unless it can be shown that he 
had a, guilty mind; Ghisholm v. Doulton, 22 Q. B. D. 736; 58 L. J. (M. C.) 
183 : R. V. Twose, 14 Cox, 327; but it is impossible now to apply the maxim 
as to " mens rea " generally to all statutes, "and it is necessary to look at the 
object and terms of each Act to see whether and how far knowledge or a 
particular intent is of the essence of the offence created; Gundy v. Lecocq, 
13 Q. B. D. 207; 53 L. J. (M. C.) 125, Stephen, J.; Craies on Statute Law 
(4th ed.), p. 433; Maxwell on Statutes (5th ed.), p. 157. It has been held that 
it is not necessary to prove that a defendant charged with assaulting a constable 
in the execution of his duty knew that the constable was so acting; R. v. 
Forbes, 10 Cox, 362, Gurney, Kecorder. Where the defendant was indicted 
under 24 & 25 Vict. u. 100, s. 55, for unlawfully taking an unmarried girl under 

(the age of sixteen years out of the possession and against the will of her father, 
it was held to be no defence that the defendant believed on good grounds that 
the girl was above sixteen years of age. R. v. Prince, L. E. 2 C. C. E. 154; 
44 L. J. (M. C.) 122. All the judges in that case agreed on the general prin- 
ciple that an honest and reasonable mistake of facts furnishes a good defence 
for an act committed under such mistake, and which would otherwise be 
criminal, but they all, except Lord Esher, considered that the object of the 
legislature being to prevent a scandalous and wicked invasion of parental rights, 
it was to be supposed that they intended that the wrongdoer should act at his 
peril. R. v. Tolson, 23 Q. B. D. 168, 190, Stephen,' J. : and see R. v. Dennis, 
69 J. P. 256. The majority of the judges seem to have held that in order to 
make the defence of mistake of fact available in that case (R. v. Prince), the 
accused must have proved the existence in his mind of an honest and reasonable 
belief in the existence of circumstances which, if they had really existed, would 
have made his act not only not criminal but also not immoral. R. v. Tolson, 

. 23 Q. B. D. 168, 181, Cave, J. A defendant was convicted under 8 & 9 Vict, 
c. 100, B. 44 {rep., but containing a provision similar ta 53 & 64 Vict. c. 5, 
s. 315), of receiving two or more lunatics into her house, not being a registered 

(o) As to statutory offences the true rule of English law seems to be correctly stated 
in Art. 23 of the Queensland Code ol 1899, except as to public nuisances. 

' Subject to the express provisions of this Code relating to negligent acts and omis 
sions, a person is not criminally responsible for an act or omission which occurs inde- 
pendently of the exercise of his will or for an event which occurs by accident. 

" Unless the intention to cause a, particular result is declared to be an element of the 
offence constituted in whole or in part by an act or omission, the result intended to be 
caused by an act or omission is immaterial. 

" Unless otherwise .expressly declared, the motive by which a person is induced to do 
or omit to do an act or to form an intention is immaterial so far as regards criminal 
responsibility." 



26 INDICTMENT. 

asylum or hospital, or a house duly licensed under the above Act, or under any 
previous Act, but it was specially found by the jury who convicted that, though 
the persons so received were lunatics, the defendant honestly, and on reasonable 
grounds, believed that they were not lunatics. It was held that, having regard 
to the scope of the Act, and the object for which it was apparently passed, such 
mistaken belief was immaterial, and that the conviction was right. B. v. 
Bishop, 5 Q. B. T>. 259; 49 L. J. (M. C.) 45. But where the prisoner was 
convicted under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, a. 57, of bigamy, having gone through 
the ceremony of marriage within seven years after she had been deserted by 
her husband, and the jury found that at the time of the second marriage she, 
in good faith and on reasonable grounds, believed her husband to be dead, it 
was held on a case reserved by the court for the consideration of all the judges, 
that a bond fide belief by the prisoner on reasonable grounds in the death lof 
the husband at the time of the second marriage was a good defence, and that 
the conviction was wrong. R. v. Tolson, 23 Q. B. D. 168; 58 L. J. (M. C.) 
97. The ratio decidendi of this decision, and the distinction between this case 
and that of B. v. Prince, ante, p. 25, seems to be contained in the following 
words of the judgment of Stephen, J., 23 Q. B. D. at p. 191-^" The conduct of 
the woman convicted was not in the smallest degree immoral, it was perfectly 
natural and legitimate. Assuming the facts to be asi she supposed, the infliction^ 
of more than a nominal punishment on her would have been a scandal. Why, 
then, should the legislature be held to have wished to subject her to punishment 
at all?" It is not, perhaps, easy to draw a distinction between B. v. Tolson 
and R. v. Bishop, supra, but the same learned judge, at the page last cited, 
explained the decision in R. v. Bishop as having gone on "the scope of the 
Act constituting the offence, and the object for which it was apparently passed," 
cf. Cundy v. Lecocq, supra; and as to R. v. Tolson, see B. v. Wheat and 
R. v., Stocks [1921] 2 K. B. 119. 

This question has been the subject of numerous decisions with regard 
to offences triable summarily against the statutes relating to lijcensing. 
Bond V. Evans, 21 Q. B. D. 249; Brooks v. Mason [1902] 2 K. B. 743; 
Sherras v. de Butzen [1895] 1 Q. B. 918; 64 L. J. (M. C.) 218: and 
adulteration of food, Coppen v. Moore (No. 2) [1898] 2 Q. B. 306; 67 L. J. 
(Q. B.) 689. Brown v. Foot, 61 L. J. (M. C.) 110; 17 Cox, 509; 56 J. P. 
581 :• Parker v. Alder [1899] 1 Q. B. 20; 68 L. J. (Q. B.) 7; 62 J. P. 792. 
See also Jones v. Davies [1902] 20 Cox, 184 : Greenwood v. Backhouse, 
20 Cox, 196 : Christie v. Cooper [1900] 2 Q. B. 522 : Laird v. Dobell [1906] 
1 K. B. 131 : Toppen v. Marcus [1908] 2 Ir. Eep. 423 : Mogan v. Caldwell, 
88 L. J. (K. B.) 1141 (Merchant Shipping Act, 1906, s. 25) : Mousell Brothers, 
Ltd. V. London A North Western Railway Co. [1917] 2 K. B. 836 (Eailway 
Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, ss. 98, 99). Knowledge by the defendant that 
he is offending against the penal provisions of a statute is sufficient to constitute 
mens rea. Bank of N.S.W. v. Piper [1897] A. C. 383; 66 L. J. (P. C.) 73. 



FORM OF AN INDICTMENT. 27 



Seob. S. 



THE FORM OF AN INDICTMENT. 

An indictment consists of three parts : tlie commencement, the statement of 
the offence, and the particulars of the offence. The caption is not part of it. 
See post, p. 61. 

By the Indictments Act, 1915 (5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90), s. 3— (1) " Every indict- 
ment shall contain, and shall be sufficient if it contains, a, statement of the 
specific offence or offences with which the accused person is charged, together 
with such particulars as may be necessary for giving reasonable information 
as to the nature of the charge. (2) Notwithstanding any rule of law or 
practice, an indictment shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, not be 
open to objection in respect of its form or contents if it is framed in accordance 
with the rules under this Act.'' 

Drawing the indictment.] — ^In ordinary cases, upon furnishing the clerk 
of assize, clerk of arraigns, oi clerk of the indictments at the assizes, or the 
clerk of the peace at sessions, with the particulars of the offence, he will draw 
the indictment ; but in cases where more than ordinary care may be requisite 
in framing the indictment, it is better to get it drawn by counsel. 

" Where it appears to the court that an indictment contains unnecessary 
matter, or is of unnecessary length, or is materially defective in any respect, 
the court may mfike such order as to the payment of that part of the costs ' 
of the prosecution which has been incurred by reason of the indictment so 
containing unnecessary matter, or being of unnecessary length, or being 
materially defective as the court thinks fit." 5 & 6 Q-eo. 5, c. 90, »• 6. 

" If any clerk of assize, clerk of the crown, clerk of the peace, clerk of the 
indictments, or other proper of&cer or their clerks or deputies, shall draw any 
bill of indictment defective, they shall draw new bills without demanding any 
fee or reward whatsoever, or forfeit the sum of £5 with full coats of suit." 
10 W. 3, c. 12 (c. 23, Buffhead), s. 8. 

RULES UNDER INDICTMENTS ACT, 1915. 

" The rules contained in the First Schedule to this Act with respect to indict- 
ments shall have effect as if enacted in this Act, but those rules may be added 
to, varied, or annulled by further rules made by the rule committee under this 
Act." 5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, s. 1. 

Sect. 2. Powers of rule committee.} — (1) There shall be established for the 
purposes of this Act a rule committee consisting of the Lord Chief Justice of 
England for the time being, and of a judge of the High Court, a chairman 
of quarter sessions, a recorder, a clerk of assize, a clerk of the peace, and 
another person having* experience in criminal procedure, appointed in each 
case by the Lord Chief Justice. 

(2) The rule committee shall have power from time to time, subject to the 



26 INDICTMENT. 

approval of the Lord Chancellor, to make rules varying or annulling the rules 
contained in the Pirst Schedule to this Act and to make further rules with 
respect to the matters dealt with in those rules, and those rules shall have 
effect subject to any modifications or additions so piade. 

(3) Any rules made by the rule committee shall be laid, as soon as may be, 
before both Houses of Parliament, and, if within forty days on which either 
House has sat since the rules were so laid before the House a, petition is 
presented to his Majesty by that House praying that the rules or any part of 
them may be annulled, his Majesty may thereupon by Order in Council annul 
the same, and the same shall thenceforth be void, but without prejudice to the 
validity of anything done thereunder. 

(4) The term of office of any person who is a member of the committee by 
virtue of appointment shall be such as may be specified in the appointment. 

Eule 1. Material, dc. jot indictments.^ — (1) An indictment may be on 
parchment or durable paper, and may be either written or printed, or partly 
written and partly printed. 

(2) Each sheet on which an indictment is set out shall be not more than 12 
and not less than 6 inches in length, and not more than 14 and not less than 
12 inches in width, and if more than one sheet is required, the sheets shall be 
fastened together in book form. 

(3) A proper margin not less than 3 inches in width shall be kept on the 
left-hand side of each sheet. 

(4) Figures and abbreviations may be used in an indictment for expressing 
anything which is commonly expressed thereby. 

(5) There shall be endorsed on the back of an indictment the name of every 
witness examined or intended to be examined by the grand jiiry, and the 
foreman of the grand jury shall write his initials against the name of each 
witness so examined. 

(6) An indictment shall not be open to objection by reason only of any failure 
to comply with this rule. 

1. THE COMMENCEMENT. 

(a) Presentment. 

Eule 2. The commencement of the indiptment shall be in the following 
form : — 

The King v. A.B. 

Court of Trial [e.g.. Central Criminal Court, [or] In the High Court 
of Justice, King's Bench Division, [or] Durham County Assizes 
held at Durham, [or] Hants Quarter Sessions held at Winchester]. 

Presentment of the Grand Jury. 

A.B. is charged with the following offence [offences] : — 

' (b) Venue. 

How stated.]— Prior- to the Indictments Act, 1915 (5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90), 
the statute law relating to venue was expressed as follows by 14 & 15 Vict. 



FORM— DEFINITION.' 29 

c. 100 {Criminal Procedure Act, 1851), sect. 23.] — "It shall not be necessary 
to etate any venue in the body of any indictment; but the county, city, or other 
jurisdiction named in the margin thereof shall be taken to be the' venue for all 
the facts stated in the body of such indictment : 

" Provided that, in cases where local description is, or hereafter ehall be, 
required such local deeoription shall be given in the body of the indictment ; 

" And provided also that where an indictment for an offence committed in 
the county of any city or town corporate shall be preferred at the assizes of 
the adjoining county, such county of the city or town shall be deemed the venue, 
and may either be stated in the margin of the indictment, with or without the 
name of the county in which the offender is to be tried, or be stated in the body 
of the indictment by way of venue." 

By sect. 24 of the same Act it was provided : " No indictment for any offence 
shall be held insufficient ... for want of a proper and perfect venue. . . ." 
[This re-enacted and extended 7 G. 4, c. 64, s. 20, which took away the right 
to object by motion in arrest of judgment, or by writ of error, for the want of n. 
proper or perfect venue. See R. v. Alberf, 5 Q. B. 37; Dav. & M. 89 ; 12 L. J. 
(N. S.) M. C. 117; R. V. Stowell, 5 Q. B. 44; Dav. & M. 189; 12 L. J. (N. S.) 
M. C. Ill; R. v. Gregory, 7 Q. B. 274; 14 L. J. (N. S.) M. C. 82;, iJ. v. 
O'Connor, 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 935 ; 5 Q. B. 16.] 

These provisions have now been repealed by the Indictments Act, 1915, and 
the venue is now sufficiently indicated by stating the court of trial at the com- 
mencement of an indictment in manner provided by Eule 2, ante, p. 28. 

Definition.] — ^Venue is the common law term for the neighbourhood (visne) 
from which the jurors are to come {venire). At common law only a 
jury of the district in which the offence was committed could convict of it. 
" The old jurisdiction of counties was local; they were like different kingdoms. 
There was no jurisdiction out of the county, no process out of it." R. v. 
Weston, 4 Burr. 2507, 2511, Lord Mansfield. Venue or local jurisdiction is 
quite distinct from national or territorial jurisdiction. Mozambique Co. v. 
Brit. South Africa Co. [1893] A. G. 602; R. v. Ellis [1899] 1 Q. B. 230; 
68 Ij. J. (Q. B.) 103; Badisohe Anilin und Soda Fabrik v. Basle Chemical 
Works [1898] A. G. 200, 204 ; 67 L. J. (Q. B.) 141. 

The Indictments Act, 1916, has expressly left the law or practice relating to 
jurisdiction untouched. 5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, s. 8 (1). See post, p. 60. 

General rule.] — The courts of common law had apart from statute no power 
to try any offence not committed within the body of the realm, i.e., their 
criminal jurisdiction was territorial and not personal. Macleod v. Att.-Gen. of 
N.S.W. [1891] A. C. 455; 60 L. J. (P. G.) 55; Sirdar Gurdyal Singh v. Rajah 
of Faridkote [1894] A. C. 670. Apart from the obsolete jurisdiction of the 
constable and marshal, no person can be tried under English law for an offence 
committed on land abroad, except under the authority of a statute. See R. v. 
Lewis, Dears. & B. 182; 26 L. J. (M. G.) 104; 7 Cox, 277. 

The jurisdiction of the courts of British colonies is limited to offences com- 



30 INDICTMENT. 

mitted within their territories, unless imperial legislation; including the pro- 
visions of their Constitution Acts, otherwise provides. Macleod v, Att.-Gen: 
for N.8.W. [1891] A. C. 455. (a). 60 L. J. (P. C.) 55. 

The American decisions on this subject are collected in Dicey, Conflict of 
Laws (1st ed.) p. 231; and see Moore on Extra-territorial Crime, 23 — 33; Beale, 
Conflict of Laws. 

Statutory exceptions.] — To the general-rule there are many statutory excep- 
tions. In some statutes jurisdiction is given over offences, not triable at common 
law. In others, latitude is given as to the place of trial of existing offences. 

Treason abroad.'] — In indictments for high treason or misprision committed 
out of the realm, the venue might, before the passing of the Local Government 
Act, 1888, be laid in Middlesex if the trial was to be " where the King's Bench 
shall sit and be kept ; " or by special commission in such shire as the King 
should appoint. 35 H. 8, t. 2, o. 1. But in consequence of 51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, 

B. 89, sub-s. 3, and E. S. C, Jan., 1903, the venue in indictments for treason 
abroad, it the trial was to take place in the King's Bench Division and not 
before a special commission, was laid in " the county of the county of London 
and the county of Middlesex." See R. v. Lynch [1903] 1 K. B. 744; 72 L. J. 
(K. B.) 167; B. v. Casement [1917] 1 K B.'98; 86 L. J. (K. B.) 467. 
35 H. 8, c. 2, applies to treasons committed in the Isle of Man, Guernsey; 
Jersey, Sark, or Alderney, or in foreign possessions which, although parts of 
the dominions of the British Crown, are not parts of the realm of England. 
See 3 Co. Inst. 11, 111; 4 Co. Inst. 124. 

Murder.} — " Where any murder or manslaughter shall be committed 
on land out Of the United Kingdom, whether within the King's dominions cr 
without, and whe'ther the person killed were a subject of his Majesty or not, 
every offence committed by any subject of his Majesty, in respect of any such 
case, whether the same shall amount to the offence of murder or of man- 
slaughter, or of being accessory to murder or manslaughter, may be dealt with, 
inquired of, tried, determined and punished in any county or place in England 
or Ireland in which such person shall be apprehended or be in custody, in 
the same manner in all respects as if such offence had been actually committed 
in that county or place." 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 9. A British subject, there- 
fore, who, in a foreign country, within the dominion of a foreign power, murders 
either a British subject or a foreigner is triable in England under the express 
provisions of this section. See B. v. Azzopardi, 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 21; 2 Mood. 
288; 1 C. & K. 203; B. v. Sawyer, E. & E. 294. In B. v. Bernard, 8 St. Tr. 
(N. S.) 887 ; 1 P. & P. 240, the question was raised whether, under 9 G. 4, 

C. 31, s. 7 (rep.), a foreigner resident in England could be indicted as accessory 
(by means of acts done by him in England) to a murder committed by a 
foreigner on foreigners in Erance ; the prisoner, however, was acquitted. Such 
a, case is now covered by 24 and 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 4. 

(a) See R. v. Hilaire [1903] 3 N. S. W. State Rep. 228 : Re Caruchet, 9 Queens- 
land L. J. 122, Griffith, C.J. : Re Bigamy Laiv of Canada, 27 Canada, 461. 



JURISDICTION. 31 

Where any person, being feloniously stricken, poisoned, or otherwise hurt 
upon the sea, or at any place out of England or Ireland, shall die in England 
or Ireland; or being feloniously stricken, etc., in England or Ireland, shall 
die of the same at sea, or at any place out of England or Ireland, the ofEence 
(whether in the Case of principal or accessory) may be dealt with, etc., in (he 
county or place in England or Ireland, in which the death, stroke, poisoning, 
or hurt happened. 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 10. Where a man in a boat at a 
short distance from the shore was shot by a person on the shore, and died 
instantly, it was held that the stroke and death were both upon the high seas, 
and therefore triable nader 28 H. 8, c. 15 [post, p. 32), and not under 2 G. 2, 
i;. 21 (rep.) R. v. Coombes, 1 Leach, 388; 1 East, P. C. 367 ; and see 1 Hawk, 
c. 37, s. 17. 

Bttrnifig, etc., King's ships.'\ — In indictments for burning or destroying the 
King's ships, magazines, etc., out of the realm (i.e., outside Great Britain), 
the venue may be laid in any county within the realm. 12 G. 3, c. 24, e. 2. 

Offences by colonial governors, etc.'\ — Oppressions, crimes, and offences com- 
mitted abroad by colonial governors, lieutenant governors, deputy governors, 
or commanders in chief, shall be inquired of, heard and determined in the 
King's Bench Division in England, or before such commissioners and in such 
county of this realm as shall be assigned by his Majesty's "Commission. 
11 W. 3, 0. 12 (11 & 12 W. 3, Buffhead). Picton's case, 30 St. Tr. 225; R. v. 
Eyre, L. E. 3 Q. B. 487 ; 36 L. J. (M. 0.) 159. 

Offences in India.] — Misdemeanors committed in India may be tried in the 
King's Bench Division in England. 13 G. 3, c. 63. And in indictments for 
offences committed by persons employed in any public service " out of Great 
Britain " the venue may be laid in Middlesex. 42 G. 3, u. 85, s. 1. See R. v. 
Shawe, 6 M. & Sel. 403. The counties of London and Middlesex are now one 
for purposes of trial. 51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 89; R. S. C, Jan., 1903. 

Offences against Foreign Enlistment Act.] — Offences against the Foreign 
Enlistment Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 90), may be tried in any place where the 
offence was Wholly or partly committed, or in any place within the King's 
dominions where the accused is : and the offence may be averred generally to 
have been committed in his Majesty's dominions, and the marginal venue may 
be the county. City or place where the trial is held. 33 & 34 Vict. c. 90, 
ss. 16, 17 ; B. V. Jameson [1896] 2 Q. B. 425 ; 65 L. J. (M. C.) 218 ; 18 Cox, 392. 

Offences against Official Secrets 4ct.]— Offences against the Official Secrets 
Act, 1911 (1 & 2 Geo. 5, i>. 28), alleged to have been committed out of the 
United Kingdom, may by s. 10 of that Act be tried in the High Court of Justice 
in England, or the Central Criminal Court. 

Offences in the Admiralty jurisdiction.} — Apart from statute, offences in the 
Admiralty jurisdiction were triable by the admiral according to the civil law and 



32 INDICTMENT. 

not according to the course of the common law, and controversies occasionally 
arose as to whether the offence was committed within the jurisdiction of the 
admiral or within the body of the realm. In R. v. Goombes, 1 Leach, 388, it 
was held that where a shot fired on land killed a man on the sea the offence was 
triable in the Admiralty jurisdiction. This decision is criticised in Badiscke 
Anilin und Soda Fabrik v. Basle Chemical Works [1898] A. C. 200, 204.; 
67 L. J. (Ch.) 141, Halsbury, L.C. The distinction and difficulties are now to 
a great extent removed by legislation. By 28 H. 8, i;. 16, a. 1, it was provided 
that treasons, felonies, robberies, murders and confederacies thereafter com- 
mitted in or upon the eea, or in any other haven, river, creek, or place, whereon 
the admiral had or pretended to have jurisdiction should be inquired of, etc., 
in such shores and places in the realm as should be limited for that purpose 
by the King's commission. This mode of trialtas been extended to the following 
offences if committed on the high seas : — Acts of hostility by a subject cf 
this realm against a subject at sea under colour of a foreign commission; 11 
W. 3, u. 7, s. 8; 18 G-. 2, u. 30, s. 1; see B. v. Evans, 2 East, P. C. 798: 
forcibly boarding a merchant ship, and throwing over or destroying the goods; 
8 G. 1, c. 24, s. 1 : trading with pirates or fitting out a vessel for that purpose; 
8 G-. 1, c. 24, s. 1 . master or seaman running away with the ship, goods, etc., 
or laying violent handa on or confining the master, or making a revolt in the 
ship, etc.; 11 W. 3, c. 7, ». 9; see R. v. M'Gregor, 1 C. & K. 249: 
dealing in slaves upon the high seas, or in any place where the admiral has 
jurisdiction, except as therein mentioned; 5 G. 4, c. 113; see B. v. Zulueta, 
1 C. & K. 215 : and to the offence of being aiccessory (before or after the fact, 
on land, or at sea) to piracy. 11 W. 3, i;. 7, o. 10. See 8 G. 1, u. 24, ». 3. The 
offences above mentioned, when a commission was issued for their trial under 
28 H. 8, c. 15, were inquired of, tried, and determined before the judge of the 
Admiralty Court, and two of the judges of the common-law courts, under a 
commission of oyer and terminer : and, in the indictment, no county was 
inserted in the margin as venue, but instead of it merely the words " Admiralty 
of England." According to Coke, rivers in this country to the furthest point 
of land next the sea, creeks and arms of the sea within the body of a county, 
and the eea-shore between the high and low watermarks when the tide is out, 
are not within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty, or within the meaning of the 
term "high seas." See Constable's case, 5 Co. Eep. 107; Hale, de Jure 
Maris, c. 4, p. 10; Admiralty case, 12 Co. Eep. 79. According to Hale the 
Admiralty Court had concurrent jurisdiction in cases of murder and 
maiming, and exclusive jurisdiction in cases of piracy jure gentium, which 
is not a common-law offence. 2 Hale, 18. Hale's view is now accepted. 
See R. V. Bruce, E. & E. 243; 2 Leach, 1093 : R. t. Keyn, 2 Ex. D. 63, 76; 
46 Ij. J. (M. C.) 17; 13 Cox, 403 : Mayne, Ind. Cr. L. [4th ed.] p. 57. The 
test whether an arm of the sea is within the body of a county is said to be, 
whether a man on. one shore can see what is being done on the other. 2 Bast 
P. C. 804. This has been held to include the Bristol Channel (R. \. Cunning 
ham. Bell, 72; 24 L. J. (M. C.) 66) : Milford Haven (R. v. Bruce, 2 Le:jch 
1093) : and Eoundstone Bay, Galway (R. v. Mannion, 2 Cox, 158 (C. C. E. Ir.)) 
And see R. v. Schwab [1907] 12 Canada Cr. Gas. 539. As to offences by 



ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION. 33 

foreigners on foreign ships within British territorial -waters, see 41 & 42 Viot-^ 
0. 73 (-post, p. 34). 

The jurisdiction of the Admiralty extends over British ships, not only 'on the- 
Mgh seas, (a) but also in foreign rivers, belo-w the bridges, -where the tide ebbs'' 
and flo-ws, and -where great ships go, although the municipal authorities of the 
foreign country may have concurrent jurisdiction. R. v. Anderson, L. E. 
1 C. C. E. 161 ; 88 Li. J. (M. C.) 12. As to jurisdiction when a ship is in dock, 
see U. S. V. Hamilton, 1 Mason, 152, Story, J. If great ships go to the place, 
proof that the tide ebbs and flows is unnecessary. R. -v. Allen, 1 Mood. 494. 
The jurisdiction extends to all persons on board the ship whether British subjects 
or foreigners. B. v. Lopez: R. v. Sattler, Dears. & B. 525; 27 L. J. (M. C.) 
48: R. V. Lesley, Bell, 220; 29 L. J. (M. C.) 97. And therefore where a 
foreigner was convicted at the Central Criminal Court. of manslaughter, com- 
mitted on board a British ship in the river Garonne, in Prance, about 35 miles 
from the sea, and about 300 yards from the nearest shore, within the flow and 
ebb of the tide, the conviction was upheld. R. v. Anderson, supra. So 
also where a larceny was committed by a person unknown on board a British 
ship lying afloat in the ordinary course of trading, in the open river at 
Rotterdam, moored to the quay, in a place where large vessels usually lay, and 
16 or 18 miles from the sea, between which and the ship there were no bridges, 
and within the ebb and flow of the tide, it was held that the larceny took place 
within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty, and therefore that a person who after- 
wards, in England, received the property so stolen could be tried at the Central 
Criminal Court, as the thief himself, even if he had been a foreigner and not 
one of the crew, might have been so tried. R. v. Garr, 10 Q. B. D. 76 ; 52 L. J. 
(M. C.) 12. The liability of a foreigner is not affected by the fact that he was 
in the first instance brought illegally and by force on board thel ship, unless 
tho offence was committed merely for the purpose of freeing himself from such 
unlawful restraint. Therefore, where the defendant, a foreigner, having com- 
mitted a crime in England, had fled to Hamburg, and was there arrested and 
forced on board an English ship, and while he was kept in custody on board 
such ship on the high seas, killed the officer who had arrested him, not for the 
purpose of escaping, but of malice prepense, it was held that, even assuming 
such arrest and detention to be illegal, he was guilty of murder. R. v. Sattler, 
supra. Where on a trial for maliciously wounding on the high seas, it was 
stated by three witnesses that the vessel, on board of which the offence was 
alleged to have been committed, was a British ship of Shields, and that she 
was sailing under the British flag, but no proof was given of the registration or 
ownership of the vessel; it was held 'that the court had jurisdiction, as the 
evidence was sufficient to prove that the vessel was British, and that being so, 
the court would have jurisdiction even if it had appeared that the vessel was 
not registered. R. v. Seberg, L. E. 1 C. C. E. 264; 39 L, J. (M. C.) 133: 
R. V. Allen, 10 Cox, 405; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 98. 

In R. V. Bjornsen, L. & C. 545; 34 L. J. (M. C.) 180; 10 Cox, 74, the 

(a) As to the Great Lakes ol North America see R. v. Meikleham [1906] 11 Ontario 
L. K. 366. 



34 INDICTMENT. 

prisoner was one of the crew of a ship built in Holatein, whence she sailed to 
London. All the officers and crew were foreigners; E., the registered sole 
owner, was an alien born, but described in the register as "of London, 
merchant." The ship sailed from London under the British flag. "While on 
the voyage the prisoner killed the master on board the vessel when several 
thousand miles from England, and 200 miles from land. On the trial of the 
prisoner for murder these facts were proved, and no evidence was given that E. 
had b«en naturalized or had obtained letters of denization; under these circum- 
stances it was held that there was no evidence that the ship w^s British, and 
that consequently the prisoner could not be convicted in England. Nor can 3 
foreigner be indicted in this country for casting away a foreign ship in foreign 
waters, if the act do not amount to piracy; but he may be indicted here for a 
conspiracy in this country to commit sUch an offence, provided the conspiracy 
be not limited to doing the act abroad. R. v. Kohn, 4 P. & E. 68, Willes, J. 

A foreigner who kills another foreigner or an Englishman on the high seas 
on board a foreign ship, is not amenable to the law of England, or triable in 
England, except in a case of piracy. B. v. Lewis, Dears. & B. 182 ; 26 L. J. 
(M. C.) 104; R. V. De Mattos, 7 C. & P. 458; R. v. Depardo, 1 Taunt. 26; 
E. & E. 134 ; 9 E. E. 693. This rule applies where the ship has been illegally 
seized as a slaver by a British vessel. R. v. Serva, !• Den. 104; 2 C. iSc'K. 53; 

1 Cox, 298. The foreigner is liable to extradition where the ship belongs to a 
state as to which the Extradition Acts have been applied. 33 & 34 Vict. c. 52, 
s. 16. A foreigner was indicted at the Central Criminal Court for manslaughter 
under the following circumstances. He was in command of a foreign ship, 
passing within three miles of the shore of England on a, voyage to a foreign 
port ; and whilst within that distance his ship ran into a British ship and sank 
her, whereby a passenger on board the latter ship was drowned. The facts 
of the case were such as, apart from the question of jurisdiction, to amount to 
manslaughter by English law. It was held by the majority of a court of j3 
judges that the offence was not committed on board the British ship, and that 
there was no jurisdiction in the courts of this country to try the prisoner, a 
foreigner passing the English coast on the high seas in a foreign ship, though 
the occurrence took plade within three miles of the English coast. R. v. Keyn, 

2 Ex. D. 63 ; L. J. (M. C.) 17 ; 13 Cox, 403. Parliament approved the view 
of the minority, and at once passed the Territorial Waters Jurisdiction Act, 
1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 73). Sect. 2 of that Act declares {see R. v. Dudley, 
14 Q. B. D. 273, 560; 54 L. J. (M. C.) 32) and enacts that " an offence com- 
mitted by ». person, whether he is or is not a subject of his Majesty, on the 
open sea, within the territorial waters <3f his Majesty's dominions, is an offence 
within the jurisdiction of the Admiral, although it may have been committed 
on board or by means of a foreign ship, and the person who committed such 
offence may be arrested, tried, and punished accordingly." The phrases and 
words " the territorial waters of his Majesty's dominions," " the jurisdiction 
of the Admiral," "offence," "ship," and "foreign ship," are defined by 
s. 7 of the same statute. And ss. 3 & 4 place certain restrictions on the pro- 
secution of a person not a, subject of his Majesty, and contain provisions as to 
procedure. The statute does not expressly exclude or include foreign public 



ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION. 35 

vessels. As to their position, see The Parlement Beige, 5 P. D. 197 (C. A.) ; 
48 L. J. (P. D. & A.) 18, and Eeport of Fugitive Slave Commission, 1876, 
Pari. Pap. 1878, vol. 28. The extent to which municipal jurisdiction outside the 
three miles' limit is internationally recognised was fully discussed in the 
Behring Sea Arbitration. And see Mortensen v. Peters, 9 Eraser (Justiciary 
Sc), 93; 1 Russ. Cr. (7th ed.) 103. 

The Central Criminal Court has jurisdiction to inquire of, hear, and determine 
any offence committed, or alleged to have been committed, within the jurisdic- 
tion of the Admiralty of England, and to deliver the appointed gaols of the 
Central Criminal Court of prisoners committed to or detained there for such 
offences ; and all indictments found and proceedings had before the Court are 
valid. 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 36, s. 22; 44 & 45 Vict. c. 64, b. 2 (2) : R. v. Anderson, 
L. B. 1 C. C. R. 161; 38 L. J. (M. C.) 12: R. v. Carr, 10 Q. B. 76; 
52 L. J. (M. C.) 12. 

By the Admiralty Ofjences Act, 1844 (7 & 8 Vict. u. 2), all offences alleged 
to have been committed on the high seas, and other places within the Admiralty 
of England, may be heard and determined by his Majesty's justices of the 
absize or others his Majesty's commissioners by whom any court shall be holden 
under any of his Majesty's commissions of oyer and terminer or general gaol 
delivery, and they shall have severally and jointly all the powers which by any 
Act are given to the commissioners named in any commission of oyer and 
terminer for the trying of offences committed within the jurisdiction of the 
Admiralty of England, and may deliver the gaol, in every county and franchise 
within the limits of their several commissions, of any person committed to or 
imprisoned therein for any offence alleged to have been committed upon the 
high seas, etc. ; and all indictments found, and other proceedings had, by and 
before the said justices and commissioners shall be valid (s. 1). By sect. 2 
of the same Act " in all indictments preferred before the said justices and com- 
missioners under this Act, the venue laid in the margin shall be the same as 
if the offence had been committed in the county where the trial is had ; and all 
material facts, which, in other indictments, would be averred to have taken 
place in the county where the trial is had, shall, in indictments preferred under 
that Act, be averred to have taken place ' on the high seas.' " It has been 
held that an indictment under this statute need not contain an averment that 
the offence was committed " within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty." R. v. 
Jones, 1 Den. 101; 2 C. & K. 165. The provisions of 7 & 8 Vict. c. 2 are left 
unrepealed by the Indictments Act, 1915, but it is clear from the express 
language of sect. 3 of the latter Act (ante, p. 27) that an offence committed 
within the jurisdiction of tbe Admiralty need not now. even be averred to have 
taken place " on the high seas." Section 3 of the Admiralty Offences Act, 
1844, provides for the commitment for trial of persons charged with such 
offences; and sect. 4 saves the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court, under 
4 & 5 W. 4, u. 36, B. 22, supra. Where any person within the jurisdic- 
tion of the Admiralty of England or Ireland, becomes accessory to any felony, 
whether at common law or by any Act (past or future) and whether committed 
within that jurisdiction or elsewhere, or begun within it and completed else- 
where, or begun elsewhere and completed within it, his offence shall be felony. 



36 INDICTMENT. 

and the venue in the margin of the indictment shall be the same as if the offence 
had been committed in the county or place in which he is indict-ed, and his 
offence shall be averred to have been committed " on the high seas." 24 & 25 
Viot. c. 94, s. 9. This provision, although impliedly repealed, is similarly left 
standing by the Indictments Act, 1915. As to the trial of offenders in the 
British dominions beyond the seas for crimes committed on the high seas, or m 
places in vphich the Crown has power or jurisdiction out of his Majesty's 
dominions, see 12 & 13 Vict. u. 96 ; and 53 & 54 Vict. c. 37. 

By the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894 (67\ & 58 Vict. c. 60), s. 687, all offences 
against property or person committed in or at any place either ashore or afloat 
out of his Majesty's dominions by any master, seaman, or apprentice, who at the 
time when the offence is committed is, or within three months previously- has 
been, employed in any British ship, shall be deemed to be offences of the eame 
nature respectively, and be liable to the same punishments respectively, and be 
inquired of, heard, tried, determined, and adjudged in the same manner, and by 
the same courts, and in the same places as if such offences had been committed 
within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England ; and the costs and expenses 
of the prosecution of any such offences may be directed to be paid as in the case 
of costs and expenses of prosecution for offences committed within the jurisdic- 
tion of the Admiralty of England. This section applies to offences under the 
Merchant Shipping Act, 1906 (6 Edw. 7, i.. 48). See ss. 84, 86 o* that Act; 
See R. V. Dudley, 14 Q. B. D. 273; 54 L. J. (M. C.) 32, decided on the similar 
provieion in s. 267 of 17 & 18 Vict. c. 104 (rep.) : Ilbert, Government of India 
(2nd ed.), 242; and as to colonial jurisdiction under the Act, R. v. Hinde 
(1902) 22 N. Z. L. E. 436. A hulk retaining the general appointments of a 
ship, registered as a British ship, and hoisting the British ensign, although 
only used as a floating warehouse, is a British ship within the meaning of the 
above enactment. R. v. Armstrong, 13 Cox, 184, Archibald, J. 57 & 58 Vict, 
u. 60, H. 686, sub-s. 1, also enacts, that where any person, being a British sub- 
ject, is charged with having committed any offence on board any British 
ship on the high seas, or in any foreign port or harbour, or on board any 
foreign ship to which he does not belong, or, not being a British subject, 
is charged with having committed any offence on board any British ship on the 
high seas, and that person is found (that is to say, is found to be at the time 
of his'trial, R. v. Lopez, R. v. Sattler, Dears. & B. 525; 27 L. J. (M. C.) 
48; 7 Cox, 431) within the jurisdiction of any court of justice in his Majesty's 
dominions, which would have had cognizance of such offence if committed on 
board a British ship within the limits of its ordinary jurisdiction, such court 
shall have jurisdiction to try the offence as if it had been so committed. 
Sub-s. 2 saves the effect of 12 & 13 Vict. c. 96. 

Each of the Criminal Law Consolidation Acts of 1861 contains a provision 
by which all indictable offences in those Acts respectively mentioned committed 
within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty, are to be deemed to be offences of the 
same nature and subject to the eame punishments as if they had been com- 
mitted on the land in England or Ireland, and may be dealt with, inquired of, 
tried, and determined in any county or place in England or Ireland in which 
the offender shall be apprehended or be in custody, in the same manner in all 



JURISDICTION. 37 

respects as if the otEenoe had been committed in that county or place. 24 & 23 
Vict. y^. 96 [Larceny, etc.], s. 115; c. 97 [Malicious Injuries to Property], ». 72; 
c. 98 [Forgery], o. 50; u. 99 [Offences relating to the Coin], s. 36; c. 100 
[Offences against the Person], a. 68. These enactments give jurisdiction to a 
borough quarter sessions to try ' a man arrested in the borough for offences 
against the Acts of 1861 committed at sea. B. v. Peel, L. & C. 231; L. J. 
<M. C.) 69; 9 Cox, 220. These provisions appear to be no longer necessary in 
view of 57 & 58 Vict. c. 60, s. 686 (1) , ante, p. 36, and have not been reproduced 
in the Forgery Act, 1913 (3 & 4 G-eo. 5, c. 27), nor in the Larceny Act, 1916 
(6 & 7 Geo. 5, c. 50). 

Offences during journeys.^ — In indictments for felonies or misdemeanor* 
committed on any person, or on or in respect of any property, in or upon any 
coach, waggon, cart, or other carriage whatever employed in any journey, or 
on board any vessel whatever employed on any voyage or journey upon any 
navigable river, canal, or inland navigation, the venue may be laid in any 
county tlyough which the coach, etc., or vessel shall have passed in the course 
of the journey or voyage during which the felony or misdemeanor was com- 
mitted, in the same manner as if it had been actually committed therein ; and 
where the side, bank, centre or other part of the highway, river, etc., shall 
constitute the boundary of two counties, the venue may be laid in either of the 
counties through, or adjoining to, or by the boundary of any part whereof, the 
coach, etc., or vessel shall have passed in the course of the journey or voyage. 
7 G-. 4, c. 64, s. 13. This enactment is not confined to the carriages of common 
carriers, or to public conveyances, but extends to any carriage employed in 
any journey. R.y. Sharpe, Dears, 415; 24 L. J. (M. C.) 40; 6 Cox, 418. The 
fact that a person assaulted in a train changes into another carriage 'of the 
same train during the journey does not take away the jurisdiction. R. v. 
French, 8 Cox, 252. Similar provisions are contained in s. 21 of the Fugitive 
Offenders Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 69), as to offences on journeys or voyages 
in which the vehicle or vessel passes through one or more British possessions. 

Offences in more than one county or •place.'\ — Where a felony or mis- 
demeanor is committed on the boundary of two or more counties, or within 
the distance of 600 yards of the boundary, or is begun in one county and 
completed in another, the venue may be laid in either county, in the same 
manner as if it had been wholly committed therein. 7 G. 4, li. 64, s. 12 
(cf. 44 & 45 Vict. c. 69, s. 20). The distance is measured in a, direct line, 
as the crow flies. R. v. Wood, 5 Jur. 225 ; 10 L. J. (Ex.) 168 ; cf. Lake v. 
Butler, 5 E. & B. 92, and 52 & 53 Vict. c. 63, s. 34, which governs statutes 
passed since 1889. The first branch of this enactment extends to the boundaries 
of counties only, and not to prosecutions in limited jurisdictions. R, v. Welsh, 

I Mood. 176. 7 G. 4, c. 64, s. 12, regulates venue only, and does not enable the 
prosecutor to lay the offence in one county and try it in the other; but only 
to lay and try it in either. R. v. Mitchell, 2 Q. B. 636; 2 G. & D. 274; 

II Ij. J. (M. C.) 66. In cases of murder or manslaughter, where the cause of 
death arises in one county, and the death takes place in another, the prisoner 



38 INDICTMENT. 

may, under this statute, be indicted in either county. See 1 Euss. Cr, 
(7th ed.) 819. 

Persons who anywhere incite, procure, and abet, or assist the commission 
of a misdemeanor may be indicted in the county in which the misdemeanor 
is committed. R. v. Johnson, 7 East, 63; 29 St. Tr. 81. WTiere an offence 
is done through an innocent agent, the principal may be indicted in the 
county in which the agent acted, or in that in which the principal procured 
him to act. Post. 349 : R. v. Brisac, 4 East, 164. In indictments for con- 
spiracies or other misdemeanors, the venue may be laid in any county in which 
it can be proved that an act was done by any one of the offenders in furtherance 
of their common design. R. v. Burdett, 4 B. & Aid. 95; 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) ], 
116. See R. v. Brisac, 4 East, 164. So in indictments for compassing the 
King's death, or for any of the treasons in 36 G. 3, c. 7, a. 1 (made perpetual 
by 57 Gr. 3, c. 6, s. 1), the venue may be laid in any county in which a sufficient 
overt act can be proved. R. v. Lord Preston, 12 St. Tr. 645 ; R. v. Vane, Kel. 
(J.) 14, 15 ; 6 St. Tr. 119. See Deacon's case, Fost. 9 : 18 St. Tr. 365. In an 
indictment for sending a threatening letter, the venue may be laid either in 
the county where the prosecutor received it; R. v. Girdwood, 2 Bast, P. C. 
1120; 1 Leach, 142; R. v. Esser, 2 East, P. C. 1125; or in the county from 
which the offender sent it. So, if a libel, R. v. Burdett, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1, 
124; 4 B. & Aid. 95 : R. v. Ellis [1899] 1 Q. B. 230; R. v. Watson, 1 Camp. 
215 : or a letter containing a challenge (jR.' v. Williams, 2 Camp. 506) is sent 
from the county of A. to the county of B., the venue may be laid in either 
county. So, if an act done in one county causes a nuisance in another county, 
in an indictment for it, the venue may be laid in either county, although it 
has been said to be more correct to lay it in the county in which the act was 
done. Staundf. b. 2, 91. 

It has been doubted whether these rules apply to offences part of the essential 
elements of which take place outside England. R. v. Ellis [1899] 1 Q. B. 230. 
Of. Badische Anilin und Soda Fabrik v. Basle Chemical Works [1898] App. 
Cas. 200, 204. But a person who from a foreign country initiates acts which 
take effect in England and are criminal by the law of England appears to be 
liable to indictment and punishment in the county or place in England ]n 
which the acts took effect. See R. v. Oliphant [1905] 2 K. B. 67; 75 L. J. 
(K. B.) 15 ; 21 Cox, 192 : R. v. de Mamy [1907] 1 K. B. 388 ; 76 L. J. (K. B.) 
210: R. V. Stoddart [1909] 73 J. P. 348; 2 Cr. App. B. 217; 1 Buss. Cr. 
(7th ed.) 62 et seq. (a). 

Offences in counties of cities or towns. ^ — Where an offence is committed 
within the county of a city or town corporate (except in London, Westminster, 
or the borough of Southwark, 38 G. 3, c. 52, s. 10), the prosecutor may prefer 
his indictment to the grand jury of the next adjoining county, at the sessions 
of oyer and terminer or gaol delivery, and may have the offender tried there. 

(o) And see R. V. Waugh [1909] Victoria L. R. 379, where it was held that W. 
had been properly convicted in the State ot Victoria of an attempt to obtain money by 
false pretences by a letter written and posted by W. in Victoria, addressed to T. in the 
State of Tasmania, with intent to induce T. to send money to W. in Victoria. 



JURISDICTION. 39 

88 G. 3, 0. 52, s. 2. See R. v. Gough, 2 Doug. 791; R. v. Mellor, E. & E. 144 : 
B. V. Gog, E. & E. 179 : R. v. Pinreei;, 3 St. Tr. (N. S.) 11. Or, if the bill 
has been found by a grand jury of the county of the city, etc., any court ct 
oyer and terminer or gaol delivery, holden for such county of the city, etc., 
may order it to be tried by a jury of the next adjoining county. 38 G. 3, c. 52, 
s. 3. Under the former law the venue in such cases was required to be stated 
as prescribed by 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 23 rep. {ante, p. 28), but under the 
Indictments Act, 1915, it is sufficient to state the court of trial as prescribed 
by rule 2 (ante, p. 28). The Court before which the offender is tried and 
convicted may order the judgment to be executed either in the county of trial 
or in the county of the city or town corporate in which the offence was 
committed. 51 Q. 3, c. 100, o. 1. By the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 
1851 (14 & 15 Vict. c. 55, s. 19), " whenever any justice or justices of the 
peace, or coroner, acting for any county of a city or county of a town corporate, 
within which his Majesty has not been pleased for five years next before the 
passing of this Act (1 Aug., 1851) to direct a commission of oyer and terminer 
and gaol delivery to be executed, and until his Majesty shall be pleased to 
direct a commission of oyer and terminer and gaol delivery to be executed 
within the same, shall commit for safe custody to the g^bol or house of correction 
of such county of a city or town any person charged with any offence committed 
within the limits of such county of a city or town not triable at the court of 
quarter session of the said county of a city or county of a town, the commitment 
shall specify that such person is committed pursuant to this Act; and the 
recognizances to appear to prosecute and give evidence taken by such justice, 
justices or coroner, shall in all such cases be conditioned for appearance, 
prosecution, and giving evidence at the court of oyer and terminer and gaol 
delivery for the next adjoining county . . . and the justice, justices or coroner, 
by whom persons charged as aforesaid may be committed, shall deliver or cause 
to be delivered to the proper officer of the court the feveral exaiuinations, 
informations, evidence, recognizances, and inquisitions relative to such persons 
at the time and in the manner that would be required in case such persons 
had been committed to the gaol of such adjoining county by a justice or justices, 
or coroner, having authority so to commit; and the same proceedings shall 
and may be had thereupon at the sessions of oyer and terminer or general 
gaol delivery for such adjoining county, as in the case of persons charged with 
offences of the like nature committed within such county." 

Section 23 of the same Act extends to prisoners tried in or removed for 
trial to the adjoining county (under s. 19) the provisions of 38 G. 3, c. 52, 
and 51 G. 3, c. 100, as to the execution of the sentences to be passed on 
such persons. By s. 188 of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. 
c. 50), (1) " Until his Majesty is pleased to direct a commission of oyer and 
terminer and gaol delivery to be executed within any borough, being a county 
of a city or county of a town, all bills of indictment for offences committed 
within that borough shall be preferred, and all proceedings thereon shall be 
had in the manner authorized by 38 G. 3, c. 52. (2) For the purposes of that 
Act, each borough named in the 6th schedule shall be considered as next 
adjoining the county named in conjunction therewith." Under the 6th schedule. 



40 INDICTMENT. 

Northumberland is considered the next adjoining county to Berwick-upon-Tweed 
and Newcastle-upon-Tyne; G-loucestershire, to Bristol; Cheshire, to Chester; 
Devonshire, to Exeter; and Yorkshire, to Kingston-upon-Hull. As to the mode 
of stating that the county of trial is next adjoining, see B. v. Gcfff, B. & E. 179. 

Separate commissions of assize, etc., are still issued and executed for 
the counties of the cities or towns of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Exeter, Bristol, 
Norwich, Lincoln, Nottingham, Worcester, York, Haverfordwest, and Car- 
marthen, and for the borough of Leicester. 

The other counties of cities or towns are Berwick-upon-Tweed, Kingstoa- 
upon-HuU, Gloucester, Canterbury, Chester, Southampton, Lichfield, and Poole. 

Offences tried in the High Court.'] — In the case of an indictment tried jn 
the High Court, the venue was formerly the county in which the indictment 
was found, unless a change of venue was ordered (see post, p. 120), or imless 
the trial was at bar (see post, p. 121). R. v. Amery, 1 T. B. 363; Short and 
Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 298 : Att.-Gen. v. Churchill, 8 M. & W. 171, 193 : 
Dixon V. Farrer, 18 Q. B. D. 43 (C. A.). 

Now, in the case of all indictments tried in the High Court, the proper 
commencement is "In the High Court of Justice, King's Bench Division. 
5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, r. 2 " (ante, p. 28). 

Offences in Central Criminal Court District.] — In indictments preferred at 
the Central Criminal Court (the jurisdiction of which extends to the city of 
London and counties of London and of Middlesex, and certain specified portions 
of the counties of Essex, Kent, and Surrey; 4 & 5 W. 4, i;. 36, o. 2 ; 38 & 
39 Vict. c. 77, s. 23; 61 & 52 Vict. c. 41, ». 89), the district within the limits 
of its jurisdiction is to be deemed and taken to be one county for all purposes 
of venue, local description, trial, judgment, and execution not " thereinbefore ' 
specially provided for ; and the venue laid in the margin was formerly to be 
as follows, " Central Criminal Court, to wit;" and all offences which in other 
indictments would be laid to have been committed in the county where the 
trial is had, and all material facts which would be in other indictments averred 
to have taken place in the county where the trial is had, were, in indictments 
preferred and tried in the said court, to be laid to have been committed and 
averred to have taken place " within the jurisdiction of the said court." 
4 & 5 W. 4, c. 36, s. 3. This section has been left unrepealed by the Indictments 
Act, 1915, but the proper commencement of indictments preferred at the 
Central Criminal Court is now simply " Central Criminal Court," and it is 
unnecessary to aver that the offence took place " within the jurisdiction of the 
said court." 5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, s. 3, and r. 2 (ante, pp. 27, 28). Persons 
subject to military law, who have been committed for the murder or 
manslaughter of any person subject to military law, may, under certain 
circumstances, where the offence has been committed in England or "Wales, out 
of the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court, be indicted and tried before 
that court. 25 & 26 Vict. c. 65. As to the trial at this court of offences com- 
mitted out of its jurisdiction, under 19 & 20 Vict. c. 16, see post, p. 118. 



JURISDICTION: ACCESSORIES. 41 

The history of the jurisdiction of the court is given in 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1135, 
Appendix C. 

Accessories.} — Offences by accessories before or after the fact to any felony 
wholly committed within England or Ireland may be dealt with, inquired of, 
tried, determined, and punished by any court which shall -have jurisdiction to 
try the principal felony, or any felonies, committed in any county or place in 
which the act by reason whereof such person shall have become such accessory 
shall have been committed : " and in every other case offences by accessories 
before the fact may be dealt with, etc., by any court having jurisdiction to try 
the principal felony or any felonies committed in any county or place in which 
the accessory shall be apprehended or be in custody, whether the principal 
felony shall have been committed on the sea or on the land, or begun on the 
sea and completed on the land, or begun on the land and completed on the sea, 
and whether within his Majesty's dominions or without, or partly within 
his Majesty's dominions and partly without." 24 & 25 Vict. u. 94, s. 7. 
See R. V. Wallace, G. & Mar. 200; 2 Mood. 200. An accessory before the fact 
may however be indicted, etc., in all respects as if he were the principal felon. 
24 & 25 Vict. c. 94, s. 1. As to accessories where the offence is committed in 
the Admiralty Jurisdiction, see ante, p. 35. 

Bigamy.} — In indictments for bigamy, the venue may be laid either in the 
county where the offender was apprehended, or is in custody, 24 & 25 Vict, 
c. 100, s. 57, or in the county in which the second marriage took place. If 
the defendant, being in custody for a felony, is detained for bigamy, he can 
be indicted for the bigamy in the county in which he is so detained. R. v. 
Gordon, E. & R. 48. The law is left unchanged by the Indictments Act, 1915, 
but it is now only necessary to state the court of trial. 5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, 
r. 2 (ante, p. 28). 

Coinage offences.} — In indictments for offences with reference to false or 
counterfeit coin, " where any person shall tender, utter, or put off any counter- 
feit coin in any county or jurisdiction, and shall also tender, utter, or put off 
any other counterfeit coin in any other county or jurisdiction on the same day 
or within ten days next ensuing, or where two or more persons have acted in 
concert in different counties or jurisdictions to commit any offence against the 
Coinage Offences Act, 1861, the offence may be laid and charged to have been 
committed, and the offender may be dealt with, etc., in any one of those 
counties or jurisdictions." 24 & 25 Viet. u. 99, s. 28. 

Customs and excise.} — In indictments for violently assaulting or resisting 
oiBcers of the excise (7 & 8 Geo. 4, u. 53, s. 43), or for offences against the 
Customs Acts (39 & 40 Vict. i;. 36, s. 258), the venue may be laid in any county. 
In indictments for offences against the customs committed upon the water at 
a place which is not or is not certainly known to be within any county, the 
venue may be laid in any place on land where the offender may be or be brought. 
39 & 40 Vict. c. 36, s. 229. 



42 ~ INDICTMENT. 

Escapes and prison breach.'i — ^In indictments for escapes, breaches of prison, 
and rescues, the venue might formerly be laid either in the jurisdiction where 
the offence was committed, or in that where the offender should be apprehended 
and retaken. 4 Geo. 4, c. 64, o. 44. That statute was wholly repealed by 
28 & 29 Vict. c. 126, s. 73, sched. 3 : but provisions similar to s. 44 are in 
force as to escapes from Parkhurst Prison (1 & 2 Vict. c. 82, ». 18), and from 
Pentonville Prison (5 & 6 Vict. c. 29, s. 28). 

In indictments for being at large before the expiration of a sentence of penal 
servitude, the venue may be laid either in the county where the defendant 
was apprehended or in that from whence he was ordered to be sent to penal 
servitude. 5 Geo. 4, c. 84, s. 22 ; 20 & 21 Vict. c. 3, s. 3. 

Forgery. I—Bj s. 14, sub-s. 1, of the Forgery Act, 1913 (3 & 4 Geo. 6, c. 27), 
a person charged with an ofEence against that Act, or with an offence indictable 
at common law or under any Act for the time being in force consisting in the 
forging or altering of any matter whatsoever, or in offering, uttering, die- . 
posing of, or putting off any matter whatsoever, knowing the same to be 
forged or altered, may be proceeded against, indicted, tried, and punished 
in any county or place in which he was apprehended or is in custody as if 
the offence had been committed in that county or place, and for all purposes 
incidental to or. consequential on the prosecution, trial, or punishment of the 
offence, it shall be deemed to have been committed in that county or place : 
provided that, where the offence charged relates to documents made for the 
purpose of any Act relating to the suppression of the slave trade, it shall, for 
the purposes of jurisdiction and trial, be treated as an offence against the 
Slave Trade Act, 1873. By sub-s. 2, nothing in the section shall affect 
the laws relating to the government of his Majesty's naval or military 
forces. 

Larceny, etc.^ — At common law if a man commits larceny (whether simple 
or compound) in one county, and carries the goods with him into another, he 
may be indicted for the simple or compound larceny in the county in which 
he committed it, or he may be indicted for it as for a simple larceny in the 
county into which, or in any of the counties through which, he carried the 
goods ; for in contemplation of law, there is such a taking and carrying away 
as constitute the offence of larceny at common law in every place through 
which, at any distance of time, the goods were carried by him. R. v. Parkin, 
1 Mood. 45 ; 1 Hale, 507 ; 2 Hale, 163; 3 Co. Inst. 113 ; 1 Hawk. c. 33, s. 52; 
4 Bl. Com. 304; 2 Bast, P. C. 771; Griffith v. Taylor, 2 C. P. D. 194, 202, 
Cockburn, C.J. . R. v.'Fenley, 20 Cox, 252, Jelf, J. The larceny itself is 
ambulatory, but the aggravated circumstances are fixed and stationary. 1 Hale, 
536 : R. V. Thomson, 2 Buss. Cr. (7th ed.) 1304 : B. v. Millar, 7 C. & P. 665 : 
R. V. Fenley, supra. 

By the Larceny Act, 1916 (6 & 7 Geo. 5, c. 50), s. 39 (1) : A 
person charged with any offence against this Act may be proceeded against, 
indicted, tried and punished in any county or place in which he was appre- 
hended or is in custody as if the offence had been committed in that county or 



JURISDICTION: LARCENY, ETC. 43 

place ; and for all purposes incidental to or consequential on the prosecution , 
trial, or punishment of the offence it shall be deemed to have been committed 
in that county or place. [The Act applies to larceny, receiving, robbery, 
burglary, housebreaking, demanding money with menaces, threatening to 
publish with intent to extort, false pretences, corruptly taking a reward, 
accessories and abettors of offences under the Act.] (2) . Every person who 
steals or otherwise feloniously takes any property in any one part of the United 
Kingdom may be dealt with, indicted, tried and punished in any other part 
of the United Kingdom where he has the property in his possession in the 
same manner as if he had actually stolen or taken it in that part. (3) : Every 
person who receives in any one part of the United Kingdom any property 
stolen or otherwise feloniously taken in any other part of the United Kingdom 
may be dealt with, indicted, tried and punished in that part of the United 
Kingdom where he so receives the property in the same manner as if it had 
been originally stolen or taken in that part. 

Mutiny.] — In indictments for endeavouring to seduce soldiers or sailors 
from their duty, or for inciting or stirring them up to mutiny, the venue may 
be laid in any county in England, whether the offence be committed on the 
high seas or in England. 37 G-. 3, c. 70, s. 2. 

Perjury.] — By s. 8 of the Perjury Act, 1911 (1 & 2 Geo. 5, c. 6), where 
an offence against that Act or any offence punishable as perjury or as suborna- 
tion of perjury under any other Act of Parliament is committed in any place 
either on sea or land outside the United Kingdom, the offender may be pro- 
ceeded against, indicted, tried, and punished in any county or place in England 
where he was apprehended or is in custody as if the offence had been com- 
mitted in that county or place, and for all purposes incidental to or conse- 
quential on the trial or punishment of the offence, it shall be deemed to have 
been committed in that county or place. 

Post-office offences.]— By the Post Office Act, 1908 (8 Edw. 7, c. 48), s. 72, 
" (1) An offence against this Act may be tried either in the county or place 
in, which it was actually committed, or in the county or place in which the 
alleged offender is apprehended or is in custody, or (when the offence is in 
respect of a mail, mail bag, postal packet or money order, or any chattel, 
money, or valuable security sent by post) in any county or place through which 
or any part thereof the mail, mail bag, postal packet, money order, chattel, 
money or valuable security passed in due course of conveyance by post. . . . 

(2) Where an offence is committed on any highway, harbour, canal, river, 
arm of the sea or other water, constituting the boundary of two or more 
counties or places, it may be tried in any of the said counties or places. 

(3) The offence of being accessory to or of aiding or abetting an offence against 
this Act may be tried in any county or place in which the last mentioned 
offence may be tried." 



44 INDICTMENT. 

Slave trade.]— Offences in connection with the slave trade may be tried either 
where committed, or in Middlesex, or in any place where the accused foi 
the time being is if it be within the King's dominions, or a place where his 
Majesty has jurisdiction under the Foreign Jurisdiction Acts. 36 & 37 Vict. 
c. 88, B. 26. See 1 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 280.. 

Unlawful oaths.'] — Offences against the Unlawful Oaths Acts of 1797 & 1802, 
if committed on the high seas or outside the realm, or in England, may be 
tried by a court of oyer and terminer or gaol delivery for any county in England 
in the same manner as if committed in such county. 37 G. 8, u. 123, s. 6; 
52 Geo. 3, c. 104, 8. 7. 



2. THE STATBMEKT OF THE QITENCE. 

Statutes. 

7 Geo. i, u. 64 (Crirninal Law Act, 1826). 

Sect. 21. Description of offences.'] . . Where the offence charged ha? 
been created by'any statute, or subjected to a greater degree of punishment, or 
excluded from the benefit of clergy, by any statute, the indictment or informa- 
tion shall, after verdict, be held sufficient to warrant the punishment prescribed 
by the statute, if it describe the offence in the words of the statute. 

[This section, although left xmrepealed by the Indictments Act, 1915, has m 
effect been rendered obsolete by the provisions of that statute, infra. As to the 
effect of it, see R. v. Martin, 8 A. & E. 481.] 

5 if 6 Geo. 5, c. 90 (Indictments Act, 1915). 

Sect. 3. General provisions as to indictments.] — (1) Every indictment shall 
contain, and shall be sufficient if it contains, a statement of the specific offence 
or offences with which the accused person is charged, together with such 
particulars as may be necessary for giving reasonable information as to the 
nature of the charge. 

(2) Notwithstanding any rule of law or practice, an indictment shall, subject 
to the provisions of this Act, not be open to objection in respect of its form 
or contents if it is framed in accordance with the rules under this Act. 

Eule 4. Mode in which offences are to be charged.] — (1) A description of 
the offence charged in an indictment, or where more than one offence is charged 
in an indictment, of each offence so charged, shall be set out in the indictment 
in a separate paragraph called a count. 

(2) A count of an indictment shall commence with a statement of the offence 
charged, called the statement of offence. 

(3) The statement of offence shall describe the offence shortly in ordinary 
language, avoiding as far as possible the use of technical terms, and without 
necessarily stating all the essential elements of the offence, and if the offence 
charged is one created by statute, shall contain a reference to the section of 
the statute creating the offence. 



FORM : PARTICULARS OF THE OFFENCE. 45 

It will be seen, by reference to the forms of indictment throughout this book, 
that the Indictments Act, 1915, is intended to secure brevity, simplicity, and 
lucidity in describing offences. Ordinary language is to be used, and technical 
terms are as far as possible to be avoided. Thus the crime of murder is not 
to be described as " vrillul " or " felonious ' ' murder, or as murder ' ' of malice 
aforethought," but simply as " murder." Where the offence charged is one 
created by statute, the statement of offence in the indictment is to contain a 
reference to the section of such statute, e.g., in the case of felonious wounding, 
the offence should be described as '' wounding with intent, contrary to section 18 
of the Offences against the Person Act, 1861"; and in the case of unlawful 
wounding, as " wounding, contrary to section 20 of the Offences against the 
Person Act, 1861." 

The statement of the offence follows immediately after the presentment i f 
the grand jury {ante, p. 28), and is in the following form ; — 

STATEMENT OF OFFENCE. 

First Count. 

Arson, contrary to section 2 of the Malicious Damage Act, 1861. [If the 
indictment contains only one count, the words " First Count " should be 
omitted.] 

3. PABTICULABS OF THE OFFENCE. 

(a) How stated. 

5 S & Geo. 5, c. 90 {Indictments Act, 1915). 

Rule 4 — (4) After the statement of the offence, particulars of such offence shall 
be set out in ordinary language, in which the use of technical terms shall not be 
necessary : 

Provided that where any rule of law or any statute limits the particulars 
of an offence which are required to be given in an indictment, nothing in this 
rule shall require any more particulars to be given than those so required. 

(5) The forms set out in the appendix to these rules or forme conforming 
thereto as nearly as may be shall be used in cases to which they are applicable, 
and in other cases forms to the like effect or conforming thereto as nearly as 
may be shall be used, the statement of offence and the particulars of offence 
being varied according to the circumstances in each case. 

(6) Where an indictment contains more than one count the counts shall be 
numbered consecutively. 

Particulars of the offence should be stated immediately below the statement of 
the offence as follows : — 

PARTIOULABS OP OFFENCE. 

A. B. on the 9th day of March a.d. 1916 in the County of London maliciously 
set fire to a dwelling-house, one C. D. being therein. 



46 INDICTMENT. 

Common law.] — At common law, in the indictment, all the ingredients of 
the offence with which the defendant was charged, the facts, circumstances and 
intent constituting it, were required to be set forth with certainty and precision, 
without any repugnancy or inconsistency, and the defendant charged directly 
and positiyely with having committed it. 

At common law these rules were strictly enforced in favorem vita {see 
2 Hale, 193). They are now relaxed to the extent below indicated under the 
several sub-headings. 

Words of art.] — In an indictment for murder, the words " did murder " 
(murdravit) , Dy. 261 a; in an indictment for rape the words "did ravish" 
(rapuit), Staundf. 26 a ; and_in an indictment for larceny the words " feloniously 
did take and carry away " (Jelonic& cepit ei asportavit), i Bl. Com. 305, 
were held to be absolutely necessary on the ground that they were technical 
words, essential to the definition of the offence, without which these offences 
respectively could not be described upon the record : and if they were omitted, 
the defendant could demur or move to quash the indictment, or move in arrest 
of judgment, or if convicted appeal. In future the use of technical terms is 
to be avoided as far as possible. 5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, r. 4 (3), ante, p. 44. 

Statutory offences.] — Indictments Act, 1915, rule 5. Provisions as to 
statutory ojfences.l — (1) "Where an enactment constituting an offence states 
the offence to be the doing or the omission to do any one of any different acts 
in the alternative, or the doing or the omission to do any act in any one of any 
different capacities, or with any one of any different intentions, or states any 
part of the offence in the alternative, the acts, omissions, capacities, or inten- 
tions, or other matters stated in the alternative in the enactment, may be 
stated in the alternative in the count charging the offence. 

(2) It shall not be necessary, in any count charging a statutory offence, to 
negative any exception or exemption from or qualification to the operation of 
the statute creating the offence. 

Eule 5 (1) does not authorise the inclusion of two or more separate offences in 
one count, even though they are charged in the alternative. R, v. Molhy 
[1921] 2 K. B. 364; post, p. 573 (n). 

Exceptions and exemptions .1 — ^By rule 5 (2) of the Indictments Act, 1915 
(supra), it shall not be necessary in any count charging a statutory offence, to 
negative any exception or exemption from or qualification to the operation of 
the statute creating the offence. 

This rule extends to exceptions generally the previous practice with regard 
to provisos in the case of statutory offences. The former law is stated m 
ThibauU v. Gibson, 12 M. & W. 88, 94, by Lord Abinger, C.B., in the following 
terms : — 

" In all cases where proceedings are taken against a party for the recovery 
of a penalty under a statute, if there be any exception in the clause which 
gives the penalty exempting certain cases from its operation, the declaration 
or information must show that the particular case is not within the exception. 
But where it comes by way of proviso in a subsequent part of the Act, it is 



DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY. , 47 

not necessary to notice it in the declaration or information, but it is matter 
which the defendant must allege as ground for defence." 

In E. V. James [1902] 1 K. B. 640, the effect of the authorities on this 
subject was held to be that it is not necessary for the prosecution to negative 
a proviso, even though the proviso be contained in the same section of the 
Act of Parliament creating the offence, unless the proviso is in the nature of 
an exception which is incorporated directly or by reference with the enacting 
clause. See B. v. Hall, 1 T. E. 320; Steel v. Smith, 1 B. & Aid. 94. In 
R. V. Audley [1907] 1 K. B. 383, this rule was applied to the proviso to s. 57 
of the Offences against the Person Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 100), that the 
section should not extend to a second marriage outside England or Ireland by 
a person not a British subject ; and it was held unnecessary in an indictment 
for bigamy at Gibraltar to aver that the prisoner was a British subject. 
Bigham, J., said that all the provisos to the section were matters of confession 
and avoidance to be alleged and proved by the defence. 

Ownership or occupation of property.] — Indictments Act, 1915, rule 6. 
Description of property.'] — (1) The description of property in a, count in an 
indictment shall be in ordinary language and such as to indicate with reasonable 
clearness the property referred to, and if the property is so described it shall not 
be necessary (except when required for the purpose of describing an offence 
depending on any special ownership of property or special value of property) 
to name the person to whom the property belongs or the value of the property. 

(2) Where property is vested in more than one person, and the owners of the 
property are referred to in an indictment it shall be sufficient to describe 
the property as owned by one of those persons by name with others, and if 
the persons owning the property are a body of persons with a collective name, 
such as "Inhabitants," " Trustees," " Commissioners," or " Club," or other 
such name, it shall be sufficient to use the collective name without naming 
any individual. 

Notwithstanding the above rule, Form No. 9 (relating to larceny) and 
Porm No. 10 (relating to burglary and larceny) of the forms of indictment 
printed in the appendix to the Indictments Act, 1915, contain the name of the 
owner of the property, and it will probably be found convenient in practice to 
name the owner where he is known. Form No. 10 contains a statement of the 
value of the property, because the offence under s. 8 (2) (c) of the Larceny Act, 
1916 (6 & 7 Geo. 5, c. 50), depends on special value of property. 

Property of deceased persons.'] — ^An indictment for stealing the shroud of a 
dead person may state it to be the property of the executor or administrator; 
2 Hale, 181 (a). If there is no will and no administration, it may be laid 
to be the goods of the person who defrayed the expenses of the burial {B. v. 
Haynes, 12 Co. Eep. 113), or formerly of the ordinary, if the shroud were pur- 
chased with the money of the deceased; 2 Hale, 181. So, if a coffin is stolen, 
it may be described in the same manner. But if the property is described in 

(a) As to property in a dead body, etc., see Spence V. Doodeward, 6 Australia 
C. L. E. 406. 



48 , INDICTMENT. 

ordinary language and so as to indicate with reasonable clearness the property 
referred to, e.g., " the shroud covering the dead body of A. B.," it is unneces- 
sary to name the owner. 5 & fr Geo. 5, c. 90, r. 6 (l), supra. 

Larceny from bailees.'] — Property stolen out of the possession of a bailee may 
be described in the indictment as the property either of the bailor or bailee; 
2 Hale, 181 ; although the goods were never actually in the real owner's 
possession, but in the possession of the bailee only. R. v. Remnant, E. & E. 
136; R. V. Wymer, 4 C. & P. 391. See Pollock and Wright on Possession in 
the Common Law. As, for instance, goods left at an inn, iJ. v. Todd, 
2 East, P. C. 663, or entrusted to a person for safe keeping, R. v. TayloT) 

1 Leach, 356 : R. v. Stdtham, Id. 357 cit. ; or to a carrier for carriage, R. v. 
DeaUn, 2 Bast, P. C. 653; 2 Leach, 862; see R. v. Spears, 2 Leach, 825; 

2 East, P. C. 568; cloth to a tailor to make into clothes; linen to a laundress 
to wash, R. V. Packer, 2 Bast, P. C. 653; 1 Leach, 357 n. ; goods pawned and 
the like — may be said to be the goods and chattels of the person to whom they 
are so entrusted, etc., or of the owner, at the option of the prosecutor. See 
2 Hale, 181; 1 Hale, 513; 2 East, P. O. 652; 1 Hawk. c. 33, b. 47; R. v. 
Wilkins, 1 Leach, 520; 2 lb., 875 cit. ; 2 East, P. C. 678. 

Married women.] — Where the person named as owner appears to be a married 
woman, the defendant must formerly, unless the indictment was amended, 
have been acquitted, because in law the goods were the property of the husband ; 
1 Hale^ 513 ; and must have been described as such except where the woman had 
married after the larceny and before indictment found. R. v. Turner, 1 Leach, 
536, and see R. v. French, E. & E. 491; H. v. Wilford, lb. 517. This rule ,if 
the common law that the wife could have no property was made subject to 
exceptions by statute where the husband and wife had been judicially separated, 
or where the wife had obtained a protection order ; 20 & 21 Vict. c. 85, ss. 21, 23; 
and is now virtually abolished by 45 & 46 Vict. c. 75 {Married Women's 
Property Act, 1882), which enacts, s. 12, that — " Every woman, whether 
married before or after this Act, shall have in her own name against all 
persons whomsoever, including her husband, the same civil remedies, and also 
(subject, as regards her husband, to the proviso hereinafter contained) the 
same remedies and redress by way of criminal proceedings, for the protection 
and security of her own separate property, as if such property belonged to her 
as a feme sole, but, except as aforesaid, no husband or wife shall be entitled 
to sue the other for a tort. In any indictment or other proceeding under 
this section it shall be sufficient to allege such property to be her property ; and 
in any proceeding under this section a husband or wife shall be competent to 
give evidence against each other, any statute or rule of law to the contrary 
notwithstanding : Provided always, that no criminal proceedings shall be 
taken by any wife against her husband by virtue of this Act while they are 
living together, as to or concerning any property claimed by her, nor while 
they are living apart, as to or concerning any act done by the husband while 
they were living together, concerning property claimed by the wife, unless 
such property shall have been wrongfully taken by the husband when leaving 



DESCRIPTION OF PEESONS. 49 

or deserting, or about to leave or desert his wife :" and (a. 16) that " a wife 
doing any act with respect to any property of her husband which, if done by 
the husband with respect to property of the wife, would make the husband 
liable to criminal proceedings by the wife under this Act, shall in like manner 
be liable to criminal proceedings by her husband." And by the Larceny Act, 
1916 (6 & 7 Geo. 5, c. 50), s. 36— (1) " a. wife shall have the same remedies and 
redress under this Act for the protection and security of her own separate 
property as if such property belonged to her as a feme sole : Provided that no 
proceedings shall be taken by any wife against her husband while they are 
living together as to or concerning any property claimed by her, nor while 
they are living apart as to or concerning any act done by the husband while 
they were living together concerning property claimed by the wife, unless such 
property has been wrongfully taken by the husband when leaving or deserting 
or about to leave or desert his wife. (2) A wife doing an act with respect to 
any property of her husband, which if done by the husband would make the 
husband liable to criminal proceedings by the wife under this Act, shall be in 
like manner liable to criminal proceedings by her husband. " It is not necessary 
that an indictment against a wife for stealing the goods of her husband should 
contain averments that the prisoner was the wife of the prosecutor, or that 
she took the goods in question when leaving or deserting, or about to leave 
or desert, her husband. B. v. James [1902] 1 K. B. 541 ; 71 L. J. (Q. B.) 211 ; 
20 Cox, 156 ; 66 J. P. 217. If goods described in an indictment as goods of 
A. B. turn out to be the separate property of his wife living with him, the 
indictment may be amended: R. v. Murray [1906] 2 K. B. 385; 75 L. J. 
(K. B.) 593; 21 Cox, 250; 70 J. P. 295. 

Joint Owners.]— The Indictments Act, 1915 (5 & 6 Geo. 5, u. 90), r. 6 (2), 
ante, p. 47, extends and makes of general application the provisions of the 
Criminal Law Act, 1826 (7 Geo. 4, c. 64), ss. 14, 15 {rep.), and gets rid of 
numerous special Acts relating to the property of joint owners. 

Most of the trading companies, familiarly known as joint-stock companies, 
are incorporated under the Companies Acts, now consolidated in 8 Bdw. 7, 
c. 69 (see ss. 16, 17), but they may now be described by their corporate name, 
whether incorporated under that Act or not. The existence of a company 
under its corporate name is sufficiently proved by parol evidence that it has 
carried on business under that name. R. v. Langton, 2 Q. B. D. 296; 46 L. J. 
(M. C.) 136 ; 13 Cox, 345. But it is preferable to prove the existence and 
name of the company by the certificate of incorporation given under 8 Edw. 7, 
c. 69, S3. 16, 17. R. V. May, 64 0". P. 570. 

Description of persons.] — Indictments Act, 1915, rule 7 : The description or 
designation in an indictment of the accused person, or of any other person to 
whom reference is made therein, shall be such as is reasonably sufficient to 
identify him, without necessarily stating his correct name, or his abode, style, 
degree, or occupation ; and if, owing to the name of the person not being known, 
or for any other reason, it is impracticable to give such a description or designa- 
tion, such description or designation shall be given as is reasonably practicable 
in the circumstances, or such person may be described as " a person unknown." 

A.O.P. 4 



so INDICTMENT. 

The defendant should be described in the indictment by his christian name and 
aurname. 2 Hale, 175. But these need not necessarily be stated correctly, pro- 
Tided that he is described in a manner which is reasonably sufficient to identify 
him. When a, corporation is indicted it should be described by its proper cor- 
porate name or style, subject to the above provisions of rule 7. But where the 
inhabitants of a parish are indicted for not repairing a highway, or the inhabi- 
tants of a county for not repairing a bridge, it was always enough to describe 
them as the inhabitants of a parish or county without naming any of them. 
2 EoUe Abr. 79 : 2 Hawk. u. 25, s. 68. 

The surname may be such as the defendant has usually gone by or acknow- 
ledged ; and if there be a doubt which one of two names is his real surname, 
the second may be added in the indictment after an alias dictus, thus : 
"Richard Wilson, otherwise called Richard Layer" (Bro. Misnom. 47). 

In indictments for offences against the persons or property of individuals, the 
christian name and surname of the person injured should be stated, if known; 
2 Hawk. c. 25, ss. 71, 72. A bastard is quasi nullius filius, and can have no 
name or reputation immediately on birth . Co. Litt. 36 ; but may soon acquire 
a name by reputation. R. v. Scarborough, 3 Cox, 72. A newly bom child 
may be sufficiently described as " then lately before born of the body of A. B. 
and not named." 

Where the person injured has a name of dignity, as a peer, baronet, or 
knight, he should be described by it. " His Boyal Highness the Duke of 
Cambridge " has been considered sufficient without setting forth any of his 
christian names. R. v. Frost, Dears. 474; 24 L. J. (M. C.) 116. 

Description of document. — Indictments Act, 1915, rule 8 : Where it is 
necessary to refer to any document or instrument in an indictment it shall be' 
sufficient to describe it by any name or designation by which it is usually 
kno\fn or by the purport thereof, without setting out any copy thereof. 

At common law, written instruments wherever they formed a part of the 
gist of the offence charged {see R. v. Coulscn, 1 Den. 592; 19 L. J". (M. C.) 
182), had to be set out verbatim. Thus, in the case of forgery, the instrument 
forged must, before 2 & 3 W. 4, o. 123, s. 3 (rep.), have been set out in the 
indictment in words or figures : R. v. Mason, 1 East, 180, n. ; 2 Bast, P. C. 
975 : R. V. Powell, 1 Leach, 77 : R. v. HaH, Id. 145 : R. v. Lyon, 2 Leach, 
597, 608; and on an indictment for not executing a warrant, the nature and 
tenor of the warrant must have been shown. R. v. Burrough, 1 Vent. 305 : 
Com. Dig. Indictment (G. 3). The strictness of the common law rule was 
relaxed by 14, & 15 Vict. c. 100, ss. 5, 7 (rep.), by ss. 42, 48 (rep.) of the 
Forgery Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 98), and by s. 17 (1) of the Forgery Act, 
1913 (3 & 4 G-eo. 5, c. 27). Under these enactments it is sufficient to describe 
an instrument referred to in an indictment by any name or designation by which 
it is usually known without setting out^a copy or facsimile. 

General rule as to description.] — Indictments Act, 1915, rule 9. General rule 
as to description.] — Subject to any other provisions of these rules, it shall be 
sufficient to describe any place, time, thing, matter, act, or omission whatsoever 



GENERAL RULE AS TO DESCRIPTION. 51 

to wEich it is necessary to refer in any indictment, in ordinary language in such 
a manner as to indicate with reasonable clearness the place, time, thing, matter, 
act or omission referred to. 

Certainty as to age of person injured.^ — Where it is essential tp coi;istituti 
the offence that the person injured should have been under a certain age, the 
person^ should be stated in every count of the indictment to be under that age. 
B. V, Martin, 9 C. & P. 213. See R. v. Sarah Waters, 1 Uen. 356 ; 18 L. J. 
(M. C.) 53; 3 Cox, 300. 

Statements as to time.] — The date of the commission of the offence should 
bf stated in the indictment. Staundf., 95 a. R. v. HoUond, 5 T. R. 607; 
B. v. Aylett, 1 T. E. 63, 69 : R. y, Haynes, 4 M. & Sel. 214. But it was 
never necessary that it should be laid according to the truth unless time was of 
the essence of the offence : in other cases if the time stated were previous to the 
finding of the indictment, a variance between the indictment and evidence in 
the time when the offence was committed was not material, 2 Co. Inst. 318; 
3 Co. Inst. 230 : Sir H. Vane's case, Kel. (J.) 16 : R. v. Aylett, supra: R. v. 
Dossi, 13 Cr. App. E. 158. For this reason, in practice all the facts in an 
indictment usually were stated to have occurred at the same time, time and 
special venue being laid as to the first fact, and afterwards referre(f to by the 
words " then and there," as to the others. 

The time, if laid, ehould be the day of the month and year upon which 
the act is supposed to have been committed. In burglary the offence should 
be stated to have been committed " in the night." Where a time is limited 
for preferring an indictment, the time laid should appear to be within the time 
so limited. See R. v. Brown, M. & M. 163; and post, p. 63. 

In cases of offences against children under Part II. of the Children Act, 
1908 (8 Bdw. 7, c. 67), or of offences mentioned in the First Schedule to that 
Act, wherti any such offence is continuous, it is not necessary to specify in the 
indictment the date of the acts constituting the offence. 8 Edw. 7, u. 67, s. 32, 
sUib-s. 4. This provision is specially safeguarded by rule 12 of the Indictments 
Act, 1915 (po«f., p. 62). 

Statements as to place.'\ — At common law it was necessary to lay with 
certainty statements of place in the indictment, but it was never necessary 
that the averments should be according to the truth unless local description 
was of the essence of the offence, for if the place stated were within the county 
or other extent of the court's jurisdiction, a variance between indictment and 
evidence was not material if the place proved were within the jurisdiction 
of the- court. 2 Hawk. u. 25, s. 84. Under the Indictments Act, 1915, it is 
quite suflieient to state the county in which the offence was committed. 

Value.} — It is unnecessary to state value, except where it is of the essence 
of the offence (5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, rule 6 (1), ante, p. 47), such as an offence 
against the Larceny Act, 1916, s. 13 (a), or the Bankruptcy Act, 1914, s. 154, 
sub-s. 4. Where value is essential to constitute the offemce, and the value is 



52 INDICTMENT. 

aacribed in the indictment to many articles collectively, the offence must be 
made out as to all or a sufficient number of the articles, for the grand jury 
have ascribed the value to all the articles collectively. R. v. Forsyth, E. k 
E. 274. 

Money.] — Until 1851, money was described in an indictment as so many 
"pieces of the current gold," or ■'silver," or "copper coin of the realm, 

called ," and the particular species of coin must have been specified. See 

R. V. Fry, E. & E. 482 : R. v. Warsha-ner, 1 Mood. 4fi6 ; R. v. Radley, 
1 Den. 450; 18 Jj. J. (M. C.) 154. And if a larceny of particular pieces of 
coin, as sovereigns, half-sovereigns, crowns, etc., was charged, the indictment 
was not supported by proof of the stealing of a sum of money, which must 
have consisted of some or other of the coins mentioned in the indictment, 
without proof of the stealing of some one or more of the specific coins named. 
R. V. Bond, 1 Den. 517; 19 L. J. (M. C.) 138. 

But by ». 18 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1851 (14 & 15 Vict. e. 100), it 
is provided that " in every indictment in which it shall be necessary to make 
any averment as to any money or any note of the Bank of England or any other 
bank, it shall be sufficient to describe such money or bank note simply as 
money, without specifying any particular coin or bank note : and such allega- 
tion, so far as regards the description of the property, shall be sustained by 
proof of any amount of coin or of any bank note, although the particular 
species of coin of which such amount was composed, or the particular nature 
of the bank note, shall not be proved." And by the Larceny Act, 1916 
(6 & 7 Geo. 5, c. 50), s. 40 (2), ■" an allegation 'in an indictment that money or 
bank notes have been embezzled or obtained by false pretences can so far as 
regards the description of the property be sustained by proof that the offender 
embezzled or obtained any piece of coin or any bank note or any portion of the 
value thereof, although such piece of coin or bank note may have been delivered 
to him in order that some part of the value thereof should be returned to any 
person and such part has been returned accordingly." 

Notes of a provincial bank, which were not at the time of the commission 
of the offence in circulation for value, but which were paid in at one branch 
of the bank, and were in course of transmission to another branch, at which 
they had originally been issued, in order that they might there be re-issued 
or otherwise disposed of — it not being the practice of the bank to re-issue at 
one branch notes originally issued at another — were held to be bank notes 
within 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 18. R. v. West, Dears. & B. 109; 26 L. J. 
(M. C.) 6. 

Statement of intent.}— Indictments Act, 1916, rule 10. Statement of 
intent.'] — It shall not be necessary in stating any intent to defraud, deceive 
or injure to state an intent to defraud, deceive or injure any particular person 
where the statute creating the offence does not make an intent to defraud, 
deceive or injure a. particular person an essential ingredient of the offence. 

The rule will not apply to an indictment framed under s. 24 of the Offences 
against the Person Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 100), for administering poison 



DUPLICITY. 53 

or other destructive or noxious thing to any person, with intent to injure, 
aggrieve, or annoy sueh person. 

Charge of previous convictions, etc.] — Indiotmerds ict, 1915, rule 11. Charge, 
of previous convictions, etc.} — Any charge of a previous conviction of an ofencri 
or of being a habitual criminal or a habitual drunkard shall be charged at the 
end of the indictment by means of a statement — in the case of a previous con- 
viction that the person accused has been previously convicted of that offence 
at a certain time and place vyithout stating the particulars of the offence, and 
in the case of a habitual criminal or habitual drunkard, that the offender is a 
habitual criminal or a habitual drunkard, as the case may be. 

This provision merely reproduces the former practice under the Prevention of 
Crime Act, 1908 (8 Edw. 7, c. 59), s. 10, sub-s. 3, and the Inebriates Act, 1898 
(61 & 62 Vict. c. 60), s. 1, sub-s. 2, the provisions of which, with regard to 
indictments, are repealed by the Indictments Act, 1915. 

Figures and abbreviations in indictment.'] — It was formerly held that no 
part of the indictment should be in figures; and therefore numbers, dates, etc., 
were stated in words at length. 2 Hale, 170. 

Now, by rule 1 (4) of the Indictments Act, 1915 {ante, p. 28), figures and 
abbreviations may be used in an indictment for expressing anything which is 
commonly expressed thereby. 

(fc) Duplicity. 

The indictment must not be double (a) ; that is to say, no one count of ihe 
indictment should charge the defendant with having committed two or more 
separate offences. See R. v. Molloy [1921] 2 K. B. 364; and post, p. 673 (n), 
So, two defendants cannot be jointly charged with murder or manslaughter by 
means of an injury done by one of them to the deceased on one day and another 
injury done by the other of them on a different day. B. v. Devett, 8 C. & P. 
639. Nor should the accused be charged in one count with many offences of 
the same kind (not being continuous offences) committed against the same 
person on different dates extending over a very considerable period of time 
{e.g., " on divers dates between January, 1909, and October 4th, 1910," and, 
in another count, " on divers dates between the 4th October, 1910, and the end 
of February, 1913"). R. v. Thompson [1914] 2 X. B. 99; 83 L. J. (K. B.) 
643; 9 Cr. App. E. 352. But where the offences charged consist of one single 
act they may be made the subject of a single count. For instance, where the 
prisoner was charged in one count with uttering a number of forged receipts, 
and it was proved that all the forged receipts were uttered at one and the 
same time, in one bundle, the count was held good. R. v. Thomas, 2 East, 



(a) Informations for offences punishable on summary conviction are governed by 
11 &, 12 Vict. c. 43, s. 10, which forbids the inclusion of two offences in one information. 
As to the effect of the section see Smith V. Perry [1906] 1 K. B. 262; 75 L. J. (K. B.) 124; 
R. V. Cable [1906] 1 K. B. 719; 75 L. J. (K. B.) 381. 



54 INDICTMENT. 

P. G. 934. So, the indictment may charge the prisoner, in the same count, 
with felonious acts with respect to several persons — as in robbery, with having 
assaulted A. and B., and stolen from A. one shilling, and from B. two 
shillings — if it was all one transaction. R. v. Oiddins, C. & Mar. 634. A man 
may be indicted for the battery of two or more persons in the same count 
where the battery is one transaction, or for a libel upon two or more persons 
when the publication is one single act, without rendering the count bad 
for duplicity. B. v. Benfield, 3 Burr. 980, 983, 984 : where R. v. Clendon, 
3 Btr. 870 ; 2 Ld. Eaym. 1572, was held not law : and see B. v. Jenour, 7 Mod. 
400. A count charging a man with one endeavour to procure the commission 
of two offences is not bad for duplicity, because the endeavour is the offence 
charged. R. v. Fuller, 1 B. & P. 180; 2 Leach, 790. 

An exception to the rule as to duplicity is to be found in indictments for 
burglary, in which it is usual and proper to charge the defendant with having 
broken and entered the house with intent to commit a felony, and also with 
having committed the felony intended. Laying several overt acts in a count 
for high treason is not duplicity, Kel. (J.) 8, because the charge consists of 
the compassing, etc., and the overt acts are merely evidence of it; and the 
same applies to conspiracy. Another exception is to be found in the case of con- 
tinuous offences under Part H. of the First Schedule of the Children Act, 1908, 
where dates need not be specified in the indictment but a series of EW3ts may be 
treated as constituting one continuous offence. 8 Edw. 7, o. 67, ». 32 (4) : 
5 & 6 Geo. 6, c. 90, r. 12; post, p. 61. 

In criminal cases, the mode of objecting to duplicity is the same as in civil 
proceedings prior to the Common Law Procedure Act, 15 & 16 Vict. c. 76; 
i.e., by demurrer : or the court on motion may quash the indictment, which is 
now the usual procedure. Duplicity cannot be made the subject of a motion 
in arrest of judgment; Nash v. B., 4 B. & S. 935; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 94; but 
it is a ground of appeal under the Criminal Appeal Act, 1907 (7 Edw. 7, c. 23), 
=. 3 (a). B. V. Thompson [1914] 2 K. B. 99; 83 L. J. (K. B.) 643; 78 J. P. 
212; 30 T. L. E. 223; 9 Or. App. E. 252. Duplicity is distinct from the 
joinder in one indictment of counts for different offences, as to which see 
post, p. 57. 



(c) Amendment. 

Indictments Act, 1915, s. 5. Orders for amendment of indictment, separate 
trial, and postponement of trial.] — (1) Where, before trial,* or at any stage of a 
trial, it appears to the court that the indictment is defective, the court shall make 
such order for the amendment of the indictment as the court thinks necessary to 
meet the circumstances of the case, unless, having regard to the merits of the 
case, the required amendments cannot be made without injustice, and may 
make such order as to the payment of any costs incurred owing to the necessity 
for amendment as the court thinks fit. 

(2) Where an indictment is so amended, a, note of the order for amendment 
shall be endorsed on the indictment, and the indictment shall be treated for 



AMENDMENT. 55 

the purposes of the trial and for the purposes of all proceedings in oonnectioij 
therewith as having been found by. the grand jury in the amended form. 

(3) Where, before trial, or at any stage of a trial, the court is of opinion 
that a person accused may be prejudiced or embarrassed in his defence by 
reason of being charged with more than one offence in the same indictment, 
or that for any other reason it is desirable to direct that the person should be 
tried separately for any one or more offences charged in an indictment, the 
court may order a separate trial of any count or counts of such indictment. 

(i) Where, before trial, or at any stage of a trial, the court is of opinion 
that the postponement of the trial of a person accused is expedient as a 
consequence of the exercise of any power of the court under this Act to amend 
an indictment or to order a separate trial of a count, the court shall make 
such order as to the postponement of the trial as appears necessary. 

(5) Where an order of the court is made under this section for a separate 
trial or for the postponement of a trial — 

(a) if such an order is made during a trial the court may order that the 

jury are to be discharged from giving a verdict on the count or counts 
, the trial of which is postponed or on the indictment, as the case may 
be ; and 

(b) the procedure on the separate trial of a count shall be the same in all 

respects as if the count had been found in a separate indictment, and 
the procedure on the postponed trial shall be the same in all respects 
(if the jury has been discharged) as if the trial had not commenced ; and 

(c) the court may make such order as to costs and as to admitting the 

accused person to bail, and as to the enlargement of recognizances and 
otherwise as the court thinks fit. 

(6) Any power of the court under this section shall be in addition to and 
not in derogation of any other power of the court for the same or similar 
purposes! 

Wide powers of amending misdescriptions in indictments were conferred 
upon courts of Assize and Quarter Sessions by the now repealed provisions 
of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. c. 46), the Quarter Sessions 
Act, 1849 (12 i& 13 Vict. c. 45), and the Criminal Procedure Act, 1851 
(14 & 15 Vict. c. 100). But even under those statutes an amendment 
which altered the nature or quality of the offence charged was not usually 
made : e.g., where the defendant was indicted for a forgery charged as a 
statutable felony, but the offence turned out to be a forgery at common law, 
and therefore only a misdemeanor, the judge refused to order the word 
" feloniously " to be struck out of the indictment. B. v. Wright, 2 P. & P. 
820. Nor could an indictment drawn as for a misdemeanour be amended by 
the court by inserting " feloniously," even if the omission of that word were 
obviously accidental. See R. v. Garland [1910] 1 K. B. 154. Nor could an 
indictment be amended by substituting for one of two offences created by the 
same enactment the other offence so created. R. v. Benson [1908] 2 K. B. 
270; 77 L. J. (K. B.) 644. An indictment for obtaining money by false 
pretences was amended by striking out a statement of a false pretence that 
certain articles were worth a certain sum of money. It was held that the 



56 INDICTMENT. 

amendment ought not to have been made, but the conviction was affirmed on 
the ground that no substantial miscarriage of justice had resulted from the 
amendment. ij. v. Cohen, 3 Cr. App. E. 180. As to the common law, set 
Wilkes' case, 19 St. Tr. 1075; 4 Burr. 2527. In an indictment for obtaining 
money, etc., by false pretences, it was held necessary to allege that the 
obtaining was " with intent to defraud," and that where those words were 
omitted the indictment could not be amended by inserting them. R. v. James, 
12 Cox, 127, Lush, J. 

It may be doubted whether any of the above decisions will be followed in 
future under the very ample powers given by the Indictments Act, 1916 
(5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90), a. 5 (1), supra. An amendment of a matter which is not 
material may, semble, be made after verdict. See R. v. Dossi, 13 Cr. App. 
E. "158. 

(d) Joinder of two or more defendants in one indictment. 

Where several persons join in the commission of an offence, all or any number 
of them may be jointly indicted for it, or each of them may be indicted 
separately. Thus, if several commit >"■ robbery, burglary, or murder, they may 
be indicted for it jointly, 2 Hale, 173, or separately ; and the same where two 
or more together commit a battery, or are together guilty of extortion or the 
like. R. V Atkinson, 1 Salk. 382. And though they have acted separately, 
yet if the grievance is the result of the acts of all jointly, all may be indicted 
jointly for the offence. R. v. Trafford, 1 B. & Ad. 874. Where money has been 
obtained under false pretences, and the false pretences were conveyed by words 
spoken by one defendant in the presence of the others, all of whom acted in 
concert together, they may all be indicted jointly. Young v. R., S T. E. 98. 
The same rule applies where two or more persons join in singing a libellous 
song ; R. v. Benfield, 2 Burr. 980, 985, or in any other mode of publishing a 
defamatory libel. But if the publication by each party be distinct, as if two 
booksellers, not being partners, sell the libel at their respective shops, they 
must be indicted separately. But two or more cannot be jointly indicted for 
perjury ; R. v. Philips, 2 Str. 921, or for speaking seditious or blasphemous 
words, or the like, because such offences are in their nature several. And even 
vrhere several commit a joint act, which act is not of itself illegal, but becomes 
so merely by reason of some circumstances applicable to each individual 
severally and not jointly, they must be indicted separately ; 2 Hawk. o. 25, 
s. 89. Thus several partners could not be indicted jointly for exercising their 
trade, without having served an apprenticeship. R. v. Atkinson, 1 Salk. 382; 
B. V. Weston, 1 Str. 623. 

Principals in the first and second degree, and accessories before and after 
the fact may all be joined in the same indictment ; 2 Hale, 173 ; or the prin- 
cipals may be indicted separately, and the accessories may be indicted either 
before or after the conviction of the principals as for a substantive ofEence 
(24 & 25 Vict. c. 94, ss. 2, 3). It is said that several may be jointly indicted 
for severally erecting common inns, ad commune nocumentum, if it is said 
that they separaliter erexerunt, etc. ; and the same as to keeping disorderly 



JOINDER OF DEFENDANTS. 57 

houses, etc.; 2 Hale, 174; but it is much better, and more usual in practice, 
to indict the proprietor of each house separately. 

Misjoinder of defendants may be made the subject o£ demurrer or motion 
in arrest of judgment or appeal ; or the court may quash the indictment (see 
post, p. 98). But where there are different counts against different persona in 
the same indictment, this, though it may be a ground for moving to quash 
the indictment, is no cause for demurrer, B. v. Kingston, 8 East, 41, if the 
counts are such in substance as may be joined. 

By section 40 (8) of the Larceny Act, 1916 (6 & 7 Geo. 6, c. 50), in an indict- 
ment for feloniously receiving any property under the Act, any number of 
persons who have at different times so received such property or any part thereof 
may be charged and tried together. Where several persons are indicted for • 
burglary and larceny, one may be found guilty of burglary and larceny, and 
the others of the larceny only. B. v. Butterworth, E. & E. 520. On an 
indictment against A. and B. for larceny, with another count against B. for 
receiving, A. was acquitted ; B. was found guilty, on evidence which proved 
that he was an accessory before the tact to the larceny, and a receiver, and 
the verdict against him was entered generally ; it was held that he was not 
(since 11 & 12 Vict. c. 46, s. 1, repealed but re-enacted by 24 & 25 Vict. c. 94, 
8. 1) entitled to an acquittal for the larceny. B. v. Hughes, Bell, 242 ; 
29 L. J. (M. C.) 71 . B. V. Godspeed, 85 J. P. 232; 27 T. L. E. 255 ; 6 Or. App. 
E. 183. 

(e) Joinder of several offences in different counts in one indictment. 

We have already seen (ante, p. 63) that if a defendant is charged with two or 
more distinct offences in the same count of an indictment, the count will be bad 
for duplicity. Different considerations apply to charging a, defendant with 
different offences in different counts of the same indictment. Each count in 
an indictment is for the purposes of evidence and judgment a separate indict- 
ment; Latham v. B., 5 B. & S. 635: and see hereon Selvester v. U.S., 
170 U. S. 262, where is pointed out the error in B. v. Hayes (1727, 2 Ed. 
Eaym. 1518), where the contrary was held. 

Indictments Act, 1915, sect. 4. Joinder of charges in the same indictment.^ 
Subject to the provisions of the rules under this Act, charges for more than one 
felony or for more than one misdemeanor, and charges for both felonies and 
misdemeanors, may be joined in the same indictment, but where a felony is 
tried together with any misdemeanor, the jury shall be sworn and the person 
accused shall have the same right of challenging jurors as if all the offences 
charged in the indictment were felonies. 

Eule 3. Joinder of charges in one indictment.'] — Charges for any offences, 
whether felonies or misdemeanors, may be joined in the same indictment if 
those charges are founded on the same facts, or form or are a part of a series 
of offences of the same or a similar character. 

Joinder of different treasons.} — In an indictment for high treason there may 
be different counts, each charging the defendant with a different species of 



58 INDICTMENT. 

treason against the King and his government, such as compassing the King's 
death, levying vrar, adhering to the King's enemies, within 25 Edw. 3, st. 5, 
c. 2, and the conspiracies to imprison or do bodily harm to the King, within 
36 G. 3, c. 7, s. 1. And this power was extended by statute to treason felony, 
11 & 12 Vict. c. 12, s. 5 {repealed by 5 &, 6 Geo. 5, c. 90). See R. v. Mitchel, 
6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 599, 619. 

Joinder of different felonies.'] — Although before the Indictments Act it was 
no objection in point of law to an indictment that it charged the prisoner with 
several distinct felonies in different counts; li. V, Heywood, L. ■& C. 451; 
33-L. J. (M. C.) 138; 9 Cox, 479 : R. v. Holman, 9 Cox, 201 (C. C. R.) : Castro 
V. R., 6 A. C. 229, 244; 50 L. J. (Q. B.) at p. 604: R. v. Lockett [1914] 
2 K. B. 720 ; 83 L. J. (K. B.) 1193 ; 78 J. P. 196 ; 30 T. L. E. 233 ; 9 Cr. App. E. 
268, yet it had been u, general rule of practice not to allow a prisoner to be 
charged with different felonies in different counts of an indictment ; as, for 
instance, a murder in one count and a burglary in another, or a burglary in 
the house of A. in one count, and a distinct burglary in the house of B. in 
another, or a larceny of the goods of A. in one count and a distinct larceny of 
the goods of B., at a different time, in another, because such a course of 
proceeding is calculated to embarrass the prisoner in his defence. The true test 
in each case was whether or not the accused was so embarrassed. R. v. Lockett, 
supra. It was well established by a long series of decisions that the joinder of 
two felonies in one indictment (except where the same facts may constitute 
several felonies, Campbell v. R., 11 Q. B. 799, 812) is so necessarily unfair to 
the prisoner that the judge ought, upon an application being made to him, to 
put the prosecutor to his election and send them to two trials ; Castro v. ij., 
6 A. C. at p. 244; 50 L. J. (Q. B.) at p. 504 : R. v. Elliott, 1 Cr. App. E. 15, 
16. Thus, where an indictment charged the prisoner in three several counts 
with three several felonies in sending three separate threatening letters, 
Byles, J., compelled the prosecutor to elect upon which count he would proceed; 
R.. V. Ward, 10 Cox, 42. But the prosecution should not be put to their 
election where it is plain from the nature and circumstances of the offence 
charged that the accused is not embarrassed in his defence (e.g., where the 
acts relied upon as proving the different offences charged are in substance the 
same). R. v. Lockett, supra. 

Now under the Indictments Act any offences, whether felonies or misde- 
meanors, may be joined in the same indictment provided they are founded on 
the same facts or form or are part of a series of offences of the same or a similar 
character. Eule 3, ante, p. 57. 

.A.nd by s. 5, sub-s. 3 {ante, p. 65), where, before trial, or at any stage of a 
trial, the court is of opinion that the accused may be prejudiced or embarrassed 
in his defence by reason of being charged with more than one offence in the 
same indictment, or that for any other reason it is desirable to direct that he 
should be tried separately for any one or more offences charged in an indictment, 
the court may order a separate trial of any count or counts of such indictment. 

The proper course is to enter up the verdict and judgment separately on 
each count. O'Connell v. R., 5 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1 . Latham Y. R., 5 B. & S. 636. 



JOINDER OF FELONIES AND MISDEMEANORS. 59 

Joitider of counts for felony and misdemeanor.] — The joinder of a count for 
felony, with a count for misdemeanor, would formerly have been held bad on 
demurrer, or, after a general verdict, on motion in arrest of judgment. Young 
V. R., 3 T. E. 98, 108; Starkie Or. PI. (2nd ed.) 43. The reason was that 
the challenges and the incidents of trial are not the same in felony and misde- 
meanor, and therefore felony and misdemeanor could not be tried together. 
Castro V. B., 6 A. C. at p. 244. But now charges for both felonies and 
misdemeanors may be joined in the same indictment if those charges are founded 
on the same facts, or form or are a part of a series of offences of the same or 
a similar character. In such a case the accused is to have the same right of 
challenging jurors as if all the offences charged were felonies, and the court to 
have power to order a separate trial of any count or counts in the indictment 
if such a course seems desirable. Indictments Act, 1915 (5 & 6 Geo. 5, i;. 90), 
SB. 4, 5 ; r. 3, ante, pp. 57, 54. Thus a person may now be charged in one count 
of an indictment with forging a cheque, in a second count with uttering the 
forged cheque, and in a third count with obtaining or attempting to obtain 
money by the false pretence that the cheque was genuine. Counts for larceny 
and for obtaining by false pretences may similarly be joined in the same 
indictment, although such a precaution is now hardly necessary, owing to the 
effect of the Larceny Act, 1916, s. 44 (3), (4). 

Joinder of different misdemeanors.] — It has long been established that indict- 
ments for misdemeanor may contain several coimts for different misdemeanors, 
even, as it seems, though the judgments upon each are different. Young v. B., 
3 T. E. 98, 105, 106 : B. v. Towle, E. & E. 314; 3 Price, 145; 2 Marsh. (C. P.) 
466 : B. V. Johnson, 3 M. & Sel. 539 : B. v. Kingston, 8 East, 41, 46 : and 
see B. V. Benfield, 2 Burr. 980, 984: B. v. Jones, 2 Camp. 131; Pritchard 
Q. S. (2nd ed.) 131 ; Starkie Cr. PI. (2nd ed.) 43. Even where several persons 
were charged in different counts with offences of the same nature, the court 
held that it was no ground for a demurrer, though it might be for an applica- 
tion to the discretion of the court to quash the indictment. B. v. Kingston, 
8 East, 41, 46. And the provisions of the Indictments Act, 1915, as to joinder 
of offences in the same indictment apply equally in the case of misdemeanors. 

5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, ss. 4, 5; r. 3 (ante, pp. 57, 54). Still, if an indictment for 
misdemeanor contains several counts charging distinct misdemeanors against 
the defendant committed on totally different occasions and relating to different 
subject matters, and the presiding judge sees that the accused may be embar- 
rassed in his defence by the number of charges, the probability is that he would 
order a separate trial of one or more of the counts under s. 5, sub-s. 3 of that 
Act (ante, p. 54). See R. v. Castro, 6 Q. B. D. 490, 501, 510 : Castro v. B., 

6 A. G. 229, 246 ; 49 L. J. (Q. B.) 747 ; 50 L. J. (Q. B.) 497 : B. v. Warren, 
71 J. P. 566. Though not illegal, it ie hardly fair to put a man upon his trial 
on an indictment containing forty counts, involving several distinct charges of 
false pretences ; for it would be almost impossible that he should not be 
grievously prejudiced as regards each one of the charges by the evidence which 
ie being given upon the others. In such a case it would not be unreasonable for 
the defendant to make an application that each count or set of counts should 



60 INDICTMENT. 

be taken separately; Hawkins, J., R. v. King [1897] 1 Q. B. 214, 216; 66 L. J. 
(Q. B.) 81. There can, of course, be no objection to any number of cbargee 
which are founded on the same facts or form or are a part of a series of offenoes 
of the same or a similar character. 5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, r. 3 {ante, p. 57). 

Where the presiding judge orders a separate trial of any count or counts 
under sub-s. 3 of a. 5 of the Indictments Act, 1915 (supra), he may, under 
Bub-s. i, make an order for the postponement of the trial. See ante, p. 54. 

Where a prisoner is indicted for an offence, it is not necessary to add 
another count for an attempt to commit it ; because upon an indictment for 
felony or misdemeanor, if upon the trial it appears that the defendant merely 
attempted to commit the offence, but did not complete it, the jury may acquit 
him of the offence charged, and find him guilty of the attempt. 14 & 15 Vict, 
c. 100, s. 9. Upon an indictment for any misdemeanor, if the facts given in 
evidence to prove the misdemeanor amount in law to a felony, the defendant 
shall not on that account be acquitted of the misdemeanor, imless the court think 
fit to discharge the jury, and order the defendant to be indicted for the felony. 
14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 12. See R. v. Garland [1910] 1 K. B. 154; 
26 T. L. E. 130. 

When persons jointly indicted plead not guilty the court has power to order 
them to be separately tried where the interests of justice seem to require that 
course to be taken. See Kel. (J.) 8, 9 {treason) ; R. v. Ahearne, 2 Ir. C. L. Eep. 
381; 6 Cox, 7 {conspiracy) : R. v. Bradlaugh, 15 Cox, 217. Separate trials are 
sometimes ordered where evidence admissible against one of the accused would 
not be admissible against the others, or where the separate trial would enable 
the accused to call for the defence persons jointly indicted with him, or 
the crown to call an accomplice, or where persons jointly indicted for felony 
refuse to join in their challenges. The matter is one within the discretion of 
the judge at the trial. R. v. Gibbons and Proctor, 82 J. P. 287 ; 18 Cr. App. E. 
134. See now Indictments Act, 1915, o. 5 (3), set out ante, p. 54. 

(/) Miscellaneous provisions. 

Indictments Act, 1915, sect. 7. Provisions as to Vexatious Indictments Acts.] 
— Nothing in this Act shall prevent an indictment being open to objection it it 
contravenes or fails to comply with the" Vexatious Indictments Act, 1859, as 
amended by s. 1 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1867, or any other 
enactment : Provided that ain indictment shall not be open to objection under 
those Acts on the ground that a count is joined with the rest of the indictment 
which could not at the time of the passing of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 
1867, be lawfully joined, if that count can be lawfully joined under the law for 
the time being in force. 

Sect. 8. Savings and interpretation.] — (1) Nothing in this Act or the rules 
thereunder shall affect the law or practice relating to the jurisdiction of a court 
or the place where an accused person can be tried, nor prejudice or diminish 
in any respect the obligation to establish by evidence according to law any acts, 
omissions, or intentions which are legally necessary to constitute the offence 
with which the person accused is charged, nor otherwise affect the laws of 
evidence in criminal cases. 



THE CAPTION. 61 

(2) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, the expression " the 
court " means the court before which any indictable offence is tried or prosecuted. 

(3) The provisions of this Act relating to indictments shall apply to criminal 
informations in the High Court and inquisitions, and also to any plea, replica- 
tion, or other criminal pleading, with such modifications as may be made by 
rules under this Act. 

Sect. 9. Extent, etc.] — (2) This Act shall not extend to Scotland or Ireland. 

Eule 12. Saving for s. 32 (4) of 8 Edw. 7, u. 67.] — ^Nothing in these rules or 
in any rules made under section two of this Act shall affect the provisions of 
sub-section (4) of section thirty-two of the Children Act, 1908. 

Eule 14. Interpretation.] — ^The Interpretation Act, 1889, applies for the 
interpretation of these rules as it applies for the interpretation of an Act of 
Parliament. 



Sect. 4. 



THE CAPTION. 



The caption is no part of the indictment. 2 Hale, 165 : O'Gonnell v. R., 

5 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1, 35; Arm. & Trevor (Ir.) 41. It is merely a copy of the 
entry of the style, and commission of the court where the indictment is pre- 
ferred, and of the proceedings leading up to the finding of the bill (R. v. Martin, 

6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 925, 1091; 12 Ir. L. E. 399), which is prefixed as a kind (i 
preamble to the indictment upon the record, when the record is returned in 
obedience to a writ of a certiorari. The following is a form of the caption to 
an indictment in a court of quarter sessions : — 

" Wbstmoebland : Be it remembered that at the general quarter sessions of 
the peace of our sovereign lord the King, holden at Applehy, in and for the 

county aforesaid, the day of , in the year of the reign of our 

sovereign lord George the Fifth, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and 
Ireland, and of the British dominions beytmd the seas. King, Defender of the 
Faith, before A. B. and C. D., Esquires, and other their fellows, justices of 
our said lord the King , assigned to keep the peace of our saidt lord the King in 
the said county, and also to hear and determine divers felonies, trespasses, and 
other misdemeanors, in the said county committed, by the oath of " [the grand 
jurors, naming them] " good and lawful men of the county aforesaid, sworn 
and charged to inquire for our said lord the King, and for the body of the county 
aforesaid, it is presented, in manner and form as appears by the indictment 
hereunto annexed." 

By the Court, 
A.B., Clerk of the Peace. 



62 INDICTMENT, 

(See 2 Hale, 165 : R. v. Fearnley, 1 Leach, 425 ; 1 T. E. 316 ; and the fortns, 
i Went. 41, 105, 132, 150, 174, 222; 6 Went. 1, 357, 373; 2 Hawk. c. 25, 
BS. 118, 126, 127, 128; 2 Salk. 605 : B. v. Warre, 2 Str. 698. The words 
" sworn and charged " are not essential. R. v. Martin, 6 St. Tr. (N. 8.) 
925, 1091, and cases there cited. See also the form of caption suggested in 
Short & Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 606.) 

In B. V. McKeever [1871] Ir. Eep. 5 C. L. 86, a caption describing a session 
as held before " A. B., Esq., deputy chairman " of Quarter Sessions, was held 
sufficient. 

A proper caption should show that the court of trial had jurisdiction, and 
that the indictment was found by a sufficient number of grand jurors. It has 
been usual to insert the names of twelve grand jurors at the least in the caption, 
and Hale says that this is necessary ; for it may be that the presentment was by 
a less number than twelve, in which case it is not good ; 2 Hale, 167 ; but in 
Aylett V. R., 3 Bro. Pari. Cas. 529; 1 Eng. Eep. 1479; 6 A. & E. 247 n., where 
it was objected (upon a writ of error) that the caption did not contain the names 
of any of the jurors, the House of Lords, after consulting the judges, affirmed 
the judgment of the court of King's Bench, that this was not essential; and in 
R. V. Marsh, 6 A. & E. 236, Denman, C. J., agreed that the insertion of the 
names is not necessary. See also R. v. Darley, 4 Bast, 174, 176 n. . R. v. 
Davis, 1 C. & P. 470. The caption ought to state them to be jurors o/ the 
county; Whitehead v. R., 7 Q. B. 582. It should also state them to be good 
and lawful men {probi et legales homines), Id., 2 Hale, 167, and early cases 
collected in Huband, Grand Jury (Ir.), 201, 202. But the court will presume 
them to be so even if the statement is not made. Mansell v. R., 8 St. Tr. 
(N. S.) 831 ; 8 E. & B. 54; 27 L. J. (M. C.) 4 : and see Martin V. R., 6 St. Tr. 
(N. S.) 925 ; 12 Ir. L. R. 399. No objection can be sustained to the caption 
of an indictment for an allegation that the grand jurors were " sworn and 
affirmed," without showing that those who were sworn were persons who ought 
to have been affirmed, or that those who were affirmed were persons who ought 
to have been sworn. Mulcahy v. R., L. E. 3 H. L. 306, 322 ; Ir, Eep. 1 C. L. 
13. As to the mode of rectifying a mistake in the caption, see R. v. Justices of 
Middlesex, 5 B. & Ad. 1113, and R. v. Marsh, supra. 

The caption if erroneously drawn up may be amended. R. v. Darley, supra : 
R. V. Davis, supra: Faulkner's case, 1 Wms. Saunders (6th ed.) 248. 

There is, it would seem, only one original general caption for the whole 
sessions. R. v. Marsh, 6 A. & E. 236, 249, Williams, J., Coleridge, J. 
Objection may be taken to the caption by demurrer; R. v. Fearnley, 1 T. E. 
316 ; and formerly could be taken by writ of error, whether the error were of 
fact or law. R. v. Marsh, supra, at p. 243, Denman, C. J. : R. v. McKeever 
[1871} Ir. Eep. 5 C. L. 86. 



WITHIN WHAT TIME TO BE PREFERRED. 63 



Sect. 5. 

WITHIN WHAT TIME THE BILL MUST BE PBEFERBED. 

At common law, there is no time limited for commencing a suit by the King 
{nullum tempus occurrit regi) ; and therefore, in all cases of treason, felony, and 
misdemeanor, where a time is not limited by statute, a prosecution may be 
commenc6d at any length of time after the offence. In the case of offences 
punishable summarily, the summary proceedings must be instituted within six 
months of the offence, unless it is a continuing offence; London CounUf Council 
V. Worley [1894] 2 Q. B. 826; and see 73 J. P. 562, 574; or unless another 
limitation is given by statute for the particular prosecution. 11 & 12 Vict. 
0. 43, o. 11; see Douglas, Summary Jurisdiction Procedure (9th ed.). In 
criminal cases within the Summary Jurisdiction Acts, the laying of the informa- 
tion is the commencement of the prosecution ; Beardsley v. Giddings [1904] 
1 K. B. 847 ; 20 Cox, 645 : Brooks v. Bagshaw [1904] 68 J. P. 514 : B. v. 
Priestley [1886] 49 J. P. 148; but qucere when, though the information is laid 
before, process is granted after, the expiration of the time limited. The oldest 
authorities seem to treat the arrest as the commencement of the prosecution 
at common law ; 2 Hale, 72 ; but under the different statutes creating limitations 
(stated below) there have been somewhat varying interpretations of what con- 
stituted the commencement of the prosecution. 

The following are the chief statutory limitations on the prosecution of indict- 
able offences : — 

Treason.] — Indictments for such high treasons as caused corruption of blood 
(with the exception of -treason, by "designing, endeavouring, or attempting 
any assassination on the body of the King by poison, or otherwise " (7 & 8 W. 3, 
c. 3, a. 6) ), must be found by the grand jury within three years next after the 
offence committed, if the offence has been committed within England, Wales, 
Berwick-upon-Tweed (7 & 8 W. 3, c. 3, s. 5), or Scotland {see 7 Anne, u. 21, 
Post. 249) ; but if committed on the high seas or in a. foreign country, there is 
no time limited to the prosecution. 

Misdemeanors by British oflicials in India.] — Certain offences by British 
officials in India may be prosecuted in England within three years {see 24 G. 3, 
sess. 2, u. 25, s. 82) ; or six years (33 Gr. 3, u. 52, ». 141) after the offence. See 
Ilbert, Government of India (2nd ed.) 256. In 21 G. 3, c. 70, s. 7, the limita- 
tion is five years after commission of the offence or arrest in England. 

Blasphemy.] — An " information " for blasphemy by words spoken must be 
laid within four days of the speaking, and the prosecution must be within three 
months of the information. 9 W. 3, c. 35 (9 & 10 W. 3, c. 32, Eaflhead), s. 2. 
Cf. 19 G. 2, 0. 21, s. 12, as to profane swearing. 

Riot.] — Prosecutions for offences against the Riot Act (1 G. 1, st. 2, t. 5) 
must be commenced within twelve months after the offence committed (s. 8). 



64 INDICTMENT. 

Strictly speaking, this would mean lunar months. See Bruner v. Moore [1904] 
1 Ch. 305; 73 L. J. (Ch.) 377. 

Unlawful drilling.]— Prosecutions under the Unlawful Drilling Act, 1820 
(60 G. 3 & 1 G. 4, e. 1), must be '" commenced within six calendar months 
after the offence committed " (s. 7). 

Night poaching.] — Prosecutions by indictment under the Night Poaching 
Act, 1828, must be '' commenced . within twelve calendar months after the 
commission of the offence." 9 G. 4, u. 69, s. 4. 

Revenue offences.] — " Indictments or informations brought or exhibited for 
any offence against the Customs Acts, in any court or before any justice, shall 
be brought or exhibited within three years next after the date of the offence 
committed." 39 & 40 Vict. u. 36, S. 257. See B. v. Thompson, 16 Q. B. 832; 
20 L. J. (M. C.) 183; 5 Cox, 166, on the similar provisions of a repealed 
Customs Act. Proceedings for the recovery of any fine or penalty incurred 
under the Income Tax Acts may be commenced within three years next after 
the fine or penalty is incurred. 7 Edw. 7, c. 13, b. 23 (I). 

Penal statutes.] — All indictments or informations upon any penal statute, 
whereby the forfeiture is limited to the King, must be brought within two 
years after the offence committed ; if the forfeiture is limited to the King and 
the prosecutor, the suit must be within one year ; and in default thereof, the 
same must be sued for by the King within two years after that year ended; 
but where a statute limits a shorter time, the suit must be brought within such 
time limited. 31 Eliz. u. 5, b. 5. This Act does not apply to penalties under 
the Income Tax Acts (supra) and is repealed (by 11 & 12 Vict. c. 43, s. 36) as 
to informations instituting summary proceedings. 

Charges against officials.] — Prosecutions for " any act done in pursuance, or 
execution, or intended execution, of any Act of Parliament, or of any public 
duty or authority, or in respect of any alleged neglect or default in the execution 
of any such act, duty, or authority, shall not lie or be instituted unless com- 
menced within six months next after the act, neglect, or default complained 
of, or ' in case of a continuance of injury or damage' " (e.g., in case of a 
public nuisance) " within six months next after the ceasing thereof." 56 & 57 
Vict. c. 61, s. 1 (o). This Act expressly or impliedly repeals the particular 
limitation clauses in prior public general Acts. See s. 2, Schedule. 

Corrupt or illegal practices at elections.] — A proceeding against a person in 
respect of the offence of a corrupt or illegal practice or any other offence at 
parliamentary elections must be commenced within one year after the offence 
was committed, or if it was committed in reference to an election with respect 
to which an inquiry is held by election commissioners must be commenced 
within one year after the offence was committed, or within three months 
after the report of such commissioners is made, whichever period last expires. 



WITHIN WHAT TIME TO BE PREFERRED. 65 

so that it be commenced within two years after the offence was committed. 
The issue of a summons, warrant, writ, or other process, shall be deemed to be 
a commencement of a proceeding, where the service or execution of the same 
on or against the alleged offender is prevented by the absconding or oonoealmeat 
or act of the alleged oSEender; but save as aforesaid the service or execution of 
the same on or against the alleged offender, and not the issue thereof, shall 
be deemed to be the commencemnt of the proceeding. 46 & 47 Vict. c. 51, 
s. 51. The same period of limitation applied to proceedings for similar offences 
at municipal elections, as the above section is incorporated in the Municipal 
Elections {Corrupt and Illegal Practices) Act, 1884 (47 & 48 Vict. u. 70), by 
o. 30 of the later Act ; and it also applies to municipal elections in the city of 
London ; 47 & 48 Vict. c. 70, s. 35 ; and to offences in connection with elections 
for county councils (51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 75), district or parish councils and 
boards of guardians (56 & 57 Vict. c. 73, s. 48), and metropolitan boroughs 
(62 & 63 Vict. u. 14). 

Offences against girls.] — Prosecution for the offences of unlawfully and 
carnally knowing, or attempting to have unlawful carnal knowledge, of any 
girl who is of or above the age of thirteen years and under the age of sixteen 
years, may not be commenced more than six months after the commission of 
the offence. 48 & 49 Vict. o. 69, ». 5, as amended by 4 Edw. 7, c. 15, s. 27; 
see R. V. Chandra Dharma [1905] 2 K. B. 335; 74 L. J. (K. B.) 450. Com- 
mencement of a prosecution for rape within the six months is sufficient though 
in the result the accused is indicted and convicted under 48 & 49 Vict. c. 69, s. 5. 
R. V. West [1898] 1 Q. B. 174; 18 Cox, 675. 

Marriages.] — ^Prosecutions for the felony of unduly solemnising marriage 
must be commenced " within the space of three years after the offence com- 
mitted." 4 G. 4, c. 76, s. 21. A like limitation applies to prosecutions for 
offences under the Marriage Act, 1836 (6 & 7 W. 4, c. 85, s. 41). 

Merchandise Marks.] — No prosecution for an offence against the 
Merchandise Marks Act, 1887, shall be commenced after the expiration of three 
years next after the commission of the offence, or of one year next after the 
first discovery thereof by the prosecutor, whichever expiration first happens. 
50 & 51 Vict. c. 28, s. 15. 

Commencement of prosecution.] — The commencement of the prosecution is 
the preferring of the indictment when it is sent up without a preliminary 
inquiry : or the laying of the information; or, it would seem, the arrest of the 
accused or the application for summons or warrant in respect of the offence. 
See R. V. West [1898] 1 Q. B. 174, 177. The time is calculated by excluding 
the day on which the offence is said to have been committed, and including 
the day on which the prosecution begins. Pellew v. Inhabitants of East Won- 
ford, 9 B. & C. 134 : Williams v. Burgess, 12 A. & E. 635 : RadcUffe v. 
Bartholomew [1892] 1 Q. B. 161 ; 61 L. J. (M. C.) 63. Sundays are included 
in computing the time unless expressly excluded. R. v. Middlesex Justices, 
A.o.P. 5 



66 INDICTMENT. 

3 Dowl. (N. S.) 719, 724; Maxwell on Statutes (5th ed.), p. 562. An amend- 
ment of an information does not necessarily prevent the information as originally 
laid from being the commencement of the prosecution. R. v. Wakeley [1920] 
1 K. B. 688; 89 L. J. (K. B.) 97; 84 J. P. 31; 14 Cr. App. K. 121. In Acts 
passed since 1850 " month " means calendar month. 62 & 53 Vict. c. 68, ». 3. 

The provisions of the Night Poaching Act, 1828 (9 G. 4, c. 69), b. 4, are 
satisfied if information is laid and warrant is issued and executed within the 
year. B. v. Brooks, 1 Den. 217-; C. & K. 402; 2 Cox, 436. So, where the 
warrant of commitment for the offence was within the time limited, but the 
indictment not till afterwards, this was held sufficient. B. v. Austin, 1 C. & E. 
621. But the mere issuing of >•■ warrant to apprehend the defendant has been 
held not to be a commencement of the prosecution, unless it is shown to have 
been executed within the time limited for the commencement of the prosecution. 
R. V. Hull, 2 P. & P. 16 : R. v. Casbolt, 11 C!ox, 385. And proof of the 
existence of a warrant to apprehend the defendants is not evidence of the com- 
mencement of such a prosecution, although the warrant was issued within the 
twelve months prescribed by that section, and although it recites the laying 
of the information. The information itself must be given in evidence. B. v. 
Parker, L. & C. 459 ; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 135. Where a man was indicted in 1869 
for night poaching alleged to have been committed in 1863, and pleaded guilty, 
he was allowed to withdraw that plea and to plead not guilty, and an acquittal 
was directed on failure to produce an information and warrant showing that the 
prosecution had been commenced within twelve calendar months. B. v. 
Casbolt, 11 Cox, 385. In B. v. Killminster, 7 C. & P. 228, an indictment for 
night poaching was preferred against the defendant within twelve months after 
the commission of the offence, and was ignored; four years afterwards another 
bill was found against him for the same offence, and upon an objection that 
the proceeding was out of time, Coleridge, J., doubted whether the first indict- 
ment was not a proceeding sufficient to entitle prosecutor to proceed : he 
reserved the point, but the defendant was acquitted upon the merits. See also 
Adam v. Bristol Inhabitants, 2 A. & E. 389 ; 4 N. & M. 144 ; 4 L. J. (K. B.) 36. 

As to " commencement of proceedings " within the Criminal Law Amend- 
ment Act, 1912 (2 & 3 Geo. 5, c. 20), see B. v. O'Connor [1913] 1 K. B. 567; 
82 L. J. (K. B.) 335 ; 23 Cox, 334. 



. FINDING THE INDICTMENT. 67 

Sect. 6. 
FINDING THE INDICTMENT. 

Vexatious Indictments. 

At common law any person was at liberty to prefer a bill of indictment 
before a grand jury against another for any indictable offence, without any 
previous inquiry before a justice into the truth of the accusation. Such indict- 
ments are usually referred to as voluntary bills. This right is not taken away 
by the Indictable Ojfences Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. u. 42), which provides for 
the procedure in the case of a preliminary inquiry by justices as to indictable 
offences. By the Assizes and Sessions Act, 1908 (8 Edw. 7, c. 41), s. 1 (5), 
■■ any person having by law the right to present a bill of indictment to a grand 
jury in a case where no person has been ' committed for trial,' and proposing to 
do so at any assizes or quarter sessions, shall give notice of his intention to do 
so to the proper officer more than five days before the commission day or day 
appointed for holding ^the court of quarter sessions as the case may be." 

The right to prefer voluntary bills is liable to abuse, because as the grand 
jury only hear the evidence for the prosecution, and the accused is unrepresented 
before them, a person innocent of the charge made against him, and who has 
had no notice that any proceedings were about to be instituted, might find 
that a grand jury had been induced to find a true bill against him, and so to 
injure his character and put him to great expense and inconvenience in defending 
himself against a groundless accusation. Accordingly the right has by legis- 
lation been taken away in the case of many crimes. The Vexatious Indictments 
Act, 1859 (22 & 23 Vict. u. 17), provides (s. 1) that "no bill of indictment 
for any of the offences following " {see list infra) " shall be presented to or 
found by any grand jury, unless the prosecutor or other person presenting 
such indictment has been bound by recognizance to prosecute or give evidence 
against the person accused of such offence, or unless the person accused has 
been committed to or detained in custody, or has been bound by recognizance 
to appear to answer to an indictment to be preferred against him for such 
offence, or unless such indictment for such offence, if charged to have been 
committed in England, be preferred by the direction or with the consent in 
writing of a judge of one of the superior courts of law at Westminster (i.e., now 
of the High Court of Justice) or of his majesty's attorney-general or solicitor- 
general for England, or unless such indictment for such offence, if charged 
to have been committed in Ireland, be preferred by the direction or with the 
consent in writing of a judge of one of the superior courts of law in Dublin 
(i.e., now of the Supreme Court of Ireland), or of his majesty's attorney-general 
or solicitor-general for Ireland or (in the case of an indictment for perjury) 
by the direction of any court, judge or public functionary, authorized by the 
Criminal Procedure Act, 1851 (14 & 15 Vict. c. 100 — repealed and re-enacted by 



&8 INDICTMENT, 

the Perjury Act, 1911 (1 & 2 Geo. 5, c. 6) ), to direct a prosecution for perjury." 
The offences within the Act of 1859 are : 

(0) Perjury and subornation of perjury (repealed and re-enacted by 1 & 2 
Geo. 5, c. 6) ; ' 

(b) Conspiracy ; 

(c) Obtaining money or other property by false pretences (but not , the mere 
attempt to obtain : R. v. Burton, 13 Cox, 71 C. C. E.) ; 

(d) Keeping a gambling house or a disorderly house ; 

(e) Any indecent assault. 
To these have been added : 

(/) All misdemeanors under Part 2 of the Debtors Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Viet. 
c. 62, s. 18), and the Bankruptcy Act, 1914 (4 & 5 Geo. 5, i;. 59, o. 164); 

(g) All libels or alleged libels, apparently including blasphemous, defamatory, 
seditious and obscene libel (44 & 45 Vict. u. 60, s. 6) ; 

{h) All misdemeanors under the Criminal. Law Amendment Act, 1885 (48, & 
49 Vict. u. 69, s. 17) ; 

(t) All offences punishable on indictment under the Merchandise Marks. Act, 
1887 (50 & 51 Vict. c. 28, s. 13) ; 

(j) Offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1906 (6 Edw. 7, c. 34v. 
». 2, (2) ) ; 

(&) Offences under the Punishment of Incest Act, 1908 (8 Edw. 7, u. 45, 
a. 4 (1) ) ; and 

(1) Misdemeanors under Part 2 of the Children Act, 1908 (8 Edw. 7, o. 67,, 
8. 35). 

In the case of offences under heads (j) and (fe) the sanction of the attorney- 
general is also required, unless in cases under (&) the prosecution is commenced 
by the director of public prosecutions (6 Edw. 7, u. 34, s. 2 (1); 8 Edw. 7, 
c. 45, s. 6). (a). 

A committal for trial by justices sitting in and acting for one petty sessional 
division of a county on a, charge arising in another petty sessional division of 
the same county is a good committal under 22 & 23 Vict i;. 17„ ». 1. B. v. 
Beckley, 20 Q. B. D. 187 ; 57 L. J. (M. C.) 22. By s. 2 of the Act of 1859,. 
" where any charge or complaiiit shall be made before any one or more of. 
his majesty's justices of the peace that any person has committed any of the 
off.ences aforesaid within the jurisdiction of such justice, and such justice shall 
refuse to commit or to bail the person charged with sucfi offence to be triedi 
for the same, then in case the prosecutor shall desire to prefer an indictment 
respecting the said offence, it shall be lawful for the said justice, and he is 
hereby required, to take the recognizance of such prosecutor to prosecute the 
said charge or complaint, and to transmit: such recognizance, information and 
depositions:, if any, to the court in which euch indictment ought to be preferred,, 
in the same manner as such justice would have done in case he had committed 

(o) S.ee 6 Edw. 7, u. 34, s. 2 (1) : 8 Edw. 7, c. 45, s. 6. The first of these enact- 
ments requires the sanction of the attorney-general. The second requires such sanction 
or action by the director of public prosecutions. Both nevertheless apply the Vexatiom 
Indictments Act: The eifect seems to be to make u preliminary inquiry essential, even 
iv the case of a public prosecution. 



VEXATIOUS INDICTMENTS. 69 

the person charged to be tried for suoli ofEence." "Where a prosecutor boYiA 
jide prefers before a justice a charge in respect of an offence in ihe above list, 
alleged to have been committed within his jurisdiction, and the justice dismisses 
the charge for vrant of evidence, — even where there is no evidence in support 
of the charge, — the dismissal is equivalent to a refusal to commit, and the 
prosecutor is entitled under s. 2 to require the justice to take his recognizance 
to prosecute the charge. R. v. Lm-d Mayor of London, ex parte GostUng, 
16 Cox, 77; 64 L. T. 646; 50 J. P. 711. And where a magistrate committed 
the accused for trial for certain offences, and no further evidence was called in 
respect of other charges, and the magistrate was not asked to commit on other 
charges, and expressed no opinion on them, but counts were subsequently 
added to the indictment in respect of such other charges, it was held that 
these facts amounted to refusal to commit, an3 the counts thus added were 
quashed. R. v. Coyne, 69 J. P. 151, Pulton, Eecorder. Where a magistrate 
has refused to grant process he cannot be compelled to do so, nor to take 
recognizances under the Act, unless an indictable offence is disclosed by the 
information : Ex -parte Wason, L. R. 4 Q. B. 573 : and see R. v. Battier or 
Bather, 42 L. T. 532; 44 J. P. 490 : Ex paHe Reid, 49 J. P. 600. Where a 
justice refuses to grant process for an offence within the Vexatious Indictments 
Acts, the prosecutor may (1) obtain the sanction of the attorney-general to 
prefer a bill ; (2) obtain (on an ex parte application) the consent of a judge of 
the High Court (K. B. D.) to prefer a bill. R. v. Bray, 3 B. & S. 255 ; 32 L. J. 
(M. C.) 11; or (3) apply for an order to the justice to hear and determine the 
application according to law. R. v. Adamson, 1 Q. B. D. 201; 45 L. J. (M. C.) 
46 : R. V. Bennett, 72 J". P. 362 : R. v. Bros, 66 J. P. 54. 

In considering the sufficiency of a recognizance to prosecute under s. 1 of 
the Vexatious Indictments Act, reference may be made to the accompanying 
depositions to ascertain the particulars of the offences charged. R. v. Bell, 
12 Cox, 87. 

If a prosecutor is bound over under s. 2 after a refusal to commit for trial, 
but fails to send up a bill to the grand jury at the sessions for which he is 
bound before that body is discharged, the court cannot enlarge his recognizances 
to the next sessions. R. v. Eayres, 64 J. P. 217. The fiat of the attorney- 
general may be issued even in cases where the magistrates have already refused 
to commit for trial. R. v. Rogers, 66 J. P. 825, Fulton, Eecorder. Where 
the prosecution is instituted on the fiat of the attorney-general, it has been held 
to be sufficient to lodge the fiat with the clerk of the court of trial, and unneces- 
sary to produce or prove it at the trial. R. v. Dexter, 19 Cox, 360; see also R. 
T. Metz, 84 L. J. (K. B.) 1462; 79 J. P. 384; 31 T. L. E. 401; 11 Cr. 
App. E. 164. 

It is not necessary that the performance of any of the conditions mentioned 
in the Vexatious Indictments Act, .1859, should be averred in the indictment 
or proved before the petty jury. Knowlden v. fl., 5 B. & S. 532; 33 L. J. 
(M. C.) 219; 9 Cox, 483. If » defendant committed for obtaining a chattel 
by false pretences is indicted in one count for that offence, and in another 
count for obtaining another ' chattel by false pretences , without any authority 
having been obtained under the statute to prefer such second charge [excepting 



70 INDICTMENT. 

where- the second charge is founded upon facts disclosed in the depositions, 
30 & 31 Vict. c. 35, «. 1, infra], the proper course is for the judge at 
the trial to direct the second count to be quashed, and not to put the prisoner 
to plead to it. If, however, the two counts are allowed to go to the jury, and 
evidence is given respecting each charge, and the jury convict on each count, 
the conviction cannot be supported on either — not on the second, because it 
ought to have been quashed; nor on the first, because improper evidence has 
been received. R. v. Fuidge, L. & C. 390; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 74; 9 Cox, 430. 
When the indictment is preferred by the direction or with the consent in 
•writing of a judge of one of the superior courts, it is for the judge, to whom 
the application is made for such direction or consent, to decide what materials 
ought to be before him, and it is not necessary to summon the party accused, 
or to bring him before the judge. R. v. Bray, 3 B. & S. 255 ; 32 L. J. (M. C.) 
11. Where three persons were committed for conspiracy, and afterwards the 
solicitor-general, acting under this statute, directed a bill to be preferred against 
a fourth person who had not been committed, and all four were indicted 
■together for the same conspiracy, such a course was held to be unobjectionable. 
Knowlden v. R., supra. 

The Act of 1859 was found to be attended by the inconvenience that it was 
frequently objected on the trial of a prisoner charged with an offence falling 
under its provisions, that when before the magistrates he had not been charged 
with, nor committed by them for, the precise offence stated in the indictment, 
although it was abundantly evident from the depositions that the charge made 
in the indictment was substantially, although perhaps not in form, gone into 
before the magistrates. This inconvenience was remedied by the Criminal Law 
Amendment Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 35), which, after reciting that it is 
found that delay and inconvenience are frequently caused by the provisions con- 
tained in s. 1 of 212 d 23 Vict. c. 17, in cases not within the mischief for remedy 
whereof that Act was made and passed, and that it is expedient to restrict the 
operation thereof, enacts (s. 1) that, " the said provisions of the said first section 
of the said Act shall not extend or be applicable to prevent the presentment to 
or finding by a grand jury of any bill of indictment containing a count or counts 
for any of the offences mentioned in the said Act, if such count or counts be 
such as may [now'] be lawfully joined with the rest of such bill of indictment, 
and if the same count or counts be founded (in the opinion of the court in or 
before which the same bill of indictment be preferred) upon the facts or evidence 
disclosed in any examinations or depositions taken before a justice of the peace, 
in the presence of the person accused or proposed to be accused by such bill of 
indictment, and transmitted or delivered to such court in due course of law ; and 
nothing in the said Act shall extend or be applicable to prevent the presentment 
to or finding by a grand jury of any bill of indictment, if such bill be presented 
to the grand jury with the consent of the court in or before which the same may 
be preferred." See hereon, R. v. Brown [1895] 1 Q. B. 119; 64 L. J. 
(M. C.) 1; 18 Cox, 81. This section is to be read with 22 & 23 Vict. c. 17, 
for the purposes of 32 & 33 Vict. c. 62 {Debtors Act, 1869), s. 18. R. v. Bell, 
12 Cox, 37, Montague Smith, J. Where A. had been committed for trial for 
conspiracy with B. who had not been arrested, it was held that the court of 



FINDING BILLS OF INDICTMENT. 71 

trial could, under 30 & 31 Vict. c. 35, s. 1, give leave to prefer an indictment 
against B. for conspiracy. R. v. Kopelewitch, 69 J. P. 216, Fulton, Eecorder. 
The ■■ consent of the court," mentioned in the last part of s. 1, is not a mere 
formality, and if the court grants such consent without having before it materials 
on which it may exercise a discretion, the indictment, or any counts contained 
in it, preferred in pursuance of such consent may be quashed. R. v. Bradlaugh, 
15 Cox, 156. But it is not necessary to obtain the consent of the court to 
the addition of counts for offences within the Vexatious Indictments Act 
before the bill is presented to the grand jury, if the facts on which the counts - 
are founded appear upon the depositions. R. v. Clarke, 59 J. P. 248, Collins, J. 
Semble, it is necessary so to obtain such consent where it is desired to prefer 
a fresh bill of indictment, whether it charges offences disclosed upon the 
depositions or not, as is the practice at the Central Criminal Court. Charges 
preferred before the justices on which they have refused to commit cannot be 
joined in an indictment with those on which the justices did commit, unless 
the prosecutor has been bound over as to the dismissed charges. R. v. Crabbe, 
59 J. P. 247, Pulton, C. S. : B. v. Coyne, 69 J. P. 151, ante, p. 69. 

The words " legal proceedings " in section 1 of the Vexatious Actions Aci. 
1896 (59 & 60 Vict. u. 51), which enables the High Court under certain circum- 
stances to order that no legal proceedings shall be instituted without the leave 
of the High Court by a person who has habitually and persistently instituted 
vexatious legal proceedings, do not include criminal proceedings. In re Boaler, 
30 T. L. E. 580 (C. A.). 

The law relating to vexatious indictments is not affected by the Indictments 
Act, 1915, which provides that " nothing in this Act shall prevent an indict- 
ment being open to objection if it contravenes or fails to comply with the 
Vexatious Indictments Act, 1859 {ante, p. 67), as amended by s. 1 of the 
Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1867 (ante, p. 70), or any other enactment : pro- 
vided that an indictment shall not be open to objection under those Acts on 
the ground that a count is joined with the rest of the indictment which could 
not at the time of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1867, be lawfully joined, 
if tliat count can be lawfully joined under the law for the time being in force." 
6 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, s. 7 (ante, p. 60). 



(b) Finding Bills of Indictment. 

The grand jurors have duties and powers with reference to four classes of 
indictments : — 

1. Presentments made by them of their own knowledge and information 
without the intervention of any prosecutor or the examination of any witnesses. 
Their powers as to presentment in the case of highway indictments are limited 
by 5 & 6 W. 4, c. 50, s. 99; and 51 & 62 Vict. c. 41, s. 78 (3). 

2. Voluntary bills sent before them without any preliminary inquiry before 
justices (ante, p. 67). 



72 INDICTMENT. 

3. Bills sent before them after a preliminary inquiry followed by a committal 
for trial under the Indictable Ojfences Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. c. 42). 

4. Bills sent before them after a preliminary inquiry not folbwed by 
committal for trial but falling within the provisions of the Vexatious Indict- 
ments Acts, 1859, as amended and extended by subsequent legislation {ante, 
p. 69 et seq.). 

Summoning the grand jury.] — The grand jurors are summoned by the sheriff, 
or if he is disqualified for any cause, by the coroner. See B. v. McGuire [1898] 
34 New Brunswick, 430, and as to objections to the grand jurors, infra. 

A grand jury is not summoned for the purpose of indictments in the High 
Court of Justice (King's Bench Division) unless the master of the Crown OfSce 
has before the fourth day of the sittings (term) received notice of some business 
intended to be brought before them, 85 & 36 Vict. c. 52. See Short and 
Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd. ed.) 85. 

By the Assizes and Quarter Sessions Act, 1908 (8 Edw. 7, c. 41), s. 1, 
provision is made for dispensing with the attendance of grand jurors if not 
more than five days before the commission day, in the case of assizes, and 
before the day appointed for holding the court in the case of quarter sessions, 
it appears to the proper officer (or the clerk of assize or clerk of the peace) 
that the attendance of the grand jurors will not be required by reason of there 
being no business to be transacted for which they will be required. 

Qualification.] — Grand jurors must be probi et legates homines, and ought 
to be of the same county where the crime was committed. At common law 
a grand juror must not be an alien or an outlaw; he must be returned by the 
proper officer, and not at the instance of the prosecutor. Bacon, Abr. III., 
Juries A., 725. 

The grand jurors of county sessions of the peace must be qualified under s. 1 
of the Juries Act, 1825 (6 Q-. 4, c. 50). In quarter-session boroughs every 
burgess may be a grand juror unless exempt or disqualified (45 & 46 Vict, 
c. 60, s. 186, sub-s. 1). Grand jurors at assizes need not be freeholders, 
Anon., E. & E. 177. British peers are not liable, but an Irish peer, who' is a 
member of the House of Commons , is liable to serve upon the grand jury at 
the assizes. Lord Headley's case [1806] E. & E. 117. "No man who has 
been or shall be attainted of any treason or felony, or convicted of any crime 
that is infamous, unless he shall have obtained a free pardon, nor any man 
who is under outlawry, is or shall be qualified to serve on juries or inquests 
in any court or on any occasion whatsoever." 33 & 34 Vict. c. 77, s. 10. Since 
the abolition of attainder (33 & 34 Vict. c. 23, s! 1) and the repeal of statutes 
referring to infamous crimes, it is difficult to say whom this section disqualifies. 
But see 6 & 7 Geo. 5, c. 30, s. 29 (3). 

Objections to grand jurors.] — In Ireland it has been held that the proper 
mode of objecting to a grand juror is by plea in abatement and not by challenge. 
R. V. Sheridan, 31 St. Tr. 543. In England it is not clear that the objection 
would not be taken by way of challenge : 2 Hale, 155 ; 2 Hawk. c. 25, s. 16 : 



SWEARING THE GRAND JURY. 73 

R. V. Lewis, 7 St. Tr. 250 : R. v. Sheares, 27 St. Ti. 255, 267; 8 Eep. Crim. 
Law Commrs., 1841, c. 2, art. 15. It may also be taken in arrest of judgment : 
B. V. Jackson, 25 St. Tr. 885. (o) 

Swearing tb$ grand jury.] — The grand jurors must be sworn or affirmed before 
tihey,can find a bill of indictment laid before them. The form of oath adminis- 
tered to the foreman, as modified by the Oaths Act, 1909 (9 Bdw. 7, c. 39) is 
as follows : — 

" /, as joreman of the grand inquest for our Sovereign lord, the King, for 

the hody of this county of , swear by Almighty God that I will diligently 

enquire and true presentment make of all such matters and things as shall be 
given me in charge, or shall otherwise come to my knowledge touching this 
present service. The King's counsel, my fellows' and my own I will observe 
and keep secret: I will present no one through envy, hatred, or malice: nor 
will I leave any one unpresented through fear, favour or affection, gain, reward, 
or the hope thereof : hut I will present all things truly and indifferently as they 
shall come to my knowledge, according to the best of my skill and under- 
standing." [iSo Help me God.l {See 2 Hale, 161.) The grand jurors if they 
wish may be sworn in the old form, q.v. Archb. Cr. PI. (23rd ed.) 98. 

The other jurors take a similar oath. When all the grand jurors are 
sworn they are charged by the presiding judge as to the bills of indictment to 
be sent before them and advised as to whether the evidence (as disclosed by 
the depositions taken before the committing magistrates) is such as to constitute 
a primd facie case against the accused . but they are entitled to exercise their 
own discretion on each bill when it comes before them. After being charged 
they retire to the grand jury chamber to receive and consider the bills. 

Swearing the witnesses.] — It has always been usual in Bngfend to swear 
the witnesses to be called before the grand jury : R. v. Dickinson, K. & E. 
401. In Ireland they were neither sworn nor examined until 1816 (56 G. 3, 
u. 87). 

At common law it was necessary that some officer of the court (which term 
includes the crier), after the indictment was engrossed (R. v. Tew, Dears. 429; 
24 Xi. J. (M. C.) 62), should administer the oath to the witnesses in open court, 
and then the indictment was laid before the grand jury by the proper officer. 
Tl)e Grand Juries Act, 1856 (19 & 20 Vict. c. 54), dispensed with the swearing 
of the witnesses in open court (s. 2). Under that Act the "foreman " of the 
grand jury, or any other member of the grand jury who may for the time being 
act on behalf of the foreman in the examination of witnesses in support of any 
bill or indictment (s. 3), is authorised and required to administer an oath 
(or an affirmation, where by law it is required or allowed to be taken in lieu 
of an oath (s. 3)) to all persons who appear before the grand jury to give 

(a) For full discussion of the law as to objecting to grand jurors see R. V. Hayes 
[1903] 9 Canada Cr. Cas. 101, and notes p. 121 : R. v. Belanger, 6 Canada Cr. Cas. 295 : 
and see R. v. Duffy, i Cox, 172: R. v. Mitchell, 3 Cox, 93: and as to the U. S. case* 
on the subject, V. S. v. Gale, 109 U. 3. 65. 



I 



74 INDICTMENT. 

evidence in support of any bill of indictment, and all such persons, attending 
before any grand jury to give evidence, may be sworn and examined upon 
oath by the grand jury touching the inatters in question. The Indictments Act, 
1915 (5 & 6 Geo. 5, u. 90), rule 1 (5), superseding similar provisions in the Grand 
Juries Act (supra), provides that there shall be endorsed on the back of an 
indictment the name of every witness examined or intended to be examined 
by the grand jury, and the foreman of the grand jury shall write his initials 
against the name of each witness so examined. The Grand Juries Act (supra) 
does not affect the fees by law payable to any of&cer of any court for swearing 
witnesses. Similar provisions are made as to Ireland by 1 & 2 Vict. c. 37, 
which repealed 56 G-. 3, c. 87. 

Proceedings before the grajid jury.] — Administration of Justice Act, 1920 
(10 & 11 Geo. 5, c. 81), s. 4 (1) : Where any person charged before any justice 
or justices with an offence pleads guilty or admits the truth of the charge before 
the justice or justices and is committed for trial, the clerk to the justice or justices 
shall, before the day fixed for the holding of the assizes or quarter sessions at 
which the person so committed is to be tried, transmit to the clerk of the assize 
or clerk of the peace, as the case may be, a certificate stating that the person so 
ccmrflitted so pleaded guilty or admitted the truth of the charge, and the grand 
jury, on the production to them of the certificate, shall forthwith, without hearing 
or examining any witnesses, return a true bill as respects that charge. (2) This 
section shall come into operation on the date on which the Grand Juries (Sus- 
pension) Act, 1917, expires, or, if His Majesty in Council so directs, on such 
earlier date as may be specified in the Order, and, if any Order is so made, the 
Grand Juries (Suspension) Act, 1917, shall cease to have effect on the date so 
specified. By order in Council December 23rd, 1921 (St. E. & 0. 1921, No. 1879 
L. 27, this section came into operation on the 23rd December, 1921. Indictments 
for offences within the Vexatious Indictments Act, 1859 (22 & 23 Vict. c. 17), or 
requiring the sanction of the attorney- general or the director of public prosecu- 
tions, must not be sent before the grand jury unless the conditions prescribed 
by the statutes (ante, pp. 67, 70) have been satisfied; and, if presented or found 
in contravention of the statutes, may be quashed. See post, p. 98. 

After the indictment has been taken to the grand jury room, it comes under 
the consideration of the grand jury in its turn. The witnesses for the prose- 
cution are then called in, in the order in which their names are indorsed M 
the indictment, and are sworn and examined by the grand jury. Eefusal )o 
be sworn is punishable as contempt of court. R. v. Lord Preston, 12 St. Tr. 
645. As a general rule the solicitor for the prosecution is not admitted to the 
grand jury chamber ; but at the Central Criminal Court the solicitor is adinitted 
in difficult and very complicated cases by written order of the clerk of the 
court. (Eules, Dec. 12, 1892, r. 6). If there appears to a majority of the 
' grand jury (consisting of twelve at least) " probable evidence " of the offence 
charged (2 Hale, 157), the clerk of the grand jury will indorse on the indict- 
ment, "True bill;" but if the majority are of opinion that the offence has 
not been sufficiently proved, the words " No true bill " are in that case indorsed 



PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE GRAND JURY. 75 

on the indictment. Afterwards, the foreman, accompanied by other grand 
jurors, carries the indictments so endorsed into court, and delivers them to 
the clerk of the court, who thereupon states to the court the substance of each, 
and the indorsement upon it, and the grand jurors who bring in the bills 
express their assent to his statement. In strict legal parlance, an indictment 
is not so called, until it has been found a " true bill " by the grand jury; 
before that it is named a " bill of indictment " merely. 

The grand jury may present an indictment on their own knowledge, nor 
can any inquiry be made as to whether witnesses were properly sworn before 
them (see form of oath, ante, p. 73, E. v. Russell, G. & Mar. 247 ^ B. Y. 
Bullard, 12 Cox, 353) : but they may if they think fit require the same evidence, 
written and parol, as may be necessary to support the indictment at the trial. 
They are not, however, usually very strict as to the documentary evidence; 
they often admit copies where the originals alone are evidence ; and some- 
times even evidence by parol of a matter which should be proved by written 
evidence. But as they may insist on the same strictness of proof as must oe 
observed at the trial it is prudent in all cases to be provided, at the time the 
bill is preferred, with the same evidence with which it is intended afterwards 
to support the indictment. In R. v. Clements, 2 Den. 251 ; 20 L. J. (M. C.) 
193, the deposition of the prosecutrix, which had been allowed by the judge to 
be read in evidence before the grand jury after a statement by counsel for the 
prosecution that she was so ill as to be unable to travel, that the deposition 
had been taken by the magistrate in the presence of the prisoners, who had 
an opportunity for cross-examination, and was signed by the prosecutrix and 
the magistrate, and that witnesses to prove all the above facts were in 
attendance, was held to have been rightly so read; but the point as to whether 
evidence on oath should have been first given does not seem to have been 
raised. In R. v. Philip, 1 P. & P. 105, Erie, J., the evidence of a medical 
man was held necessary as a condition precedent to the deposition being read 
before the grand jury (c/. B. v. Wilson, 12 Cox, 622, Lush, J.). In R. v. 
Beaver, 10 Cox, 274, Byles, J., held that the deposition could not be laid 
before the grand jury unless the presiding judge had, by evidence taken in 
the presence of the accused, satisfied himself of the existence of the facts 
required by 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, o. 17, to make the deposition admissible. 
But this decision is adversely criticised in a note (p. 275), and in a subsequent 
case, R. v. Bullard, 12 Cox, 353, the same judge, on the foreman of the grand 
jury coming into court and asking for the deposition of an absent witness, 
without whose evidence they had no materials for finding the bill, granted 
the application, without any proof that the deposition was admissible as 
evidence under 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 17, observing that the grand jury were 
not bound by any rules of evidence, that they were a secret tribunal, and 
might lay by the heels in gaol the most powerful man in the country by 
finding a bill against him, and for that purpose might even read a paragraph 
from a newspaper. So in R. v. Gerrans, 13 Cox, 158, where it was stated 
by counsel for the prosecution that a witness was unable to attend the trial 
through illness, Denman, J., permitted his deposition to be presented to the 
grand jury without any preliminary proof that the witness was ill, or that 



76 indictment: 

his deposition had been regularly taken, and directed thait the grand jury 
should be told that the oonrt permitted them to look at the deposition, and to 
act upon it if they thought proper. And in R. v. Lynch (K. B. D. 19, Dec., 
1902), Alverstone, C.J., allowed the deposition of a witness absent througli 
illness to be read before the grand jury without requiring to hear evidence js 
to his condition, stating that such evidence was unnecessary. 

Where a witness refuses to give evidence before the grand jury, they cannot 
use his deposition as evidence to enable them to find the bill. B. v. Bendle, 
11 Cox, 209, Channell, B. 

An improper mode of swearing the witnesses before the grand jury will not 
Vitiate the indictment. B. v. Bussell, C. & Mar. 247. See O'Connell v. B., 
5 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1 ; 11 CI. & P. 155 ; 8 Eng. Eep. 155. A witness who gives 
false evidence before a grand jury is indictable for perjury (1 & 2 Geo. S, u. 6, 
a. 1), and the other witnesses examined on the same bill are good witnesses to 
prove it. B. v. Hughes, 1 C. & K. 519; but a grand juror is not an admissible 
witness in such a case : Id. ; and see R. V. Marsh, 6 A. & B. 236, 237. 

If witnesses will not come forward voluntarily to give evidence before ihe 
grand jury, the course is to sue out a subpcena or subpoena duces tecum, either 
at "the crown office in London (see Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 405) or 
with the clerk of assize for the assizes, or with the clerk of the peace for the 
sessions, and serve each of them with a copy, or subpoena ticket, as it is termed. 
If the witness is in prison, he may, if in civil custody, be brought up by 
hab. Corp. ad testificandum; or if in criminal custody, he may be brought 
up by an order from a judge, under 16 & 17 Vict. c. 30, s. 9 : and whether 
in civil or criminal custody, under an order of a secretary of state, under s. 11 
of the Prison Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 41). 

The grand jury have nothing to do with the defence (2 Hale, 157) and are 
not entitled to hear the evidence of the defendant's witnesses, nor of the 
defendant himself, under the Criminal Evidence Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 36). 
B. V. Rhodes [1899] 1 Q. B. 77 ; 68 L. J. (Q. B.) 83. Nor, it would seem, is 
it necessary to have him incourt when the grand jurors are sworn. See B. v. 
Mathurin [1908] 12 Quebec L. B. (K. B.) 494. Nor is it their business to 
inquire into the sanity of the accused, which is for ■■<■ petty jury to determine ; 
nor have they any authority to ignore a bill on the ground of insanity. R. v. 
Hodges, 8 C. & P. 195. 

Finding the blU.]^^The bill must be found by a majority of the jurors, and 
that majority must consist of twelve at least; 2 Hale, 161 . R. Y. Clyncard, Cro. 
Eliz. 654 ; for which reason it is that the number of persons on the grand jury by 
inveterate practice never exceeds twenty-three , nor is less than twelve ; 2 Burr. 
1088 n. : B. v. Marsh, 6 A. & E. 236, 241, Denman, C.J. ; 6 L. J. (M. C.) 163. 

The finding must be indorsed on the indictment, and is " parcel' cf the 
indictment and the perfection of it," and " touches it principally, for it ia 
the life of it.'' B. v. Ford, Yelv. 99. And the bill as found must be delivered 
in open court; B. v. Thompson, 1 Cox, 268; and it should be signed by the 
foreman ; but absence of the signature is not fatal if the bill was delivered 
by the foreman in open court and read in his presence. R. v. Sidoli, 1 Lew. 65. 



FINDING THE BILL. 77 

It is said that the. grand jury cannot find billa vera as to part, and ignoramus 
as to the other part of an indictment ; for they ought to find the whole . or 
nothing. 2 Hawk. c. 23, s. 2 ; E. v. Ford, Yelv. 99 : B. Y. Serjant, 1 Sid. 414. 
Thus, where upon an indictment for libel, they found " quoad the words billa 
vera," " sed utrum malitiose ignoramus," the finding was held void. 1 Leon, 
287. But this has reference only to the same count in the indictment : for it 
is clear that they may find billa vera as to one count, and ignoramus to another. 
B. V. Fieldhouse, 1 Cowp. 32S. They cannot, however, find the bill condi- 
tionally; as, for instance, "si messuagium sit in possessione domini regis, 
tunc billa vera." B. v. Lord Cromwell, Yelv. 15. Upon an indictment for 
murder against A. and B., the grand jury found billa vera as to A., and as to 
B., manslaughter only. The court, after holding that such a finding was 
possible, decided that the best course was to proceed on the indictment so far 
as it found murder, and to have a new indictment on the manslaughter charge. 
fi. y. Garew, 3 Bulstr. 206; 1 EoUe Eep. 407. In R. v. Bubb, 4 Cox, 455, 
457, a similar finding was on the authority of the case above cited, and 
1 Chit. Or. L. 322,. treated as good for the murder and nugatory as to the 
manslaughter. And they may find billa vera as to A., and ignoramus as to 
B. ; B. V. Cholmley, Cro. Car. 464; or they may find bills against one or both 
of them for manslaughter, although, in such a case, it is more usual for the 
grand jury to return the indictment to the court, with a desire that it may 
be altered to a bill for manslaughter, and, when so altered (which may readily 
be done), to find a true bill generally. Upon an indictment for murder, 
however, the jury even under the old law could not find billa vera se defendendo. 
B. V. Powle, 2 EoUe Rep. 52. Nor can they do eo now, as such a finding 
would be practically a finding of no offence. See 24 & 25 "Vict. c. 100, s. 7. 

Since 5 & 6 Vict. c. 38 {post, p. 107j the grand jurors at quarter sessions can 
find bills which the sessions have no jurisdiction to try. R. y. Allum, 2 Cox, 
62, Parke, B. : B. v. Atkinson, 1 Wms. Saund. (6th ed.) 249, note 1. Prior 
to that Act the contrary was held. B. v. Bigby [1839] 8 C. & P. 770 : B. v. 
Sainton, 2 Str. 1088. Where such a bill is found the proper course is to 
transmit it to the assizes for trial, or for the judge of assize to remove it to 
the assizes by certiorari under 5 & 6 Vict. t. 38, o. 2 (post, p. 110). See B. v. 
Wildman, 12 Cox, 354, Keating, J. For form of order to transmit, see Archb. 
Q. S. (6th ed.) 550; Pritchard, Q. S. (2nd ed.). Indictments found at the 
sessions, and transmitted by the justices to the assizes, must be tried at the 
assizes, although not removed by certiorari. B. v. Wetherell, E. & E. 381. 
The power of the justices at quarter sessions to remit indictments found there 
for trial at the assizes is not affected by the Assizes Belief Act, 1889 (52 & 
53 Vict. t. 12) : see a. 5 of that Act. Such transmission is, however, a matter 
in the discretion of the justices, and the judge of assize has now power to 
order it, even although the defendant may, after the finding of the indictment 
at sessions, have been bound by recognizance to appear and plead to it at 
the assizes. B. v. Wildman, supra. 

Although the grand jury have been formally discharged, yet if they have 
not separated, they may be recalled and charged with other bills. B. v. 
Bolloway,. 9 C. & P. 43. 



78 INDICTMENT. 

If a bill is thrown out, it can be preferred to the same grand jury during 
the same assizes or sessions. B. V. Simmonite, 1 Cox, 30; sub nom. R. v. 
Newton, 2 M. & Bob. 503, Wightman, J. There are, however, authorities to 
the contrary : B. v. Humphreys, C. & Mar. 601, Patteson, J. : B. v. Austin, 
i Cox, 387. 

The grand jury are not liable to action or prosecution for anything done by 
them with reference to finding a bill of indictment. Floyd v. Barker, 12 Co. 
Eep. 23; Earl of Macclesfield v. Starkey, 10 St. Tr. 1329, 1413. 

Evidence by grand jurors as to what passed in the grand jury room will not 
be received. B. v. Marsh, 6 A. & E. 236, 237 : and see B. v. Brown [1907] 
7 N. S. W. State Eep. 290. 

Copy of indictment for accused person.] — By rule 13 of the Indictments Act, 
1915, (1) " It shall be the duty of the clerk of assize, after a true bill has been 
found on any indictment, to supply to the accused person, on request, a copy 
of the indictment free of charge. 

" (2) The cost of any copy supplied to the accused person whether under this 
rule or otherwise shall be treated as part of the costs of the prosecution for the 
purpose of s. 1 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1908. [See post, p. 267.] 

" (3) In the application of this rule to quarter sessions, the clerk of the peace 
shall be substituted for the clerk of assize." 



Sect. 7. 

PROCESS, AFTER INDICTMENT FOUND, TO COMPEL 
APPEARANCE OF THE ACCUSED. 

Proceedings by writ.] — If a defendant against whom an indictment has been 
found is present in court, or is in the custody of the court, he may at once be 
arraigned upon the indictment, without any previous process. 2 Hawk. c. 27; 
1 Chit. Cr. L. 338. "Where the defendant is in the custody of another court, 
the course is to remove him by habeas corpus ad respondendum, and bring him 
up to plead. " Where recognizances shall have been entered into for the 
appearance of any person to take his trial for any offence at any court of 
criminal jurisdiction, and a bill of indictment shall be found against him, and 
such person shall be then in the prison belonging to the jurisdiction of such 
court, under warrant of commitment, or under sentence for some other offence, 
it shall be lawful for the court, by order in writing, to direct the governor of 
the said prison to bring up the body of such person, in order that he may be 
arraigned upon such indictment without writ of habeas corpus, and the said 
governor shall thereupon obey such order." 30 & 31 Vict. c. 35, b. 10. The 
attendance of the prisoner can also, it would seem, be obtained under a secretary 
of state's order. 61 & 62 Vict. c. 41, o. 11. Where a prisoner after his 
committal for trial, but before trial, has been removed to a lunatic asylum by 



Pp,OCESS TO COMPEL APPEARANCE. 79 

warrant from the secretary of state, under 27 & 28 Vict. c. 29 (rep.), whether 
he was or was not under recognizance to appear he could be brought up for 
trial by a habeas corpus issued by the judge of assize. R. v. Peacock, 12 Cox, 
21, Brett, J. But it is doubtful whether this power exists in the case of a 
warrant of the secretary of state, issued under s. 2 of the Criminal Lunatics 
Act, 1884 (47 & 48 Vict. c. 64). See Ex parte Collins (Q. B. D. Teb. 16, 1899) ; 
34 L. J. Newsp. 132; 43 Sol. Journ. 280. 

When an , indictment for a misdemeanor has been found, a writ of venire 
facias ad respondendum may be issued either by the King's Bench Division, 
a judge of assize, or a court of quarter sessions. Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, 
rr. 32, 83, 84; Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 87, 98, 165 ;• Com. Dig. 
Process, A. 1 ; 5 Bdw. 3, c. 11. On default in appearance a writ of distringas 
may be issued. Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, r. 85; and on default of appearance within 
four days of a return to the writ of distringas, a writ of capias ad respondendum 
may be issued. Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, j.. 86. 

In the case of indictments in the High Court against the inhabitants of a 
county, parish, or district, or againat a corporation aggregate, writs of venire 
facias and distringas are issued to compel appearance. Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, 
r. 87. When the indictment is found in or removed' to the High Court, the 
proper procedure in the case of defendants not parties to the removal, nor 
bound by recognizances to answer, is by issue of a writ of venire facias, or in 
the case of an information by issue of a subpoena to answer, or venire facias: 
r. 83. If the defendant does not appear within four days of a return by the 
sheriff to a venire facias the prosecutor may issue "■ writ of distringas ; r. 85. 
And if default in appearance is made after execution of the distringas the 
prosecutor may sue out a capias ad respondendum: r. 86. 

The form of a writ of venire -facias is as follows : — 

George the Fifth, etc., to the sheriff of , greeting. We command you 

that you cause to come before us in [the King's Bench Division of our High 

Court of Justice at the Eoyal Courts of Justice, London] cm the day of 

, A. B. to answer to us for certain misdemeanors whereof he is indicted: 

and have you there then this writ. See Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, Form 52. 
Witness, etc. 

This writ was issued by .' 

The form of a writ of distringas to answer is as follows : — 

George the Fifth, etc., to the sheriff of the county of , greeting. We 

command you that you distrain A. B., of , in your county [yeoman], by 

all his lands and chattels in your bailiwick, so that neither ha nor any one for 
him do put his hands to the same until you shall have another command from 
jis for that purpose, and that you answer to as for the issues thereof, so that 
you may have him before [our justices assigned to keep our peace, and also 
to hear and determine divers felonies, trespasses and other misdemeanors in the 

said county committed, at in your said county] , on the day of 

next ensuing, to answer unto us concerning certain misdemeanors l_or felonies] 
whereof he is indicted, and to hear his judgment for his many defaults, and 



80 INDICTMENT. 

have you there then this writ. Witness C. D. and E. F. [two justices of th« 

peace] at , the day of , in the year of our reign [see 

Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, Form 56]. 

If the defendant appears to the writ of distringas, a supersedeas may be 
obtained, either to stay the execution of the writ, or to procure a return nf 
the amount levied. Cr. Off. Rules, 1906, r. 104, and form 171 . Bac. Abr. 
tit. Attorney, B. But if the defendant fails to appear within the time limited, 
and the sheriff makes a return that he has Ho lands, a writ of corpias ad 
respondendum may be issued, and if he cannot be taken upon the first capias, 
second and third writs of capias called alias and pluries, may issue. 4 Bl. Com. 
389 : as to the duties and power of the sheriff, see Bengough v. Rossiter, 
i T. E. 606; 2 H. Bl. 419; R. v. YandelK 4 T. E. 521. Upon an indictment 
for felony a writ of capias is issued in the first instance ; but this mode of 
proceeding is now rarely adopted, except as a step towards outlawry. See 
post, p. 85. 

The following is the form of the writ of capias : — 

George the Fifth, etc., to the sheriff of the county of , greeting. We 

command you that you take A. B., of , in your county [labourer], if he 

shall be found in your bailiwick, and him safely keep, so that you may have 
him before [our justices assigned to keep our peace, and also to hear and 
determine divers felonies, trespasses and other misdemeanors in the said county 

committed at in your countyj, on the day of next ensuing, to 

answer to us concerning certain misdemeanors [or felonies'] whereof he is 
indicted, and have you then there this writ. Witness C. D. and E. F. [two 

justices of the peace] at , the day of , in the year of our 

reign [see Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, Form 57]. 

If the proceedings above fail the prosecutor can proceed to outlawry, post, 
p. 85. 

Proceeding by warrant of a justice.] — Proceedings in ordinary cases are 
regulated by s. 3 of the Indictable Ogences Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. c. 42), by 
which it is provided that " where any indictment shall be found by the grand 
jury in any court of oyer and terminer or general gaol delivery, or in any 
court of general or quarter sessions of the peace, against any person who shall 
then be at large, and whether such person shall have been bound by any 
recognizance to appear to answer to the same or not, the person who shall act 
as clerk of the indictments at such court of oyer and terminer or gaol delivery, 
or as clerk of the peace at such sessions, at which the said indictment shall l* 
found, shall at any time afterwards, after the end of the sessions of oyer and 
terminer or gaol delivery or sessions of the peace at which such indictment shall 
have been found, upon application of the prosecutor, or of any person on his 
behalf, and on payment of a fee of one shilling, if such person shall not have 
already appeared and pleaded to such indictment, grant unto such prosecutor 
or person a certificate ( (F) infra) of such indictment having been found; and 
upon production of such certificate to any justice or justices of the peace for any 



PROCESS TO COMPEL APPEARANCE. 81 

county, riding, division, liberty, city, borough, or place in which the offence 
ehall in such indictment be alleged to have been committed, or in which the 
person indicted in and by such indictment shall reside or be, or be supposed 
or suspected to reside or be, it shall be lawful for such justice or justices, and 
he and they are hereby required to issue his or their warrant ( (G) infra) to 
apprehend such person so indicted, and to cause him to be brought before such 
justice or justices, or any other justice or justices for the same county, riding, 
division, liberty, city, borough, or place, to be dealt with according to law ; 
and afterwards, if such person be thereupon apprehended and brought before 
any such justice or justices, such justice or justices, upon its being proved upon 
oath or affirmation before him or them that the person so apprehended is the 
same person who is charged and named in such indictment shall, without 
further inquiry or examination, commit ( (H) infra) him for trial, or admit 
him to bail, in manner hereinafter mentioned. " (See Bail, post, p. 87). 

The forms scheduled to the Indictable Offences Act, 1848, are as follows : — 

(F) 

Form of certificate of indictment being found.] — I hereby certify that at 
[a court of oyer and terminer and general gaol delivery, or a court of general 

quarter sessions of the peace], holden in and for the [county] of , at , 

in the said [county] , on a bill of indictment was found by the grand jury 

against A. B., therein described as A. B., late of [labourer], for that he 

[etc., stating shortly the offence], and that the said A. B. hath not appeared or 

pleaded to the said indictment. Dated this day of , 19 — . 

J. D., clerk of the indictments on the circuit, [or 

clerk of the peace of and for the said [county] ]. 

• (G) 

Form of warrant to apprehend a person indicted.] — To the constable of 

and to all other peace officers in the said [county] of . Whereas it hath 

been duly certified by J. D., clerk of the indictments on the circuit [or 

clerk of the peace of and for the [county] of ] [that, etc., stating the 

certificate] : These are therefore to command you, in his Majesty's name, 
forthwith to apprehend the said A. B., and to bring him before [me], or some 
other justice or justices of the peace in and for the said [county], to be dealt 

with according to law. Given under my hand and seal this day of , 

in the year of our Lord , at , in the [county] aforesaid. 

J. S. (l.s.) 
(H) 

Form of warrant of commitment of a person indicted.] — To the constable 

of , and to the keeper of the [common gaol or house of correction], at , 

in the said [county] of . Whereas by [my] warrant under [my] hand 

and seal, dated the day of , after reciting that it had been certified by 

J. D. [etc., as in the certificate], [J] commanded the constable of and 

all other peace officers of the said county, in his Majesty's name, forthwith to 
apprehend the said A. B., and to bring him before [me], the undersigned, 



82 INDICTMENT. 

[one] of his Majesty's justices of the peace in and for the said [county] ; or 
before some other justice or justices of the peace in and for the said [county], 
to be dealt with according to law : and whereas the said A. B. hath been 
apprehended under and vy virtue of the said warrant, and being now brought 
before [me], it is hereupon duly proved to [me] upon oath that the said 
A. B. is the same person who is named and charged in and by the said indict- 
ment: These are therefore to command. you, the said constable, in his Majesty's 
name forthwith to take and safely convey the said A. B. to the said [ihouse 

-of correction] at in the said [county], and there to deliver him to the 

keeper thereof, together with this precept; and I hereby command you the 
■said keeper to receive the said A. B. into your custody in the said house of 
correction, and him there safely to keep until he shall be thence delivered by due 

■course of law. Given under my hand and seal this day of , in the 

year of our Lord , at , in the [county] aforesaid. 

J. S. (L.s.) 

Backing justice's warrants.] — If a person against whom a justice's warrant 
has been issued with respect to an indictable offence has escaped or gone into, 
or resides, or is supposed to reside or be " in any place in England or Wales, 
out of the jurisdiction of the justice issuing such warrant,'' upon proof alone 
being made on oath of the handwriting of the justice issuing such warrant, it 
is lawful for any justice of the peace for the county or place in which the 
person against whom the warrant has been issued is, or is supposed to be, to 
indorse the warrant in the following form (K) ; and such indorsement shall be 
sufficient authority for the execution of the warrant in that county or place. 
11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 11. An arrest under a warrant not backed by a justice 
of the county or borough within which it is executed is illegal. R. v. Cumfton, 
5 Q. B. D. 341; 49 L. J. (M. C.) 41. A warrant issued by a Me^opolitan 
Police Magistrate in respect of an offence committed within the Metropolitan 
Police District may be executed outside that district without backing by any of 
the constables to whom it is directed. 2 & 3 Vict. c. 71, s. 17. 

Under 11 & 12 Vict. u. 42, ss. 12, 13, 14, English warrants may be backed 
in Ireland, Scotland, or the Isles of Man, Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney or Sark. 
English warrants may also be executed in Ireland, after indorsement by the 
inspector-general or a deputy or assistant inspector of the Irish Constabulary, 
under 14 & 15 Vict. c. 93, s. 19, and 30 & 31 Vict. c. 19, s. 1. 

The form of indorsement used is as follows : — 

(K) 

to wit: Whereas proof upon oath hath this day been made before me, 

one of his Majesty's justices of the peace for the said [county] of , that t'le 

name of J. S. to the within warrant subscribed is of the handwriting of tli« 
justice of the peace within mentioned: I do therefore hereby authorize W. T., 
who bringeth to me this warrant, and all other persons to whom this warrant 
was originally directed, or by whom it may lawfully be executed, and also all 
constables and other peace officers of the said [county] of — — , to execuU tlm 
same within the said last-mentiorted [county], and to bring the said A. B., i/ 



PROCESS TO COMPEL APPEARANCE. 83 

apprehended' within the same [county], before me [or before some other justice 
or justices of the peace of the same countyl, to be dealt with according to law. 
Given under my hand this day of , 19 — . J. L. 

Offenders fleeing from the United Kingdom.] — Where the offender hais fled 
to a British pOBsession or u, place to which the Foreign Jurisdiction Acts 
apply, the warrants for his arrest are executed under the Fugitive Offenders 
Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 69). As to this Act, see B. v. Cohen [1907] 
71 J. P. 190 : B. V. Phillips [1858] IF.* F. 105 : Ex parte Percival [1907] 

1 K. B. 696; 71 J. P. 148; 23 T. L. E. 238 :■ B. v. Spilsbury [1898] 

2 Q. B. 615. 

Where the accused has fled to a foreign country to which the Foreign 
Jurisdiction Acts do not apply, his surrender is obtainable under the Extra- 
dition Treaty in force with such country, or in some cases by application to 
the foreign government, independently of any treaty. The procedure to be 
followed depends on the terms of the treaty or the requirements of the foreign 
government. See Clarke on Extradition (4th ed.) ; Biron and Chalmers on 
Extradition. The Orders in Council bringing each treaty into effect and 
setting out its text are published as Statutory Eules and Orders. The Extra- 
dition Acts of 1870, 1873, and 1895, in the main regulate only procedure for 
extradition from British dominions, but they forbid the trial of fugitives 
surrendered by foreign states, except on charges founded on the facts on which 
their surrender was made. 

Where the defendant is already in prison.] — If the person against 

whom an indictment has been found is "confined in any gaol or prison for 
any other offence than that charged in the said indictment, at the time of 
such application and production of the said certificate to such justice or justices 
as aforesaid (ante, p. 81) it shall be lawful for such justice or justices, and he 
and they are hereby required, upon it being proved before him or them upon 
oath or afflrmation that the person so indicted and the person so confined m 
prison are one and the same person, to issue his or their warrant ((I.) infra), 
directed to the gaoler or keeper of the gaol or prison in which the person so 
indicted shall then be confined as aforesaid, commanding him to detain such 
person in custody until by his Majesty's writ of habeas corpus he shall be 
removed therefrom, for the purpose of being tried upon the said indictment, 
or until he shall otherwise be removed or discharged out of his custody by due 
coBrse of law." 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 3. 

(I) 
Form of warrant to detain a person indicted who is already in custody for 
another offence.] — To the keeper of the [common gaol or house of correction], 

at , in the said [county] of : Whereas it hath been duly certified 

by J. T>,, clerk of the indictments on the circuit [or clerk of the peace of 

and for the county of ], that [etc., stating the certificate] : And whereas 

[I am] informed that the said A. B. is in your custody in the said [common 
gaol] at aforesaid, charged with some offence or other matter; and it 



84 INDICTMENT. 

being now duly proved, upon oath before [me] that the said A. B^ so indicted 
as aforesaid and the said A. B. in your custody as aforesaid are one and the 
same person; These are therefore to command you, in his Majesty's name, to 
detain the said A. B. in your custody in the [common gaol] aforesaid, until 
by his Majesty's writ of habeas corpus he shall be removed therefrom for the 
purpose of being tried upon the said indictment or until he shall otherwise 
be removed or discharged out of your custody by due course of law. Given 

under my hand and seal this day of , in the year of our Lord , 

at , in the [county] aforesaid. 

J. S. (L.s.) 
Proceeding by bench warrant.] — By «■ long course of practice, it is an estab- 
lished rule that any court of record before which an indictment is found may 
forthwith issue a bench warrant for arresting the party charged, and bringing 
him immediately before such court, to answer such indictment. 8th Sep. Crim. 
Law Commrs. 99; Dick. Sess. 230 (6th ed.); and see 5 Edw. 3, c. 11; 34 
Edw. 8, c. 1; Cro. Cir. Comp. 15 (10th ed.) ; 1 Chitty Cr. L. 340; Pritchard 
Q. S. (and ed.) 194; Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 87; Cr. Off. Eules, 
1906, rr. 32, 76. In 3 Bum's J., tit. Process, 1338 (30th ed.), it is said that 
the practice refers only to cases of misdemeanor. If the warrant is issued at 
the assizes, it is signed by a judge : if at sessions, by two justices. of the peara. 
Hawkins, Book II., c. 27, s. 8, gays that the warrant is granted when the 
court is sitting. This statement applies to commissions of the peace, and is 
only another way of saying that the court is not continuous, and the act must 
be done in sessions. "Where a party against whom the indictment has been 
found is already under recognizance to appear and answer any indictment that 
may be preferred against him, and he does not appear, the prosecutor may 
bespeak a bench warrant, which will be signed by the justices at the close 
of the sessions; for the sessions being in law but one day, the defendant has 
the whole period of the sessions to appear. 2 Salk. 607 ; Cro. Cir. Comp. 15 
(10th ed.). When a prosecutor applies for a bench warrant at the Central 
Criminal Court, a recognizance to prosecute with effect against the defendant 
is required. Eeg. Gen., Jan. 1847; C. & Mar. 254. It is said that at that 
court the warrant is only current for the session in which it is issued. See B. 
V. Nichols, 64 J. P. 217, Pulton, Eecorder; Encycl. Laws of England (2nd ed.), 
vol. ii., p. 156. This opinion probably rests on the theory that the court is not 
a, continuing court, which was held to be erroneous by Wright, J., in B. v. 
Madge d Armstrong, Q. B. D. May 8, 1894, 29 Law Journ. Newsp. 301; Times, 
May 9, 1894, cited B. Y. Parke [1903] 2 K. B. at 440. It is not now the 
practice to grant a bench warrant unless immediate arrest is necessary, or 
it is shown that the party charged was about to quit the country; B. v. 
WhittakeT, 2 E. & P. 1; and it is not granted for the arrest of defaulting 
witnesses. R. v. Crawford, 6 Cox, 481 (Ir.). 

The following is the form of a bench warrant : — 

County of London.] — To all constables, headboroughs , and other his Majesty's 
officers and ministers within the county of London, and to every one of them 
whom it may concern: These are to will and require, and in his Majesty's 



OUTLAWRY. 85 

name to charge and command you, upon sight hereof, to bring before us his 
Majesty's justices of the peace for the county aforesaid, at the sessions of the 
peace [or general quarter sessions of the peace'] now holden at the Sessions 
House on Clerkenwell Green, in and for the said county, the body of A. 'B.,who 
stands indicted before us at this same session for a trespass and assault [nature 
of the offence], if the court be then and there sitting, or if not, before us or 
some other of his Majesty's justices of the peace for the same county, to find 
sufficient sureties for his personal appearance at this present sessions, to answer 
the said indictment and all such other matters as on his Majesty's behalf shall 
be objected against him: and if he cannot be taken during this present session, 
that then, as soon after as he shall be taken, you bring or cause him to he 
brought before us or some other of his Majesty's justices of the peace of the 
said county to find sufficient sureties: that is to say, two sureties in £ — — each 
for his personal appearance at the next session of the peace to be holden for 
the said county, to answer as aforesaid, and further to be dealt with according 
to law. Hereof you are not to fail at your peril. Dated in open session at 

the Sessions House, Clerkenwell Green, aforesaid, this day of , in the 

year of our Lord . 

C. D. and E. F. ' 

Warrant by judge ol the High Court.]— Under 48 G. 3, o. 58, s. 1, any 

judge of the King's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice upon af&davit 
or certificate of the fact (B. v. Redfem, 2 A. & B. 387) that an indictment has 
been found, or information filed in that court, against any person for an offence 
other than treason or felony, may issue his warrant under his hand and seal for 
apprehending him and taking him before a judge of the high court or a justice 
of the peace, to be by him held to bail with two sufScient sureties in such sum ae 
the court specifies in the warrant for appearance in the King's Bench Division 
at the time mentioned in the warrant to answer the indictment or information ; 
and if such defendant neglects or refuses to provide bail, the judge or justice 
before whom he is brought may commit him to prison. Where an indictment 
has been removed into the High Court, on production of a certificate from the 
crown of&ce that the indictment has been filed, a judge of the King's Bench 
Division may, by warrant under his hand, cause the party indicted to be 
arrested, and, in default of bail, commit him for trial. Grown Office Bules, 
1906, rr. 75, 76. B. v. Downey, 7 Q. B. 281; 15 L. J. (M. C.) 29; 4 Bl. Com. 
319. See Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, rr. 75, 76. The above statute does not preclude 
the use of a capias ad respondendum (ss. 1, 3), but that is now only needed as 
a step to outlawry. For form of warrant, see Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, rr. 32, 74, 
75, 76, and Form 43; see Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 92; 8 Eep. Crim. 
Law Commra. 348. 

Outlawry.] — ^Where an indictment for treason, felony, or misdemeanor has 
been found by a grand jury against any person, whether a peer or a commoner, 
and summary process proves ineffectual to the apprehension of the defendant, 
process of outlawry is issued : — outlawry being a punishment inflicted upon an 
offender by the law for contumacy, in refusing to render himself amenable to 



86 INDICTMENT. 

the justice of the King's courts (o) Doot. & Stud. dial. 2, cap. 3; Bao. Abr. 
Outlawry; Com. Dig., Utlagary; 1 Chitty Grim. L. 347; 2 Hale, 194; 2 Hawk, 
c. 27, B. 113. An outlawry in treason or felony still amounts to a canviction 
and attainder of the offence charged in the indictment, as much as if the 
offender had been found guilty by a jury ; 4 Bl. Com. 319 ; 2 Hawk. c. 48, 
ss. 21-25; 33 & 34 "Vict. u. 23, s. 1; but outlawry, in a case of misdemeanor, 
does not enure as a conviction for the offence, but merely as a conviction of 
the contempt for not answering.' R. v. Tippin, 2 Salk. 494. Process of out- 
lawry may be awarded by justices of oyer and terminer, and also by justices 
of the peace at quarter sessions, on indictments taken before them; 3 Bum's J., 
Process, 1339 (30th ed.>; Dick. Q. Sess. (6th ed.) 228; but the practice of 
proceeding to outlawry in courts of quarter sessions seems to have become 
obsolete : 8 Eep. Grim. L. 103 ; and the usual course is to remove the indict- 
ment found at sessions by certiorari,' and proceed to outlawry in the King's 
Bench Division. The most scrupulous exactness was required in all the pro- 
ceedings in outlawry, which might be set aside on writ of error for any 
informality. 1 Chitty Grim. L. 347. Although outlawry is still an integral, 
and has been described as an essential, part of the criminal law (R. v. Wilkes, 
< Burr. 2527, 2551, Lord Mansfield, G.J., 19 St. Tr. 1075), proceedings in 
outlawry are exceedingly rare, and may almost be said to be extinct. Short 
and Mellor Gr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 270. It is therefore sufficient to refer to that 
work, which contains a full account of the proceedings in outlawry, and to 
the Grown Office Eules, 1906, rr. 88-110, which now regulate the prEictice in 
outlawry and reversal of outlawry, vrhen the proceedings are in the King's 
Bench Division. Under s. 1, sub-s. 2, of the Statute Law Revision Act, 1888 
(51 & 52 Vict. c. 3), the Lord Chancellor may, if he thinks fit, by order extend 
the Grown Office Eules in force for the time being, as to proceedings in out- 
lawry, to proceedings in outlawry in courts of assize, oyer and terminer, and 
gaol delivery, and in other courts in England, with such modifications as to 
him may seem expedient, and as from the date of the order the old statutes 
as to outlawry scheduled to that Act are to be repealed. No order has been 
made by the Lord Chancellor, and the old statutes remain in force as to the 
courts last named. 

(a) As to New South Wales law of outlawry, see R, V. Jemmy Oovernor [1900] 
21 N. S. W. E. (Law), 278. 



BAIL. 87 



Sect. 8. 



BAIL. 

Nature of bail.] — Bail are sureties taken by a person duly authorised, for 
the appearance of an accused person at a certain day and place, to answer and 
be justified by law. Hale's Sum. 96; Dalt. c. 166, pt. 2. The defendant is 
placed in the custody of his bail; who may re-seize him (1 Hale, 124; Dalton, 
c. 166, pt. 2) if they have reason to suppose that he is about to fly, and may 
bring him before a justice, who will commit the prisoner in discharge of 'he 
bail : R. Y. Butcher, Peake (3rd ed.) 226. Any attempt to rescue him from 
their custody is illegal. Id. 

Where persons who have become bail for any defendant discharge themselves 
by taking and surrendering him before the court or magistrate by whom he 
has been bailed, it is competent for the defendant to find new sureties. 2 Hale, 
124; Hawk. c. 16, s. 3. 

When granted.] — Bail in treason or felony is discretionary in the High Court 
or courts having jurisdiction to try the offence. B. v. McGartie [1859] 11 Jr. 
C. L. E. 188, 192 : R. v. Piatt, 1 Leach, 157; Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd 
ed.) 280. It is questionable whether bail in misdemeanor is of right at common 
law. See R. v. Spilsbury [1898] 2 Q. B. 615, 620 : R. v. Badger, 4 Q. B. 468, 
472; 12 L. J. (M. C.) 66; 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1387 : Be Frost, 4 T. L. E. 757, 
Coleridge, L.C.J. ; and see 31 Car. 2, c. 2 ; 2 Hawk. c. 15, ss. 7, 13, 16, and 
post, p. 89. 

Eefusal or delay by any judge or magistrate to bail any person bail- 
able is at common law an offence against the liberty of the subject. 4 Bl. Com. 
297. It is also a violation of the Habeas Corpus Act, 1679 (81 Car. 2, c. 2) 
and of the Bill of Rights (1 W. & M., Sess. 2, c. 2). But the duty of a magis- 
trate as to admitting a prisoner to bail is judicial, and not merely ministerial, 
and therefore an action vrill not lie against him without proof of malice for 
refusing to admit to bail a person charged with a. misdemeanor, and entitled 
to be admitted to bail. Linford v. Fitzroy, 13 Q. B. 240; 18 L. J. (M. C.) 
108; B. V. Badger, 4 Q: B. 468; 12 L. J. (M. C.) 66 : Osborne v. Gough, 
3 B. & P. 551. See Bac. Abr., Bail; Com. Dig. Bail, P. 5, K. 6. 

Bail is not to be withheld merely as a punishment. The requirements as 
to bail are merely to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial.'' R. v. 
Rose, 67 L. J. (Q. B.) 289; 17 Cos, 717 (C. C. E.). 

The proper test of whether bail should be granted or refused is whether it is 
probable that the accused will appear to take his trial. Be Bobinson, 23 L. J. 
(Q. B.) 286 : R. v. Scaife, 10 L. J. (M. C.) 144; 9 Dowl. Pr. Cas. 653. 

The test should be applied by reference to the following considerations : 

(1) The nature of the accusation. R. v. Barronet, IE. & B. 1 ; 22 L. J. 
(M. C.) 15; Dears. 51 : B. v. Butler [1881] 8 L. E. Ir. 39; 14 Cox, 530. 



88 INDICTMENT. 

(2) The nature of the evidence in support of the accusation. Re Robinson 
(supra) : R. v. Butler (supra) : E. v. McGormick [1864] 17 Ir. C. L. E. 411. 

(3) The severity of the punishment which conviction will entail. Re 
Robinson (supra). The character or behaviour of the accused is said 
to be irrelevant. (Id.) 

(4) Whether the sureties are independent, or indemnified by the accused. 
See R. V. Butler, 8 L. E. Ir. 39; 14 Cox, 530 : Hermann v. Jeuchner, 
15 Q. B. D. 561; 54 L. J. (Q. B.) 340 : Consolidated Exploration, &c., Co. 
V. Musgrave [1900] 1 Ch. 37; 64 J. P. 89 : R. v. Porter [1910] 1 K. E. 
369; 79 L. J. (K. B.) 241; 26 T. L. E. 200; 3 Or. App. E. 237. 

It is not usual to grant bail on charges of murder; Re Barthelemy, 1 B. & 
B. 8; Dears. 60; or after indictment found; R. v. Chapman, 8 C. & P. 558 
(and see post, p. 93), except where the trial is adjourned. Anon., 2 Lew. 
260. If insufficient bail has been taken, or if the sureties become afterwards 
insufficient, the accused may be ordered by any magistrate to find sufficient 
sureties, and in default may be committed to prison; and the justice who 
admitted a defendant to bail upon insufficient securities is responsible if the 
defendant does not appear. Hale's Sum. 97. 

Who may be bail.] — The bail must be of ability sufficient to answer for the 
sum in which they are bound. 2 Hawk. c. 15, s. 4. They are usually house- 
holders ; but it is for the magistrate or judge to act upon his discretion as to the 
sufficiency of the bail; R. v. Saunders, 2 Cox, 249; 1 Burn's J., Bail, 373 (30th 
ed.) ; 1 Chitty Crim. L. 99 ; and the proposed bail may be examined upon oath 
as to his means, though in criminal cases justification of bail is said not to be 
essential. R. v. Hall, 2 W. Bl. 1110; 1 Chitty Crim. L. 100; but see Short 
and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 287. The court or magistrate may, at discre- 
tion, order that reasonable notice shall be given to the prosecutor and the 
police, to enable him or them to inquire or object as to the sufficiency of the 
bail. No person convicted of any crime by which he had become infamous was 
allowed to be surety for any person charged or suspected of an indictable offence. 
R. V. Edwards, 4 T. E. 440. It is not expedient to accept the solicitor of the 
accused as bail for his client. R. v. Scott-Jarvis (Q. B. D., Times, 20th Nov., 
1876) : Douglas, Summary Jurisdiction Procedure (8th ed.) 364. A person who 
has been indemnified by the accused is not accepted as his bail ; supra (4) ; wfaik 
an agreement by an accused person to indemnify his bail is illegal in that it 
tends to produce - public mischief, and the parties to the agreement are there- 
fore guilty of the offence of conspiracy, although they may have entered 
into the agreement without any wrongful intent. R. v. Porter [1910] 1 K. B. 
369; 79 L. J. (K. B.) 241; 22 Cox, 295. Persons in custody cannot be bail. 
Infants cannot be bail ; nor could a married woman at common law ; but since 
the Married Women's Property Act, 1882, married women, having separate 
estate, are accepted as bail. Personation of bail is a felony under 24 & 25 Vict, 
u. 98, ». 34. 

By s. 24 of the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1914 (4 & 5 Geo. 6, 
c. 58), for removing doubts it is declared that where as a condition of the 
release of any person he is required to enter into a recognizance with sureties, 



WHEN COMPULSORY. 89 

the recognizances of the sureties may be taken separately, and either before or 
after the recognizances of the principal, and if so taken the recognizances 
of the principal and sureties shall be as binding as if they had been taken 
together and at the same time. By s. 19 of the same Act, bail may be made 
continuous (post, p. 90). 

Bail by justices of the peace: when discretionary.] — "Where any person 
shall appear or be brought before a justice of the peace charged with any 
felony, or with any assault with intent to commit any felony, or with 
any attempt to commit any felony, or with obtaining or attempting to 
obtain property by false pretences, or with a misdemeanor in receiving 
property stolen or obtained by false pretences, or with perjury or subornation 
of perjury, or with concealing the birth of a child by secret burying or other- 
wise, or with wilful or indecent exposure of the person, or with riot, or with 
assault in pursuance of a conspiracy to raise wages, or assault upon a peace 
officer in the execution of his duty, or upon any person acting in his aid, or 
with neglect or breach of duty as a peace officer, or with any misdemeanor 
for the prosecution of which the costs may be allowed out of the county rate, 
such justice of the peace may, in his discretion, admit such person to bail, upon 
his procuring and producing such surety or sureties as in the opinion of such 
justice will be sufficient to ensure the appearance of such accused person at the 
time and place when and where he is to be tried for such offence ; and there- 
upon such justice shall take the recognizance (S. 1, 2, post, pp. 90, 91) of the said 
accused person and his surety or sureties, conditioned for the appearance of such 
accused person at the time and place of trial, and that he will then surrender and 
take his trial, and not depart the court without leave." ... 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, 
s. 23; and see 1 Chitty Grim. L. 95 ; 4 Bl. Com. 298 ; Linford v. Fitzroy, 
13 Q. B. 240; 18 L. J. (M. C.) 108 : R. v. Rose, 67 L. J. (Q. B.) 289; 18 Cox, 
717; and Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 280 et seq., 322 et seq. [The 
costs of all felonies and misdemeanors may now be allowed out of the local 
rate; 8 Edw. 7, c. 16, s. 1.] 

By o. 23 of the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1914 (4 & 5 Geo. 5, 
c. 58) where a court of summary jurisdiction commits a person charged with 
any misdemeanor for trial and does not admit him to bail the court shall inform 
the person accused of hie right to apply for bail to a judge of the High Court of 
Justice. 

In the case of persons apparently under sixteen admission to bail and deten- 
tion without bail are regulated by the Children Act, 1908 (8 Edw. 7, c. 67), 
ss. 94-96. 

When compulsory.] — ..." Where any person shall be charged before any 
justice of the peace with any indictable misdemeanor other than those herein- 
before mentioned, such justice, after taking the examinations in writing :is 
aforesaid, instead of committing him to prison for such offence, shall admit 
him to bail in manner aforesaid, or if he have been committed to prison and 
shall apply to any one of the visiting justices of such prison, or to any other 
justice of the peace for the same county, riding, division, liberty, city, borough 



go ~ INDICTMENT. 

or place, before tiie first day of the sitting or session at which he is to le 
tried, or before the day to which such sitting or session may be adjourned, 
to be admitted to bail, such justice shall accordingly admit him to bail in 
manner aforesaid." . . 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, ». 23: and see 2 Hale, 127; 
i Bl. Com. 298; Burn's J. (30th ed.) Bail; 1 Chitty Grim. L. 97; and remarks 
of Lord Denman, Linford Y. Fitzroy, supra. 

Under the Bail Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 7, s. 1), " where a justice has power 
under s. 23 of the Indictable Offences Mt, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. c. 42), to admit 
to bail for apfiearance, he may dispense with sureties, if it is his opinion the 
so dispensing will not tend to defeat the ends of justice : ' ' and it is his duty to 
admit to bail in all cases where there is a reasonable belief that the accused 
will attend to take his trial. 

Persons apparently under sixteen who are apprehended without warrant must 
with certain exceptions be admitted to bail by the police until the time of 
appearance before a justice. 8 Bdw. 7, c. 67, s. .94. 

When forbidden.] — "No justice or justices of the peace shall admit any 
person to bail for treason, nor shall sUch person be admitted to bail, except by 
order of one of his Majesty's secretaries of state, or by the High Court uf 
Justice (King's Bench Division), or a judge thereof in vacation." 11 & 12 Vict, 
u. 42, o. 23; 36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, ss. 16, 34; 38 & 39 Vict. c. 77, s. 19. 

Bail on remand.] — 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 23, applies only where the accused 
is committed for trial . and does not apply to bail on remand. There is some 
difference of opinion as to the power of the High Court to interfere where 
justices have refused bail on remand. See Douglas, Summary Jurisdictioa 
Procedure (9th ed.) : but in B. v. Beall (Q. B. D., July, 1899), Channell,, J., 
said that if the power existed the Court would be very slow to interfere with 
the justices' decision, a}id see Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 281. 

Continuous Bail.] — By ». 19 of the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 
1914 (4 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 68), where a person is remanded on bail the recognizance 
may be conditioned for his appearaiice at every time and place to which 
during the course of the proceedings the hearing may be from time to time 
adjourned, without prejudice, however, to the power of the court to vary the 
order at any subsequent hearing. 

Form of recognizance of bail taken by a justice of the peace.]— The following 
is the form of the recognizance to be entered into by bail before a justice of 
the peace, prescribed by 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42 : — 

(S. 1.) 

Be it remembered, that on the day of , in the year of our Lord , 

A. B. of [labourer], L. M. of [grocer], and N. 0. of [butcher], 

personally came before [us] the undersigned, two of his Majesty's justices of 
the peace for the said [county], and severally acknowledged themselves to owe 
to our lord the King the several sums following: (that is to say), the said 



MODE OF ADMITTING TO BAIL. 91 

A. B. the sum of and the said L. M. and N. 0. the sum of eaoh of 

ffood and lawful, money of Great Rritain, to be made amd levied of their several 
g-oods and chattels, lands and tenements respectively, to the use of our said lord 
the King, his heirs and successors, if he the said A. B. fail in the condition 
indorsed. Taken and acknowledged the day, and year first above mentioned, 

at , before us, J. S. 

J. N. 

The condition of the within-written recognizance is such, that whereas the 
said A. B. was this day charged before [us], the justices within mentioned for 
that [etc., as in the warrant}; if therefore the said A. B. will appear at the 
next court of oyer and terminer and general gaol delivery [or court of general 

quarter sessions of the peace'] to be holden in and for the county of , and 

there surrender himself into the custody of the keeper of the [common gaol] 
there, and plead to such indictment as may be found against him by the grand 
jury for or in respect of the charge aforesaid, and take his trial upon the same, 
and not depart the said court without leave, then the said recognizance to be 
void, or else to stand in full force and virtue. 

(S. 2.) 

Notice ot the said recognizance to be given to the accused and his bail.] — 

Take notice, that you, A. B. of , are bound in the sum of , and your 

sureties [L. M. and N. O.J in the sum of each, that you A. B. appear 

[etc., as in the condition of the recognizance], and not depart the said court 
without leave; and unless you the said A. B. personally appear and plead, and 
take your trial accordingly, the recognizance entered into by you and your 

sureties shall be forthwith levied on you and on them. Dated this day of 

, 19—. J. S. 

The condition of the recognizance, as respects the sureties, is performed by 
the appearance of the accused, though he stands mute. Bao. Abr. , tit. Bail : 
2 Hawk. u. 15, o. 84. 

Mode of admitting to bail where the defendant has been committed to prison.] 

— " In all cases where a person charged with any indictable offence shall be 
committed to prison to take his trial for the same, it shall be lawful, at any 
time afterwards and before the first day of the sitting or session at which he 
is to be tried, or before the day to which such sitting or session may be 
adjourned, for the justice or justices of the peace who shall have signed the 
warrant for his commitment, in his or their discretion, to admit such accused 
person to bail in manner aforesaid (ante, p.. 89), or if such committing justice 
or justices shall be of opinion that for any of the offences hereinbefore men- 
tioned (ante, p. 89) the said accused person ought to be admitted to, bail, he 
or they shall in such cases, and in all other cases of misdemeanors, certify 
(S. 3, post, p. 92) on the back of the warrant of commitment bis or their consent 
to such accused party bein^ bailed, stating also the amount of bail which 
ought to be. required. It shall be lawful for any justice of the peace, attending 
or being at the gaol or prison where such accused party shall be in custody. 



92 INDICTMENT. 

on production of such certificate to admit such accused person to bail in manner 
aforesaid ; or if it shall be inconvenient for the surety or sureties in such a, case 
to attend at such gaol or prison to join with such accused person in the recog- 
nizance of bail, then such committing justice or justices may make a duplicate 
of such certificate (S. 4, infra) as aforesaid, and upon the same being produced 
to any justice of the peace for the same county, riding, division, liberty, city, 
borough, or place, it shall be lawful for such last-mentioned justice to take the 
recognizance of the surety or sureties in conformity with such certificate, and 
upon such recognizance being transmitted to the keeper of such gaol or prison, 
and produced, together with the certificate on the warrant of commitment .is 
aforesaid, to any justice of the peace attending or being at such gaol or prison, 
it shall be lawful for such last-mentioned justice thereupon to take the recog- 
nizance of such accused party, and to order him to be discharged out of custody 
as to that commitment as hereinafter mentioned." 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 23. 
When the justice has consented to bail under this section, the recognizances can 
now be taken before the clerk to the justices or the governor of the prison in 
which the accused is. 42 & 43 Vict. c. 49, s. 42; Summary Jurisdiction Eules, 
1886, rr. 13, 13a. As to cases where the indictment is removed for trial at the 
Central Criminal Court, under 19 & 20 Vict. c. 16, see the 9th section of that Act. 

(S. 3.) 
Certificate of consent to bail by tlie committing justice indorsed on the com- 
mitment.] — I hereby certify that I consent to the within-named A. B. being 
bailed by recognizance, himself in and [two] sureties in each. 

(S. 4.) 

The like, on a separate paper.] — Whereas A. B. was on the committed 

by me to the [house of correction] at charged with [etc., naming the 

offence shortly] : I hereby certify that I consent to the said A. B. being bailed 

by recognizance, himself in and [two] sureties in each. Dated the 

day of , 19 — . 

Note. — In cases where the justice acts under the Bail Act, 1898 {ante, 
p. 90) the words as to sureties can be omitted. 

Recognizance to be transmitted to committing justices.] — " And in all cases 
where such accused person in custody shall be admitted to bail by a justice 
of the peace other than the committing justice or justices as aforesaid, such 
justice of the peace so admitting him to bail shall forthwith transmit the recog- 
nizance or recognizances of bail to the committing justice or justices, or one 
of them, to be by him qr them transmitted, with the examinations, to the 
proper ofBcer." 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 23. 

Warrant of deliYerance wliere a person in prison is bailed.]—" Where a 
justice or justices of the peace shall admit to bail 4ny person who shall then be 
in prison, charged with the offence for which he shall be so admitted to bail, 
such justice or justices shall send or cause to be lodged with the keeper of such 



BAIL BY THE HIGH COURT. 93 

prison a warrant of deliverance (S. 6, infra) under his or their hand and seal, 
or hands and seals, requiring the said keeper to discharge the person so 
admitted to bail, if he be detained for no other offence, and upon such warrant 
of deliverance being delivered or lodged with such keeper he shall forthwith 
obey the same." 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 24. 

(S. 5.) 
Form of warrant of deliverance on bail being given (or a prisoner already 

committed,] — To the keeper of the [house of correction] ad , in the said 

[county] of . Whereas A. B., late of [labourer], hath before [us, 

two] of his Majesty's justices of the peace in and for the said county, entered 
into his own recognizances [and found sufficient sureties'^ for his appearance 
at the next court of oyer and terminer and general gaol delivery [or court of 
general quarter sessions of the peace}, to he holden in and for the county 
of , to answer our sovereign lord the King, for that [etc., as in the com- 
mitment], for which he was taken and committed to your said [house of 
correction] : These are therefore to command you, in his said Majesty's name, 
that if the said A. B. do remain in your custody in the said [house of correction], 
for the said cause, and for no other, you shall forthwith suffer him to go at 

large. Given under our hands and seals this day of , in the year of 

our Lord , at , in the [county] aforesaid. 

• J. S. (L.s.) 

J. N. (L.s.) 

Bail by the court of trial.] — The court of trial has the power of granting 
bail, stated ante, p. 87, and is guided in its exercise by the considerations 
there stated. It is not, however, usual to grant bail after indictment found 
if the ofEence is of a serious nature. R. v. Chapman, 8 C. & P. 558 : R. v. 
Guttridge, 9 C. & P. 228 : R. v. Owen, Id. 83 : R. v. Bowen, Id. 509, where 
the effect of the Habeas Corpus Act, 1679 (31 Car. 2, c. 2), was discussed. 
Cf. R. V. McCartie [1859] 11 Ir. Eep. C. L. 188. 

Bail by the High Court.] — The High Court of Justice exercises (in the 
King's Bench Division) the powers as to bail of the old Court of King's Bench; 
36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, ss. 16, 34; and the practice, except as below indicated, 
is not altered by the Judicature Acts (see 38 & 39 Vict. c. 77, s. 19), or the 
Cr, Off. Eules, 1906. The extent of the discretion of the court has been stated 
ante, pp. 87 et seq. 

The court may in its discretion direct a prisoner to be admitted 'to bail 
before a justice of the peace, where it would be inconvenient to bring the 
prisoner and his bail before the court or judge in town ; or, on just cause being 
shown, to order that a party not in custody shall be admitted to bail on sur- 
rendering to a warrant. At common law the powers of the court were exercised 
by means of a writ of habeas corpus. Hale's Sum. 104; 1 Chit. Cr. L. 98; 
Burn's J., tit. Bail (30th ed.) 369. Under the present practice of the Court, 
" applications for bail in felony or misdemeanor where the party is in custody, 
shall be in the first instance by summons before a judge at chambers for a writ 



94 INDICTMENT. 

of habeas corpus, or to show cause why the defendant should not be admitted 
to bail either before a judge at chambers or before a justice of the peace, in 
auch an amount as the judge may direct." Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, i. 111. No 
summons to show cause before a judge at chambers for bail in felony shall l>e 
issued without the leave of a judge upon an ex parte application. Eule 266. 
For the requisite forms on application for bail, see Appendix to Cr. Off. Eules, 
1906, Nos. 69 to 75. Affidavits must be intituled " In the High Court of 
Justice, King's Bench Division." Cr. 0&. Eules, 1906, r. 6. 

If the judge at chambers refuses bail, a further application may be made to 
a divisional court, or any other branch of the High Court or the Lord Chan- 
cellor, not by way of appeal, but de novo; Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 
287; but there is no appeal to the Court of Appeal from the decision of a 
divisional court of the King's Bench Division upon an application for bail 
by a prisoner. R. v. Poote, 10 Q. B. D. 378 ; 52 L. J. (Q. B.) 528. 

To avoid expense and inconvenience it is now the practice in almost all 
cases, instead of applying for a writ of habeas corpus, to apply for a summons 
before a judge in .chambers, to show cause why the prisoner should not be 
admitted to bail before a justice of the peace. If the order be made, upon its 
being produced to a justice, he will admit the prisoner to bail. 

Where there is no inconvenience in the appearance of the prisoner and his 
bail in the court, counsel applies for a writ of habeas corpus ad subjiciendum, 
and also for a writ of certiorari, directed to the magistrate or coroner, as the ' 
case may be, to bring before the court the depositions on which the prisoner 
has been committed. The affidavits are entitled as in the case of a bail 
summons, and should verify the depositions (iJ. v. Barthelemy, 1 E. & B. 8; 
Dears. 60), and should be accompanied by a certified copy of the commitment, 
to which the accused is entitled as of right, under 31 Car. 2, c. 2, s. 4 {see, Cr. 
Off. Eules, 1906, l. 22, Perms 172, 173), and by a copy of the depositions. If 
these are not obtained, a certiorari to bring them up is necessary. 

Twenty-four hours' notice of bail, in. cases of murder or manslaughter, must 
be served on the widow, if any there be, or next of kin of the deceased, and 
in other cases upon the prosecutor, and also on the coroner, or committing 
magistrate — personal service is not requisite. Eeturne having been duly made 
to the writs, when the prisoner is brought into court counsel moves that be 
be admitted to bail, and if there be no opposition the court will in its discretion 
admit the prsotier to bail, and the officer of the court will take the recog- 
nizance. In cases of felony the court sometimes requires four sureties ; but for 
the inferior offences two are sufficient. R. v. Shaw, 6 Dow. & Ey. 154; Short 
and Mffllor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 285. The application to admit the prisoner to 
bail may be opposed by counsel, and affidavits may be used in answer to the 
application. When a prisoner is brought up to be bailed at chambers, the pro- 
ceedings are nearly the same as those in court. Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. 
(2nd ed.) 287. 

Bail in case of removed indiotments.] — See post. Certiorari, p. 115. 

Bail on coroner's inquisition.] — See post, p. 147. 



ESTREAT OF RECOGNIZANCES. 95 

Estreat of recognizance.] — If the condition of a recognizance entered into 
either by a party or by his sureties be broken, the recognizances may be 
forfeited, and on forfeiture the obligees become debtors to the Crown for the 
sums in which they are respectively bound. 

Former practice.] — The ancient mode of enforcing a forfeited recognizance 
was to order its estreat into the Exchequer. The word " estreat " (extractum) 
means a true note of entries in the rolls of a court containing orders in favour 
of the revenues of the Crown : Termes de la Ley. It was the duty of the clerks 
01 all the King's courts to make up an accurate estreat roll showing the nature 
and details of all fines, forfeitures, etc., enforced by the court, and to return 
it to the Exchequer. The roll had to be verified by oath (4 W. & M. c. 24, 
3. 4); wilful mis-statements were punishable (22 & 23 Car. 2, c. 22, s. 5); and 
failure to make the returns was ground for amercement (3 G. 1, u. 15, s. 12) : 
Encycl. Laws of England (2nd. ed.), vol. 5, p. 361. 

The sums not received before the return of the roll were levied by the 
sheriff under the orders of the Court of Exchequer until 1822 (3 G. 4, i>. 46). 
The Court of Exchequer had jurisdiction over recognizances forfeited before 
justices of. the peace in or out of sessions. The jurisdiction was abolished by 
3 G. 4, c. 46, s. 2. B. v. Yorkshire, West Riding JJ., 7 A. & E. 583, 590; 
7 L: J. (M. C.) 9 : fi. V. Thompson, 3 Tjr. 53 ; B. v. Hamkins, M'Cl. & Y. 27. 
But this change in the law did not affect the power of the court to bring up 
the recognizance by certiorari from sessions : Ex parte Pellow, M'Cl. Ill, 683 : 
B. V. Brooke, 59 J. P. 6, and did not affect the assizes : B. v. Hankins, supra. 

The powers of the Court of Exchequer passed in 1875 to the H. C. J. 
(Exchequer Division), and in 1880 to the K. B. D. (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, ss. 16, 
32; Order in Council, 16 Dec, 188Q ; Statutory Eules and Orders Eevised 
(ed. 1904) vol. 12, p. 1, tit. Supreme Court, England). 

Present practice— Superior Courts.]— The practice of Parliament, the Supreme 
Court, and courts of assize, respecting the estreat of recognizances, is governed 
by the Fines Act, 1833 (3 & 4 W. 4, c. 99), which repealed 22 & 23 Car. 2, c. 22. 
By ss. 26, 27, 28, provision is made for the rendering of an account to the 
Treasury, by the King's coroner and attorney, and the King's Eemembrancer, 
of fines, amerciaments, penalties, and recognizances' set, imposed or forfeited 
in the High Court, and for the estreat by those of&cers under order of the 
court or a judge of such fines, etc., levied and not received, and for their pay- 
ment over of the fines, etc., as directed by the Treasury. By s. 29 it is pro- 
vided, that an account in writing of all recognizances forfeited to or for the 
use of the crown, by or before any judge or judges of assize throughout England, . 
shall within fourteen days next after such recognizances are forfeited be made 
out by the clerk of assize, with the names and residences of the parties liable 
to make payment thereof, and he shall make out two copies, one to be sent to 
the Treasury, and such recognizances shall, within the time last aforesaid, 
be duly certified and estreated by the clerk of assize into the Court of Exchequer. 
Under 22 & 23 Vict. u. 21, s. 32, clerks of assize ceased to estreat fines, etc., 
into the Court of Exchequer, and now enrol the fines and send a copy to the 



96 INDICTMENT. 

sherifE unless under s. 38 the Treasury requires return of the estreat to the 
King's Eemembrancer. The Court of Exchequer, under a writ of privy seal, 
had power over penalties and forfeitures occurring at assizes, and could com- 
pound, or, in its discretion, discharge, any recognizances. 33 H. 8, i>. 39, 
ss. 40-42 : R. v. Hankins, M'Cl. & Y. 27, and n., p. 31. The Treasury has 
a concurrent power under 3 & 4 W. 4, i>. 99, ss. 33, 38. 

The court has a discretion as to whether to order the estreat of a recognizance. 

In B. V. Doyen, Lewes assizes, 1899, 34 L. J. Newsp. 645, a Frenchman 
was admitted to bail, his father being taken as surety, and went to France, 
where he became dangerously insane, so that, through no fault of the surety, 
he could not be produced at the. trial. Wills, J., refused an application to 
estreat the recognizance, and said he could not make any order on the justices' 
clerk as to the amount, which was deposited with him. 

In R. V. Sangiovanni [1904] 68 J. P. 54, an estreat of the recognizances 
of sureties for a person committed for trial had been ordered on his failure 
to surrender. Fulton, Eecorder, directed that the estreat should not issue, on 
being satisfied that the sureties had taken all reasonable steps to secure the 
attendance of the defendant. On finding that he had left for the United States, 
they had informed the police, and had telegraphed at their own expense to 
have the defendant detained on arrival. In consequence of their action he was 
not allowed to land, and was forced to return in the ship; but this beiiig a 
Belgian vessel, it took him to a Belgian port. 

The estreat of recognizances on the Crown side of the King's Bench Division 
is regulated by the Crown Office Eules, 1906. 

" Every recognizance acknowledged on the removal of an indictment, order, 
or other proceeding, or to prosecute any information granted by the King's 
Bench Division, or for the appearing or answering of any party in the said 
Division, or for good behaviour, or for any other purpose, shall after the 
acknowledgment thereof, be transmitted to the crown office and filed there." 
B. 112. See Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 289. 

" No recognizance shall henceforth be forfeited, estreated, or put upon the 
estreat roll without the order of the court or a judge, nor unless an order or 
notice shall have been previously served upon the parties by whom such 
recognizances shall have been given, calling Bpon them to perform the 
conditions thereof, and no default shall be considered to be made in performing 
the conditions of a recognizance by reason of the trial of any indictment or 
presentment or the argument of any order or conviction or other proceeding 
having stood over where such indictment has been made a remanet, or such 
indictment or order has stood over by order of the court, or by consent in 
writing of the parties." R. 113. 

By r. 115, "Whenever it has been made to appear to the court or judge 
that a party has made default in performing the conditions of any recognizance, 
into which he has entered, filed in the crown office, the court or a judge upon 
notice to the cognizor and his sureties, if any, may order such recognizance 
to be estreated into the Exchequer without issuing any writ of scire facias: 
provided that nothing herein contained shall be deemed to take away or pre- 
judice the right of any party to have questions of fact tried by a jury in such 



ESTREAT OF RECOGNIZANCES. 97 

cases as he might before the Crown Of&ce Eules of 1886 have bo required." 
. . . The rule goes on to provide for the trial of such questions of fact, and 
concludes " nothing herein contained shall be deemed to take away the juris- 
diction of the court or judge to order the estreat of any recognizance when the 
breach of its conditions has been committed in the face of the court or judge." 
See Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 290. 

" No proceedings shall be taken in the crown office by scire facias upon 
recognizance." R. 116. 

Where the conditions of a recognizance entered into before a court of assize 
or quarter sessions have been broken the recognizance can be enforced by the 
King's Bench Division, which issues a certiorari to bring up the recognizance. 
See Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 289 : R. v. Mul Luchman [1909] U 
L. J. Ifewsp. 60. 

Practice at general or quarter sessions.] — The practice for courts of quarter 
sessions as to the estreat of recognizances other than those of the defendant 
and his sureties is governed by s. 31 of the Criminal Law Act, 1826 (7 G. 4, 
c. 64), which provides that " in every case where any person bound by recog- 
nizance for his or her appearance, or for whose appearance any other person 
shall be bound to prosecute or give evidence in any case of felony or misde- 
meanor, or to answer for any common assault, or to articles of the peace, or 
to abide an order in bastardy (this form of recognizance was abolished by 
4 & 5 W. 4, c. 76, H. 70), shall therein make default, the officer of the court by 
whom the -estreats are made out shall prepare a list in writing, specifying 
the name of every person so making default and the nature of the offence in 
respect of which every such person, or his or her surety, was so bound, together 
with the residence, trade, profession or calling of every such person or surety, 
and shall in such list distinguish the principals from the sureties, and shall 
state the cause, if known, why each such person has not apRpared, and whether 
by reason of the non-appearance of such person the ends of justice have been 
defeated or delayed : and every such officer shall and is hereby required before 
any such recognizance shall be estreated to lay such list, if at a court of oyer 
and terminer or gaol delivery in any county besides Middlesex and London " 
(i.e., City) ..." before one of the justices of these courts respectively; if it 
a court wherein a recorder or other corporate officer is the judge or one of the 
judges, before such recorder or other corporate officer; and if at a session of 
the peace, before the chairman or two other justices of the peace who shall 
have attended such court ; who are respectively authorized and required to 
examine such list, and to make such order touching the estreating or putting 
in process of any such recognizance as shall appear to them respectively to be 
just ; and it shall not be lawful for the officer of any court to estreat or put in 
process any such recognizance without the written order of the justice, 
recorder, corporate officer, chairman, or justice of the peace before whom 
respectively such list shall have been laid. ' ' 

Subject to the special provisions of the Act above quoted, the general 
practice of courts of quarter sessions is governed by the Levy of Fines Act, 
1822 (8 G. 4), c. 46, which directs (s. 2) that the clerk of the peace or town 
A.o.P. 7 



98 INDICTMENT. 

clerk shall copy on a roll sueh forfeited recognizances, and shall within such 
time as shall be fixed by the court of quarter sessions, not exceeding twenty- 
one days from the adjournment of such court, send a copy of such roll, with a 
writ of distringas and capias [see forms scheduled to 22 d 23 Vict. c. 21], 
or a writ of fieri facias and capias, to the sheriff of such county, which shall 
be the authority to him for proceeding to the immediate levying and recovering 
of such forfeited recognizances. Sectioii 8 of the same Act requires the sheriff 
to return the writ and roll on the first day of the quarter sessions with a return 
of what has been done under it, and s. S of the Levy of Fines Act, 1823 
(4 G-. 4, c. 37), requires the clerk of the peace or town clerk to send to the 
Treasury within twenty days after the holding of quarter sessions a copy or 
extract of all rolls returned by. the sheriff, with an account of the causes of the 
discharge by the court of any forfeiture, and the reason of the sheriff for any 
failure to levy a forfeited recognizance. In municipal boroughs in which the 
town clerk and clerk of the peace are not the same person, the latter is to dis- 
charge the duties imposed on the town clerk by the Act of 1822 : see 45 & 46- 
Vict. c. 50, s. 222. By b. 17 of the Quarter Sessions Act, 1849 (12 & 13 Vict. 
c. 45), the provisions of the Acts of 1822 and 1823 as to the procedure with 
respect to forfeited recognizances are applied also to fines and amercements ; 
as to which see Be Nottingham Corporation [1897] 2 Q. B. 502 : R. v. Dover, 
1 Cr. M. & E. 726; 1 Chit. Cr. L.-726 ; 4 Chit. Cr. L. 487. 

In the case of a recognizance by the defendant the order to forfeit is made 
after he is called, and on his failure to appear during the sessions, without 
any further notice or summons. In the case of sureties, ss. 5, 6, of 3 Q. i, 
c. 46, gives a right of appeal to the sessions to all persons whose recognizances 
have been forfeited if they give proper security : and on the appeal the court 
may discharge the whole or part of the forfeiture, and discharge the obligee 
if in custody, and by s. 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. 
c. 30) courts of quarter sessions are empowered to forfeit recognizances by 
principals or sureties to keep the peace or be of good behaviour, on proof of the 
conviction of the principal of any offence which is by law a breach of the condi- 
tions of the recognizance. The procedure of the Acts of 1822 (3 G. 4, c. 46) 
ia applied to recognizances so forfeited. 



Sect. 9 

INDICTMENT, IN WHAT CASES QUASHED. 
In what cases.] — It was the rule of the common law that if an indictment 
or inquisition was bad on the face of it, or if there was any such insufficiency, 
either in the caption or in the body of an indictment or inquisition, as would 
make erroneous any judgment whatsoever given' on any part thereof, the court 
might in its discretion quash the indictment. 2 Hawk. c. 25, ss. 146-149; 
1 Chit. Cr. L. (2nd ed.) 298 : R. v. Taylor, 9 Dowl. 600. An indictment 
against six for exercising a trade was quashed because it was a distinct offence 
in each, and could not be made the subject of a joint prosecution. B. v. 



IN WHAT CASES QUASHED. 99 

Tucker, 4 Bnrr. 2046 : R. v. Weston, 1 Str. 623. In B. v. Philips, 2 Str. 921, 
judgment was arrested on an indictment of six for perjury (to which four 
pleaded and were {vonvicted), on the ground that the offence was in its nature 
several, and two could not be indicted together for it. And in several instances 
indictments have been quashed, because the facts stated in them did not 
amount to an offence punishable by law : see R. v. Burkett, Andr. 230 : R, v. 
Sarmon, 1 Burr. 516 : R. v. Wright, 1 Burr. 543 : R. v. Philpotts, 1 C. & K. 
112; for instance, an indictment against an overseer for misconduct in prepar- 
ing electoral registers was quashed on the ground that the offence, if any, 
was not punishable on indictment. B. v. Hall [1891] 1 Q. B. 747 j 60 L. J. 
(M. C.) 129. An indictment under 46 & 47 Vict. c. 51, which charged the 
defendant with "corrupt practices," at a parliamentary election, without 
setting out the nature of such corrupt practices as " bribery," etc., was quashed 
as being too general. R. v. Norton, 16 Cox, 59, Pollock, B., approved by 
the majority of the judges in R. v. Stroulger, 17 Q. B. D. 327 ; 55 L. J. 
(M. C.).. 137. An indictinent for obtaining money by false pretences was 
quashed by the judge at the trial, after the case for the prosecution had closed, 
on the judge discovering that the indictment did not contain the words " with 
intent to defraud." R. v. James, 12 Cox, 127, Lush, J. An indictment for 
libel was quashed, the expressions used in the alleged libel not being primd 
facie libellous, and the indictment containing no averments or innuendoes 
showing that those expressions were intended to impute improper conduct to 
the prosecutor. B. v. Yates, 12 Cox, 233, Quain, J. But now, under the 
Indictments Act, 1915 (5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90), s. 5 (1), wide powers of amend- 
ment are given, and defects which would formerly have been fatal will 
ordinarily be met by the application of those powers. See ante, p. 54. 

If the application is made on the part of the prosecution, the court will 
quash the indictment in all cases where it appears to be so defective that the 
defendant cannot be convicted on it, and where the prosecution appears to be 
bond fide, and not instituted from malicious motives, or for the purposes of 
oppression. If the prosecution is instituted by the attorney-general, an appli- 
cation to quash the indictment is never made upon the part of the prosecutor, 
because the attorney-general may himself enter a nolle prosequi, which vrill 
have the same effect (see post, p. 122). R. v. Stratton, 1 Doug. 239; cf. R. 
V. Colling, 2 Cox, 184, as to the procedure where the indictment has been 
removed by certiorari. 

An application to quash may, it would aeem, be made upon the part of the 
prosecution at any time before the defendant has been actually tried upon the 
indictment. See R. v. Webb, 3 Burr. 1468; 1 W. Bl. 460. But after judg- 
ment for the prisoner on demurrer, the indictment cannot be quashed at the 
instance of the prosecutor. R. v. . W. Smith, 2 M. & Eob. 109. Where the 
application is made to the High Court, the rule is absolute in the first instance, 
if the defendant has not appeared and pleaded. B. v. Stowell, 1 Dowl. 
(N. S.) 320. 

Before an application of this kind is made on the part of the prosecution, a new 
bill for the same offence must have been preferred against the defendant and 
found. R. V. Wynn, 2 East, 226. And when the court, upon such an applica- 



100 INDICTMENT. 

tion, orders the former indictment to be quashed, it is usually upon terms, 
namely, that the prosecutor shall pay to the defendant such costs as he may 
have incurred by reason of the former indictment. B. v. Webb, 3 Burr. 1468; 1 
W. Bl. 460. R. V. Dunn, 1 C. & K. 730 ; that the second indictment shall 
stand in the same plight and condition to all intents and purposes that the 
first would have done if it were not quashed : B. v. Glenn, 3 B. & Aid. 373 : 
B. V. Webb, supra; and (particularly where there has been any vexations 
delay upon the part of the prosecutor. Id.) that the name of the prosecutor 
be disclosed. R. v. Glenn, supra. 

Where the application is made upon the part of the defendant, the courts 
have almost uniformly refused to quash an indictment, where it appeared to 
be for some grave crime, such as treason or felony; Com. Dig. Indictment 
(H.); 2 Hawk. c. 25, s. 146; 1 East, P. C. 110 : B. v. Sheares, 27 St. Tr. 
255, 266; 1 Chit. Or. L. 298 : B. v. Lynch [1903] 1 K. B. 744 : R. v. Johnson, 
1 Wils. 325 ; or for forgery, perjury, subornation, or nuisance to highways. 
B. V. Belton, 1 Salk. 372 : Anm., 1 Vent. 369; cf. 1 Sid. 54 : B. v. Thomas, 
3 D. & E. 621; R. v. Burnby, 5 Q. B. 348; 13 L. J. (M. C.) 29: R. v. 
Withers, 4 Cox, 17. They have also refused to quash indictments for cheat- 
ing : R. v. Orbell, 6 Mod. 42; for selling flour by false weights : R. v. Crookes, 

3 Burr. 1841; for extortion or oppression: R. v. Wadsworth, 5 Mod. 13; 
for not executing a magistrate's warrant : R. Y. Bailey, 2 Str. 1211; against' 
overseers for not paying money over to their successors : B. v. King, 2 Str. 
1268; and the like. They have also refused to quash indictments for not 
repairing highways or bridges, or for other public nuisances, R. v. Belton, 
1 Salk. 372 : Anon., 1 Vent. 369 : R. v. Bishop, Andr. 220 : B. v. Sutton, 

4 Burr. 2116, unless there is a certificate that the nuisance is removed; R. v. 
Leytm, Cro. Car. 584; B. v. Wigg, 2 Salk. 460; 1 Ld. Eaym. 1165; nor 
will they quash an indictment for forcible entry, B. Y. Dyer, 6 Mod. 96, unless 
perhaps, when the possession has been afterwards given up. 

But when it is made clear, either on the face of an indictment or by 
af&davit, that it has been found without jurisdiction, the court wiir quash it 
on motion by the defendant after plea pleaded ; although in a doubtful case 
they will leave him to test its validity by demurrer (JJ. v. Brownlow, 11 A. 
& E. 119, 127, 128) or motion in arrest of judgment (R. Y. Lynch [1903] 
1 K. B. 444 ; R. v. Sheares, 27 St. Tr. 359) or by appeal. It is said that a 
motion to quash will not be granted upon a trial of an indictment, at nisi 
prius, if the objections taken appear on the record. R. v. Souter, 2 Stark. 
(N. P.) 423; Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 140. It is no ground for 
quashing an indictment for non-compliance with the provisions of the 
Vexatious Indictments Act (22 & 23 Vict. c. 17, s. 1, ante, p. 67) that the 
charge arising in one petty sessional division of a county, the committal is by 
justices sitting in and acting for another petty sessional division of the same 
county, such a committal being good in. point of law. R. v. Beckley, 20 
Q. B. D. 187; 57 L. J. (M. C.) 22. 

How.] — The application to quash an indictment is made to the court where 
the bill is found ; except in cases of indictments at sessions or in other inferior 



WHEN AND WHERE TRIED. 101 

courts, in which oases the application may be made to the Bigh Court of Justice 
(King's Bench Division) after removing the record by oerUorari. But a court 
of quarter sessions has itself authority to quash an indictment found there, 
before plea pleaded. R. v. Wilson, 6 Q. B. 620; 14 L. J. (M. C.) 3. 

It was formerly held that the application, if made upon the part of the 
defendant, must in all cases be made before plea pleaded; Post. 231 : R. v. 
Rookwood, cas. temp. Holt, 684; 13 St. Tr. 139; and see R. v. Thompson 
[1914] 2 K. B. 99; 83 L. J. (K. B.) 643; 110 L. T. 272; 78 J. P. 212; 
30 T. L. E. 223; 9 Cr. App. E. 252; but this, while just and convenient, is 
not esisential : R. v. Chappie, 17 Cox, 455; and where it is clear that an 
indictment has been found without jurisdiction, or' has a substantial and 
apparent defect, the court will quash it on motion by the defendant after 
plea pleaded: R. v. Heane, 4 B. & S. 947; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 115; and 
even after the ease for the prosecution had closed. R. v. James, 12 Cox, 
127. As to appeal, see R. v. Thompson, supra. Where an indictment 
had already, upon the application of the defendant, been removed into the 
Court of King's Bench by certiorari, the court refused to entertain a motion 
by the defendant to quash the indictment after a forfeiture of his recognizance 
by not having carried the record down for trial; Anon, 1 Salk. 380; and a 
motion to quash after certiorari, trial and conviction has been refused. R. v. 
Marsh, 6 A. & E. 236. 

By sub-s. 1 of s. 5 of the Indictments Act, 1915 (ante, p. 64) the court 
may before trial or at any stage of a trial amend a defective indictment unless, 
having regard to the merits of the case, the required amendments cannot be 
made without injustice, and may make such order as to the payment of any 
costs incurred owing to the necessity for amendment as the court thinks fit. 

By sub-s. 2, where an indictment is so amended, a note of the order for 
amendment shall be endorsed on the indictment, and the indictment shall be 
treated for the purposes of the trial and for the purposes of all proceedings 
in connection therewith as having been found by the grand jury in the amended 
form. 



Sect. 10. 

INDICTMENT, WHEN AND WHERE TBIED. 

When.]— Indictments for high treason or felony are usually tried at the 
same assizes or sessions at which they are preferred to and found by the grand 
jury. This practice accords with the requirements of s. 6 of the Habeas Corpus 
Act, 1679 (31 Car. 2, c. 2). 

The same course is now pursued as to misdemeanors. By 14 & 15 Vict. 
0. 100, s. 27, ■■ no person prosecuted shall be entitled to traverse or postpone 
the trial of any indictment found against him at any session of the peace, 
session of oyer and terminer, or session of ga-ol delivery : provided always, 



102 INDICTMENT. 

that if the court, upon the application of the person so indicted or o&i«^m, 
shall be of opinion that he ought to be allowed a further time, either to prepare 
for hia defence or otherwise, such court may adjourn the trial of such person 
to the next subsequent session, and upon such terms as to bail or otherwise 
as to Buch court shall seem meet, and may respite the recognizances of the 
prosecutor and witnesses accordingly, in which case the prosecutor and wit- 
nesses shall be bound to attend to prosecute and give evidence at such 
subsequent session without entering into any fresh recognizance for that pur- 
pose." This enactment abolished the old practice which entitled the defendant 
in oases of misdemeanor to postpone his trial till the nest assizes or sessions. 
4 El. Com, 351. 

Postponement of trial.]— The trial may, however, be postponed to the next 
assizes or sessions at the instance of the prosecutor or the defendant, on 
showing to the court, a sufficient cause for the delay , such as the sudden ilbaesB 
of the prisoner, or the unavoidable absence or illness of a necessary and 
material witness, the existence of prejudice in the jury, and the like. See 
31 Oar. 2, c. 2, s. 6 : R. v. D'Bon, 3 Burr. 1513 : R. v. JolUffe, i T. E. 286 : 
R. V. Morphew, 2 M. & Sel. 602 : R. v. Hunter, 3 C. & P. 591 : B. v. SUeek, 
2 C. & P. 413 : R. v. Stevenson, 3 Leach, 546 : R. v. Chapman, 8 C. & P. 558 : 
R. V. Owen, 9 C. & P. 83 : R. v. Maoarthy, C. & Mar. 625 : R. v. Mobbs, 
2 F. & F. 18 : R. V. Langhurst, 10 Cox, 353 : B. v. Taylcfr, 11 Cox, 340 : B. v. 
Dripps, 13 Cox, 25 (Ir.). In R. v. Palmer, 6 C. & P. 652, the Central Criminal 
Court postponed until the next session the presentment of a bill for arson 
to the grand jury, upon the ground of the illness of a witness sworn to be 
material, and refused to examine her deposition to ascertain whether she 
deposed to material facts. In R. v. Heesom, 14 Cox, 40, it was held by 
Lush, J., that the presentment of a bill to the grand jury cannot be postponed 
to the next assizes, on the ground that other and like charges may before that 
time be brought against the prisoner, and that if no bill was presented tha 
prisoner would be entitled to her discharge on bail. His lordship said that 
the case of R. y. Palmer, supra, was an application founded on the 
absence of a material witness for the Crown, which was provided for by s. 6 of 
the Habeas Corpus Act, 1679 (31 Car. iJ, c. 2). But see R. v. Doran, 10 Or. 
App. E. 67. Where a witness for the Crown, on the ground of whose ilhiess 
it is sought to postpone the trial, was not examined before the committing 
magistrate, the court will require an affidavit as to what the witness is expected 
^ prove. R. v. Savage, 1 C. & K. 75 : R, v., Lawrence, 4 F. & F. 901. In 
to the ^"^'°'^' "^^ *^°^' ^' ^^gg^'l^y- I^-J-. postponed the presentment of a bill 
house* in^^V^^*'^^^' °" ^^^ ground tiat all the witnesses resided af a work- 
assizes would^b ^?^^'"P°^ ^^^ broken out, and that their attendance at the 
admitted the nr^ *°gerous to the public, as they might carry infection, and 
assizes. The produ t^, °, °° ^'^ °'"'° recognizances to: appear at the next 

before the magistrate°"a d'^^ Prosecution at the trial of evidence not produced 
the trial, may be groiinTfo°°' ■™™™"°'''**^^ *° *'^^ prisoner previously to 
the defendant. B. v Flanna" ^°^*P°"^™ent of the trial in the interests of 
■nagan, 15 Cox, 403. Where the defendant was 



POSTPONEMENT OF TRIAL. TO3 

indicted for having carnal knowledge of a girl under ten years old, an appli- 
cation by the prosecution for the postponement of the trial, with a view to 
the instruction of the girl, was, refused. B. v. Nicholas, 2 C. & K. 246; and 
see R. V. Cox, 62 J. P. 89, and 2 Euss. Or. (7th ed.) 2267, 2268. It seems that 
the trial may be postponed, on the defendant's application, after the jury 
have been charged with the indictment, and before any evidence has been 
given in the case. R. v. Fitzgerald, 1 C. & K. 201. See R. v. Downey, 3 Cr. 
&'Dix. (Ir.) 314. Where the application is made by the defendant, he will 
be remanded and detained in custody until the next assizes or sessions ; but 
where the application is made by the prosecutor, it is in the discretion of the 
court either to detain the defendant in custody or admit him to bail, or to 
discharge him on his own recognizances. B. v. Beardmore, 7 C. & P. 497 ■ 
R. V. Parish, Id. 782. : R. v. Osborne, Id. 799 : B. v. Bridgman, G. & Mar. 271. 
After a bill has been found, if the offence is of a serious nature, or an absent 
witnesis has been kept out of the way by the defence, the court will not admit 
the prisoner to bail. B. v. Chapman, 8 C. & P. 558 : B. v. Guttridge, 9 0. &• P. 
228 : R. V. Owen, Id. 83 : R. v. Bowen, Id. 509. See Bail, ante, p. 87. 

By sub-s. 4 of s. 5 of the Indictments Act, 1915 (ante, p. 54), where before 
trial or at any stage of a trial the court is of opinion that a postponement is 
expedient as a consequence of the indictment having been amended or a 
separate trial of a count ordered under the Act, the court shall make such 
order as to i>ostponement as appears necessary. 

By sub-s 5, wheire an order of the court is made under this section for a 
separate trial or for the postponement of a trial — (a) if such order is made 
during a trial the court may discharge the jury from giving a verdict on the 
count or counts of which the trial is postponed or on the indictment, as the 
case may be; (6) the procedure on the separate trial of a count shall be the 
same in all respects as if the count had been found in a separate indictment, 
and the procedure on the postponed trial shall be the same in all respects (if 
the jury has been discharged) as if the trial had not commenced ; (c) the court 
may make such order as it thinks fit ais to costs, bail, enlargement of recog- 
nizances and otherwise. 

By sub-s. 6, any power of the court under this section shall be in addition to 
and not in derogation of any other power of the court for the same or similar 
purposes. 

Under the Assizes Belief Act, 1889 (62 & 53 Vict. c. 12), if a person com- 
mitted for trial at sessions is not tried at the next sessions, the next court 
of assize may on his application try or discharge him or release him on bail, 
unless the delay is due to special reasons, such as the removal of the indict- 
ment by certiorari, or the impossibility of producing the witnesses for the 
crown. S. 3 (1) (3). If the next court of quarter sessions has not tried him 
before the next subsequent assizes, the judge of assize must try or discharge 
him. S. 3 (2). 

Section 6 of the Habeas Corpus Act, 1679 (31 Car. 2, c. 2), provides for the 
release of persons committed for trial for high treason or felony if they are not 
indicted at the latest in the second term, assizes, or sessions after their com- 
mittal. 



104 INDICTMENT. 

Where.]— Indictments for felonies and misdemeanors are tried within the 
jurisdiction in which the offence is committed, or in which by some statute 
it may lawfully be tried (ante, pp. 29 et seq.), and before the court in which 
the indictment is preferred, or into which it has been removed by certiorari or 
order of removal. 

The following statement will show the courts competent to try any indict- 
able offence, subject to the. rules as to venue and national jurisdiction stated 
ante, pp. 29 et seq. 

High Court.]— The High Court of Justice (K. B. D.), as the successor of the 
Court of King's Bench, has jurisdiction to try all indictable offences against 
the law of England. This jurisdiction is concurrent with that of the courts of 
oyer and terminer, or gaol delivery, or courts of quarter sessions. See Short 
and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 86. The jurisdiction is not exercised except (1) 
Where the indictment is removed into the court by certiorari; (2) Where the 
indictment is found in the counties of London or Middlesex by a grand jury 
summoned under 35 & 36 Vict. c. 52, and E. S. C, Jan. 15, 1903, made under 
s. 89 (3) of the Local Government Act, 1888; (3) In the case of criminal 
informations filed in the court {see post, pp. 127 et seq.). The court has 
special ■ jurisdiction to try the following offences : — Treason and misprision of 
treason committed out of the realm (35 H. 8, c. 2 : B. v. Lynch [1903] 1 K. B. 
444) ; wilful neglect or delay to deliver or transmit writs for the election of 
members of parliament (63 G. 3, c. 89, s. 6) ; oppressions and crimes by 
governors, etc., of colonies, or persons in public employment out of Great 
Britain (11 W. 3, u. 12; 42 G. 3, c. 85; 1 & 2 Geo. 5, c. 28, o. 10; offences by 
officials of the crown in India (10 G. 3, c. 47, s. 4 ; 13 G. 3, c. 63, s. 39 ; 21 G. 3, 
c. 70, B. 7). As to offences in India, see Ilbert, Government of India (2nd ed.) 
265 et seq. None of the above Acts, except 35 H. 8, c. 2, appears to extend 
to treason or felony. R. v. Shawe, 5 M. & Sel. 408. Prosecutions under them 
have been rare. See R. v. Jones, 8 Bast, 31; Picton's case, 30 St. Tr. 225 ; 
R. V. Eyre, L. E. 3 Q. B. 487 : R. v. Turner [1889] 24 L. J. Newsp. 466, 469, 
479; Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 85. 

Courts of Assize, etc.'} — Courts acting under a commission of assize only try 
such criminal offences as are sent to them for trial on a transcript of a record 
of the King's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice. See Short and 
Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 110; post, tit. Certiorari, p. 110). The ordinary 
circuit courts of oyer and terminer and gaol delivery have jurisdiction to try any 
offeiice triable at common law, or by statute, in the county or other district 
for which they are commissioned, and not specifically excluded from their 
jurisdiction. Courts of assize, oyer and terminer, and gaol delivery, were 
made part of the High Court by ss. 16, 29 of the Judicature Act, 1873 : R. v. 
Dudley, 14 Q. B. D. 273, 560 : R. v. Parke [1903] 2 K. B. 432, 436 : R. v. 
Davies [1906] 1 K. B. 32. Special commissions of oyer and terminer, etc., 
can be issued, but are now rare. The jurisdiction of these courts is concurreiit 
with that of quarter sessions as to cases wherein the latter have jurisdiction. 

The sittings of courts of assize are regulated by Orders in Council. As lo 



COURT OF TRIAL. 105 

the dispensing with the holding of the court when there is no business, see 
8 Edw. 7, c. 41, ss. 1, 2, ante, p. 72. 

Central Criminal Court.} — The Central Criminal Court is created by a com- 
mission of oyer and terminer and gaol delivery for the district allotted to it, 
and for the prisons appointed as its prisons (4 & 5 W. 4, c. 36, ss. 2-4; 44 & 15 
Vict. c. 64, s. 2 : iJ. v. Boaler, 17 Cox, 569 ; B. v. Marshall, 34 L. J. Newsp. 
48). It has also a special admiralty jurisdiction (4 & 5 W. 4, c. 36, s. 22). 
The history of the court is to be found in 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1135; and see 
Leverson v. R., L. E. 4 Q. B. 894. Under the Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 
Vict. c. 66), ss. 16, 29, it has become a branch of the High Court. B. v. 
Parke [1903] 2 K. B. 432, 439, 442. 

The court must hold sessions at least twelve times a year (4 & 5 W. 4, c. 36, 
s. 15). The sessions are fixed annually by four . or more judges of the High 
Court in October of each year (44 & 45 Vict. c. 68, js. 18). 

Courts of Quarter Sessions: (a) Belation to courts of assize.] — Where the 
quarter sessions of a county occur while the judge of assize is proceeding with 
the trial of prisoners in that county, after the grand jury have been discharged, 
it has been considered proper that the quarter sessions should not proceed with 
the trial of prisoners, but after disposing of their other business, should 
adjourn to a future day. See 9 C. & P. 790. .But as the authority of a 
county or borough court of quarter sessions is not in law determined or 
suspended by the commission of assize, a trial at the sessions, during the 
continuance of the assizes in the same county, is valid in law. Smith v. B., 

13 Q. B. 738; 18 L. J. (M. C.) 207. As regards quarter sessions within the 
Central Criminal Court district, this rule is expressly recognized by 4 & 5 W. 4, 
c. 36, 3. 21. 

It was the duty of the sheriff under 3 H. 7, u. 3, and is the duty of the 
governor of the prison, to lay before the court of assize or quarter sessions a 
calendar of prisoners in the prison for trial before it : 5 & 6 W. 4, c. 38, s. 3; 

14 & 15 Vict. c. 55, s. 19; and 28 & 29 Vict. c. 126, s. 62. 

(t) Sittings.] — County quarter sessions must be held in the first week after 
31st March, 24th June, 11th October and 28th December respectively (11 G. 4, 
and 1 W. 4, u. 70, e. 35), unless the justices at special meeting alter the date 
so that the sessions may be held not earlier than fourteen days before nor 
later than fourteen days after the week in which they would otherwise be 
held (8 Edw. 7, c. 41, s. 3). These provisions do not preclude the justices 
from holding other general sessions or from holding quarter sessions by 
adjournment a(» other dates. See 1 & 2 Vict. u. 4; Archbold Q. S. (6th ed.) 
64. As to forming a second court, see 21 & 22 Vict. c. 73, ss. 9-11. 

The dates of borough quarter sessions are fixed by the recorder subject to 
the directions of the Home Secretary (45 & 46 Vict. o. 50, a. 165) : see 
Archbold Q. S. (6th ed.) 20. For table of boroughs which have separate 
courts of quarter sessions, see Archbold Q. S. (6th ed.) 614. As to forming 
a second court, see 45 & 46 Vict. c. 50, s. 168. 



lOa INDICTMENT. 

When not more than five days before the time fixed for holding quarter 
sessions, it appears that there is no business to be transacted, the court need 
not be held, and a notice may be sent dispensing with the attendance of 
jurors, 8 Edw. 7, c. 41, ss. 1, 2. 

Some judges of assize have considered it their duty to deliver the gaols of 
the prisoners whom they found there, although the offences for which such 
prisoners had been committed were within the jurisdiction of' quarter sessioDs, 
and although the prosecutor and his witnesses had been bound over to proseriite 
and give evidence at quarter sessions. The English decisions on this queslioM 
are collected in R. v. Clijford [1895] 16 New South Wales Eep. (Law) 12. 

The Assizes Relief Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. u. 12), provides (s. 1) that when- 
ever any person has been committed to gaol or admitted to bail by a justice 
or justices under s. 22 or s. 25 of 11 & 12 Vict. o. 42, charged with an indict- 
able offence triable at quarter sessions, the persons bound over to prosecute 
and give evidence shall be bound over to attend for that purpose at the next 
practicable court of quarter sessions having jurisdiction to try such person for 
such offence, unless such justice or justices for special reasons think fit other- 
wise to direct; and where the persons are so bound over, the person charged 
shall be tried at the said court of quarter sessions, and a court of oyer and 
terminer or general gaol delivery shall not be required to deliver such person 
from gaol, unless the High Ciourt of Justice shall by order direct that such 
person shall be indicted and tried at a court of oyer and terminer or general 
gaol delivery having jurisdiction to try him for such offence. Sub-s. 2 of s. 1 
prescribes the procedure where the High Court has made the order mentioned 
in sub-s. 1. Section 3 prescribes the course of procedure where a prisoner 
having been committed to gaol on a charge for an indictable offence, and 
persons having been bound over to prosecute and give evidence at quarter 
sessions, the prisoner is not tried at those sessions. 

(c) Jurisdiction.] — The present form of the Commission of the Peace (pre- 
scribed by Order in Council of Feb. 22, 1878, and printed in Statutory Rules 
and Orders Eevised (ed. 1904) vol. 1, tit. Clerk of the Cromn), authorizes the 
justices to inquire "of all and in manner of crimes and trespasses, and all 
and singular other offences of which the justices of our peace may or ought 
lawfully to inquire," . . except in oases of difficulty, which are to be trans- 
mitted to the assizes, " and to hear and determine all and singular the crimes, 
trespasses, and offences aforesaid according to the laws and statutes of our 
realm, as in the like case it has been accustomed or ought to be done." As 
to the jurisdiction of courts of quarter sessions under the commission of the 
peace, see Archbold Q. S. (6th ed.) : Keen v. R., 10 Q. B. 928; 2 Cox, 341. 

A court of county or borough quarter sessions has jurisdiction to try any 
indictable offence except those in the annexed list. The justices of the Soke of 
Peterborough are said to have a wider jurisdiction; see Gaches, Sokis of Peter^ 
borough, p. 52, 40 L. J. NeWSp., 8 July, 1905. But this has been questioned. 
See R. y. Holdich, 15 Cr. App. E. 122. The jurisdiction of quarter sessions rests 



JURISDICTION OF QUARTER SESSIONS. 107 

on the Quarter Sessions Act, 1842 (5 & 6 Vict. o. 38,. s. 1), except in the cases 
in italics, which depend on the particular statutes specified : — ■ 

1. Treason, or misprision of treason ; 

2. Murder; 

3. Capital felony, or any felony, which when committed by a person not 
previously convicted of felony, is punishable by penal servitude for life 
HO & 21 Vict. c. 3, ss. 2, 6); 

4. Offences against the King's title, prerogative, person, or government, or 
against either House of Parliament ; 

5. Offences subject to the penalties of preemunire ; 

6. Blasphemy, and offences against religion ; 

7. Administering or taking unlawful oaths ; 

8. Any offence against the Perjury Act, 1911, or any offence which under 
any enactment for the time being in force is declared to be perjury or to be 
punishable as perjury or as subornation of perjury (1 & 2 Geo. 5, c. 6, s. 10) ; 

9. Any offence against the Forgery Act, 1913, or any offence which under 
any enactment for the time being in force is declared to be forgery or to be 
punishable as forgery (3 & 4 Geo. 5, c. 27, s. 13); 

10. Offences against the False Personation Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 36, 
a. 3); "* 

11. Unlawfully and maliciously setting fire to crops of corn, grain, or 
pulse, or to any part of a wood, coppice, or plantation Of trees, or to any 
heath, gorse, furze, or fern; 

12. Offences against a. 9 of the Night Poaching Act, 1828 (9 G. 4, c. 69) ; 

13. Bigamy and offences against the laws relating to marriage ; 

14. Abduction of women and girls, and indictable offences against the 
Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885 (48 & 49 Vict. c. 69, s. 17) ; and incest 
(8 Bdw. 7, c. 45, B. 4,(2)); 

15. Endeavouring to conceal the birth of a child ; 

16. Composing, printing, or publishing blasphemous, seditions, or defama- 
tory libels ; 

17- Bribery [except bribery of and by members, etc., of corporations, within 
52 & 53 Vict. i;. 69, s. 6] ; and undue influence (17 & 18 Vict. ^. 102, a. 10) ; 

18. Corrupt practices' at parliamentary or . municipal elections , including 
elections of county, district, and parish councils, arid of boards of guardians 
(17 & 18 Vict. c. 102, s. 10; 46 & 47 Vict. c. 51, s. 53; 47 & 48 Vict. c. 70, 
ss. 30, 36, & 36, soh. ; 51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 75 ; 66 & 57 Vict, c.' 73, s. 48), 
or elections in the City of London (47 & 48 Vict. c. 70, s. 35 ; 50 & 61 Vict. 
c. xiii.) ; or of metropolitan borough councils (62 & 63 Vict. c. 14) ; 

19. Misdemeanors against the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1906 (6 Edw. 7, 
u. 34, ». 2 (S) ). (a) 

20. Unlawful combinations and conspiracies, except conspiracies and oom- 



(o) Under this Act the sessions h^ve no jurisdiction to inquire ol such offences 
which seems to preclude the grand jury from finding a bill for an offence under the Act. 
Quarter sessions have jurisdiction (o try offences under the Public Bodies Corrupt 
Practicet Act [1889] (62 & 63 Vict. c. 69). See s. 6 of that Act'. ' ' 



108 INDICTMENT. 

binations to commit any offence which the justices or recorder respectively 
have or has jurisdiction to try when committed by one person ; 

21. Stealing or fraudulently taking, or injuring or destroying, records or 
documents belonging to any court of law or equity, or relating to any pro- 
ceeding therein ; 

22. Stealing, or fraudulently destroying or concealing, wills or testamentary 
papers or any document or written instrument being or containing evidence 
of the title to any real estate, or any interest in lands, tenements, or 
hereditaments ; 

23. Misdemeanors against ss. 20, 21, and 22 of the Larceny Act, 1916 (which 
relate to fraudulent conversion, fraudulent conversion by trustee, factors obtain- 
ing advances on the property of their principals), 6 & 7 Geo. 5, t. 50, b. 38 ; 

24. Offences against the Official Secrets Acts , 1911 and 1920 (1 & -2 Geo. 5, 
c. 28, s. 10 (3) ; 10 & 11 Geo. 5, c. 74). 

By the Burglary Act, 1896 (69 & 60 Vict. i;. 57), quarter sessions were given 
jurisdiction to try a person charged with burglary ; but the Act directed that a 
justice of the peace when committing for trial a person charged with that offence 
should commit him for trial before a court of assize unless owing to the absence 
' of any circumstances which make the case a grave or difficult one he thinks it 
expedient in the interests of justice to commit him for trial before a court of 
quarter sessions ; and the Assizes Belief Act, 1889, ishall then apply. These 
provisions are now repealed, but re-enacted, by the Larceny Act, 1916, s. 38. 

Offences against the bankruptcy laws are triable at quarter sessions : see 
32 & 83 Vict. ^. 62, b. 20, and 37 & 38 Vict. ^. 96 (Stat. Law Eev.), which 
repealed the provision to the contrary in 5 & 6 Vict. c. 38, s. 1. 

The jurisdiction of quarter sessions to try a person for the common law 
misdemeanor of attempting to commit suicide is not taken away by 24 & 25 
Vict. c. 100, ss. 11-16, which render an attempt to commit murder a felony, 
punishable by, penal servitude for life; for attempting to kill one's self is not 
an attempt to commit murder within the meaning of that statute, i?. v. 
Burgess, L. & C. 258; 32 L. J. (M. C.) 55. Where an indictment charged 
that the defendants conspired by divers false pretences to defraud the prose- 
cutor of his money; and it was, objected that the facts ought to have been set 
out, BO as to show that the false pretences were within the jurisdiction of the 
sessions, by which the indictment had been tried, the court of Queen's Bench 
held that, after verdict it must be taken that the jury had found the defen- 
dants guilty on facts, proving a conspiracy to defraud by such false pretences 
as were cognizable by the sessions. Latham v. B., 5 B. & S. 635; 33 L J 
(M. C.) 197. 

A court of quarter sessions cannot try an indictment against a corporation. 
See ante, p. 10, fost, p. 111. 

Courts of quarter sessions have power to transmit to the assizes for trial 
indictments found before them which they have no jurisdiction to try (ante, 
p 107, or which from the nature of the charge should more properly 
be tried at assizes. The power arises under, the commission of the peace, and 
is preserved by s. 5 of the Assizes Relief Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 12). It is 



JUEISDICTION OF QUARTER SESSIONS. 109 

specifically given as to quarter sessions within the Central Criminal Court 
district by 4 & 5 W. 4, u. 36, s. 19. These powers are distinct from the 
procedure by certiorari, infra. 

Indictments found at the sessions and transmitted by the justices to the 
assizes must be tried at the assizes, although they have not been removed by 
certiorari. R. v. Wetherell, E. & E. 381. An indictment was found at 
quarter sessions against the defendant, who was, upon a certificate of such 
finding, taken before a justice under 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 3, and bound by 
recognizances to appear and plead at the assizes. The indictment was not 
transmitted to the assizes, but remained in the custody of the clerk of the 
peace. It was held that the transmission of the indictment to the assizes 
was in the discretion of the justices, and that the judge of assize had no power 
to order such transmission, and that the indictment having been found at 
sessions and not transmitted for trial at the assizes, it could not be tried 
at the assizes. Another indictment against the defendant for the same offence 
having however been found by the grand jury at the assizes, it was held, that 
the defendant being bound by the above-mentioned recognizance, must be 
called upon it to plead to such second indictment. B. v. Wildman, 12 Cox, 
354, Keating, J. 

Change of place of trial.] — The King's Bench Division of the High Court 
of Justice has jurisdiction to change the place of trial of any felony or misde- 
meanor, whenever it is necessary for the purpose of securing, so far as possible, 
a fair and impartial trial. R. v. Holden, 5 B. & Ad. 34Y, 354, Denman, C.J. • 
and see R. v. Boughton [1895] 2 Ir. Eep. 386; ex parte Gyde, 72 J. P. 504. 
For this purpose a writ of certiorari must issue to remove the indictment into 
the King's Bench Division, unless the court or a judge think fit to direct the 
trial to be held at the Central Criminal Court, under 19 & 20 Vict. c. 16, post, 
p. 118. Indictments may be removed from the Crown Court of Assize without 
a certiorari, because the court is made part of the High Court by the Judicature 
Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), ss. 16, 29. B. v. Dudley, 14 Q. B. D. 273, 560; 
64 L. J. (M. C.) 32. An order, however, for their removal is requisite, which 
is obtained in the same way, and is subject to the same conditions as 
certiorari. See Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, rr. 12-19, post, pp. 115, 119. Short 
and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 106, 543. 



110 INDICTMENT. 



Sect. 11. 

CERTIOBARI. 

The writ of certiorari is an original writ, usually issuing out of the King's 
Benoli Division, when the crown would be certified of any record in any other 
court of record. Fitz. N. B. 245 a ; 36 & 37 Vict. u. 66, ». 34. It may also, 
under 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 36, s. 16, be issued by the judges of the High Court who. 
are in the commission of the Central Criminal Court, and by the recorder of 
the city of London, to remove from courts of quarter sessions having jurisdic- 
tion within the Central Criminal Court district, indictments found in sucK 
courts for offences cognizable by the Central Criminal Court under the Act; 
and under 5 & 6 Vict. c. 38, s. 2, may be issued by a judge of assize in respect 
of indictments found or taken before courts of quarter sessions (for any county 
or borough within his commission) in respect of offences which they have no 
jurisdiction to try {ante, p. 106). There seems, , however, to be no 
power to remove by certiorari the order of a justice committing a person for 
trial for an indictable offence. See R. v. Roscommon Justices [1894] 2 Ir. 
Eep. 158. The power to remove by certiorari an indictment foimd at quarfjer 
sessions is not affected by 52 & 53 Vict. c. 12 {Assizes Relief Act, 1889). See 
B. 5. The writ is directed in the King's name to the judges or officers of 
inferior courts, requiring them to return the records of a certain indictment 
or inquisition depending before them, in order that the party may have the 
benefit of a trial in the King's Bench Division, or before such justices as his 
Majesty shall assign to hear and determine the cause. For the removal of 
indictments into the King's Bench Division the writ is sued out of the King's 
Bench Division and issued from the crown of&ce : that division of the High 
Court, as successor to the old Court of King's Bench, having a general 
superintendence over all other courts of criminal jurisdiction, whether ancient 
or newly created (2 Hawk. c. 27, s. 22), and being the sovereign ordinary 
court of .justice in criminal, causes. 4. Bl. Com. 320 : 36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, 
o. 34. This writ is frequently used in order the better to consider and 
determine the validity of indictments and the proceedings thereon, and to 
prevent a partial and insufficient trial, which it is apprehended would take 
place in the original jurisdiction. 1 Chit. Cr. L. 371; 2 Hale, 210. The 
effect of the writ is to remove all proceedings such as are deisoribed therein, 
which have taken place between the teste and return, although they may 
have been commenced after the teste. R. v. Battams, 1 Bast, 298; 2 Hawk, 
c. 27, 18. 73. It may be applied for before or after the finding of any indict- 
ment for misdemeanor; 60 Gr. 3 and 1 G. 4, c. 4, ». 4. - The writ is of no 
effect unless it is delivered to the court below before the time for its return 
has expired. 

Form ot the writ.] — The following is the-form of the writ of certiorari to 
remove an indictment into the King's Bench Division, addressed to the justices 
of quarter sessions : — 



CERTIORARI. Ill 

G-eorg'e the Fifth,, by the grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great 
Britain and Ireland and of the British dominions beyond the seas King 
defender of the faith, to the keepers of our peace and our justices assigned to 
hear and determine divers crimes, trespasses, and other offences committed 
within our county of D., and to every of them, greeting: We, being willing ■ 
for certain reasons that all and singular indictments of whatsoever felonies 
[or misdemeanors'] whereof A. B. is [if indictment . not yet preferred,, add, 
or may be'] before you indicted (as it said) be determined before us in the 
King's Bench Division of our High Court of Justice, and not elsewhere, do 
command you and every of you that you or one of you do forthwith send under 
your seals, or the seal of one of you, before us in our said court at the Royal 
Courts of Justice, London, all and singular the said indictments, with all 
things touching the same, by whatsoever name the said A. B. may be called 
therein, together with this Our writ, that we may cause further to be done 
thereon what right of and according to the law and custom of England we 
shall see fit to be done. Witness, Alfred Tristram, Baron Trevethin, at the Royal 
Courts of Justice, London, the day of , in the year of our Lord, 

19—. 

The writ must bear the following indorsements : — 

By order of court [or of Mr. Justice , as the case may be.] 

At the instance of the prosecutor [or defendant]. 

Recognizance by the prosecutor [or defendant] in the sum of £ , with 

[two] sureties in the sum of £ each. 

This writ was issued by E. F., of , agent for C. D., 

of , solicitor for the prosecutor [or defendant]. 

[For other forms of the writ, see Appendix to Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, FormB 
7, 8, and 9.] 

In what cases granted.] — The writ of certiorari is demandable as of right 
by the crown (Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 15 : R. v. Eaton, 2 T. E. 89 : 
R. V. Thomas, 4 M. & S. 442); and issues as of course where the attorney- 
general or other officer of the crown applies for it, either as prosecutor or as 
conducting the defence on behalf of the crown; Id. . R. v. Lewis, i Burr. 2456, 
2458 ; and this , even though the certiorari be expressly taken away by statute ; 
for, as a general rule, the crown is not bound by statute unlesis expressly named 
therein : Maxwell on Statutes (5th ed.) p. 220 : Craies on Statute Law (4th ed.) 
349 et seq. (For form of attorney-general's fiat for application for certiorari, 
see Appendix to Cr. Off. Bules, 1906, Form 23.) By analogy to this rule, the 
certiorari was formerly granted almost of course to private prosecutors, who 
were said to represent the crown, at whose suit all indictments are preferred. 
But now, " no indictment, except indictments against bodies corporate not 
authorized to appear by solicitor in the court in which the indictment is pre- 
ferred, shall be removed into the King's Bench Division, either at the instance 
of the prosecutor or of the defendant (other than the attorney-general acting 
on behalf of the crown), unless it be made to appear to the court or a 



112 INDICTMENT. 

judge, by the party applying, that a fair and impartial trial of the case 
cannot be had in the court below, or that some question of law of more than 
visual difficulty and importance is likely to arise upon the trial, or that a 
view of the premises in respect whereof any indictment is preferred; ■ or a 
■special jury, may be required for a satisfactory trial of the same." Cr. Off. 
Eules, 1906, r. 13, which supersedes 16 & 17 Vict. c. 30, s. 4 (rep.), as to which 
see B. V. Gate Fulford, 6 Cox, 510. The reason for the provision as to bodies 
corporate is that they cannot appear by attorney in courts of oyer and terminer 
or gaol delivery, or at sessions of the peace. B. v. Birmingham and Gloucester 
Bail. Co., 9 C. & P. 469, Parke, B. In R. v. Puck 4 Co., Ltd., 28 T. L. E. 
197, some doubt was expressed as to whether a limited company could not 
now plead to an indictment at the Central Criminal Court, but the point was 
not decided. 

The difficult points of law likely to arise muist be specifically pointed out 
in order to induce the court to grant a certiorari, and must be stated in the 
rule. B. V. Joule, 5 A. & E. 639 : B. v. Josephs, 8 Dowl. 178. If it is clearly 
made out that there is a fair and reasonable probability of partiality and 
prejudice in the jurisdiction within which the indictment would otherwise be 
tried, the certiorari will be granted. R. v. Lewis, 2 Str. 704 : B. v. Fawle, 
2 Ld. Eaym. 1452 : B. v. Waddington, 1 East, 167 : B. v. Penprase, 4 B. & Ad. 
573; 1 Nev. & M. 312 ; B. v. Hunt, 8 B. & Aid. 444 : B. v. Holden, 5 B. & Ad. 
347; 2 Nev. & M. 167 - B. v. Lever, 1 Wil., Wol. & Hod. 35 : R. v. Palmer, 
5 E. & B. 1024 : as where a member of the court of magistrates was interested 
in the result of the trial : R. v. Jones, 2 Har. & Wol. 293 : but see B. v. 
Fellows, 1 Har. & Wol. 648; 4 Dowl. 607, contra: or where a magistrate, 
in the commission for the county, was indicted at the quarter sessions and 
circulated among the other magistrates a, printed account of the charges. 
R. V. Grover, 8 Dowl. 325. So where the prosecutor or his solicitor is sheriff 
or under-sheriff, and could attend the grand jury when they considered the 
bill (iJ. V. Webb, 2 Str. 1068), the writ will be granted. Under some circum- 
stances the court will grant a certiorari for the removal of an indictment for 
conspiracy : R. v. Wilks, 5 E. & B. 690 ; 25 L. J. (Q. B.) 47 : R. v. Rowlands, 
17 Q. B. 671; 2 Den. 364; 21 L. J. (M. C.) 81, even where one of several 
defendants makes the application without the conisent of the others. B. v. 
Foulkes, 1 L. M. & P. 720; 20 L. J. (M. C.) 196 : R. v. Boxall, 4 A. & E. 513 : 
R. V. Probert, Dears. 30 : B. v. Jewell, 7 E. & B. 140; 26 I/. J. (Q. B.) 177. 
In those cases the writ was allowed on the application of one of several 
defendants, who was a responsible person, he entering into a recognizance 
to pay costs in case of the conviction of himself or of any of the other defen^ 
dants. See Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, r. 14, post, p. 115, and Short and Mellor, 
Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 19. 

In what cases refused.] — An indictment for not repairing bridges and the 
highways at the end thereof, where the inhabitants of the county are charge- 
able with the repair of the same, is not removable by certiorari, out of the 
county where such bridges or highways lie. 1 Anne, st. 1, c. 18, a. 5 : iJ. v 
Hamworth, 2 Str. 900 : B. v. Cumberland, 6 T. E. 194 ; 3 B. & P. 354 (H. L.). 



CERTIORARI. 113 

But this Act cannot apply where the indictment is of the inhabitants of th* 
sounty from which the petty jury comes. See Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. 
(2nd ed.) 16. An indictment against any person for keeping a bawdy-house, 
gaming-house, or other disorderly house is not removable by certiorari at the 
instance of the defendant. 25 G. 2, c. 36, s. 10. But where an indictment 
for keeping a disorderly house had been removed from the Middlesex Sessions 
to the Central Criminal Court, under 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 36, s. 16, the court granted 
a certiorari to remove the indictment into the Queen's Bench at the instance 
of the defendant, holding that where the indictment has been once remoyed 
by the prosecutor, 25 G. 2, t. 36, s. 10, which takes away the writ of certiorari, 
does not apply. B. v. Brier, 14 Q. B. 568; 19 L. J. (M. C.) 121. If an indict- 
ment charging an offence in which the certiorari is taken away by statute 
contains counts charging an offence where it is not taken away, the writs may 
still issue. R. v. Saunders, 5 D. & E. 611. 

The writ is rarely if ever issued to remove an indictment after judgment 
in the court below except for the purpose of carrying the judgment into execu- 
tion : Short and Mellor, Cr. PI. (2nd ed.) 16; 2 Hawk. 288 : R. v. Gwynne, 
2 Burr. 749 : B. V. Nicholls, 2 Str. 1227 : B. v. Nichols, 13 East, 412 n, 417 n. : 
B. V. Pennegoes, 1 B. & C. 142 : B. v. Lucas, 2 Eox & Sm. (K. B., Ir.) 30 : 
Ex parte Collins, Q. B. D., Dec, 19, 1899; 34 L. J. Newsp. 132. 

In Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 17 n., reference is made to a sugges- 
tion in an unreported case of B. v. Boaler [1888] that the writ might lie where 
error would not. But in B. v. Boaler [1892] 17 Cox, 569 ; 56 J. P. 792, it was 
held that certiorari will not go to the Central Criminal Court to bring up an 
indictment after judgment. In B. v. Seton, 7 T. E. 373, the court quashed 
a certiorari granted before, but not lodged till after judgment in an indictment 
for misdemeanor, and in B. v. Unwin, 7 Dowl. 578, a certiorari was refused in 
a case where the defendant had surreptitiously secured an acquittal by failing 
to give the notice of trial usual at the sessions where he was indicted. 

The court could grant, but usually refused to issue, the writ for removal of 
an indictment for felony or misdemeanor after verdict and before judgment. 
2 Hawk. c. 27, s. 28 ; 1 Chit. Cr. L. 380 : B. v. Oxfordshire, 13 Bast, 411 : 
B. V. Garside, 2 A. & E. 266 : B. v. Nichols, supra: B. v. Boaler, 17 Cox, 569. 
It is doubtful whether this jurisdiction can or should be exercised since the 
creation of the Court of Criminal Appeal. 

The court will not, ordinarily, on the application of the defendant, grant 
a certiorari for the removal of an indictment for perjury, forgery, or other 
heinous misdemeanor where the delay would tend to defeat the prosecution, 

2 Hawk. c. 27, s. 28 :■ B. v. Pusey, 2 Str. 717; or for murder, B. v. Mead, 

3 D. & E. 301 : B. v. Thomas, 4 M. & Sel. 442 ; unnatural crime, B. v. Holden, 
5 B. & Ad. 347; 2 Nev. & M. 167, or the like. See B. v. Penprase, 4 B. & Ad. 
573; 1 Nev. & M. 312. The creation of the Court for Crown Cases Eeserved 
rendered the High Court unwilling to grant the writ on the ground of questions 
of law arising on an indictment ; and the passing of the Criminal Appeal Act, 
1907, will no doubt increase that unwillingness, especially in the case of the 
Central Criminal Court or Courts at which a judge of the High Court will sit. 
See B. V. Kingston (Duchess), 1 Cowp. 283; 20 St. Tr. 355 : B. v. Templar, 



114 INDICTMENT. 

1 Nev. & P. 91 . B. V. Wartnahy, 2 A. & E. 435; and Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. 
(2nd ed.) 19. 

Time when granted.] — The writ may be sued out in cases of misdemeanor, 
though at the time the indictment is not in esse ; and it is sufficient if the 
indictment be found at any period before the writ is returnable. 60 G. 3, 
& 1 G. 4, t. 4, i3. 4. The proper time for either party to apply for a certiorari 
is before issue joined on the indictment : 1 Chit. Cr. L. 380; but the certiorari 
is. not too late, if delivered before the jury are sworn to try the case. 60 G. 3, 
c. 4, s. 3 {ref.) : see B. v. Passman, 2 Dowl. 529; 1 A. & B. 603; Short and 
Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 16. 

Mode of obtaining the writ.] — ^In all cases (except where the attorney- 
general applies for the writ on behalf of the crown) the application must be 
founded upon affidavit, suggesting some adequate ground for removal. See 
ante, p. 111. 

The following form of an affidavit in support of an application for a certiorari 
to remove an indictment into the King's Bench Division, is given in Appendix 
to Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, Porm 2. 

In the High Court of Justice, 

King's Bench Division. 
I, A. B., of, etc. make oath and say as follows: 

1. That at 'the general quarter sessiorts of the •peace holden at 

in and f<yr the county of , on or about the day 

of , a bill of indictmvent was preferred to the grand jury who 

returned a true bill [or that it is intended to prefer a bill of indictment, as 
the case may be]. 

2. That in my judgment and belief, nice and intricate questions or points 
of law will arise on the trial of the said indictment, which will render it 
important that the same should be tried before rnie of the learned judges of 
the High Court of Justice, and particularly, that a question will, as I am 
advised, be raised as to whether [state the particular question that will arise, 
or that a question will arise upon the construction of an Act of Parliament]. 

3. That, in my judgment and belief, it will be material and necessary that 
the said indictment should be tried by a special jury, which cannot be had, 
unless the said indictment be removed into this honourable court. And that I 
[or as the caise may be] will cause a special jury to be had if the said indict- 
ment shall be so removed. 

4. That I verily believe that it will be important and necessary that a vUw 
of the place and premises in question should be had by some of the jurymen 
to be im/panelled, to try the issue joined upon the said indictment, which I am 
informed and believe can only be had by the said indictment being removed 
into this honourable court. 

[Note. — Where the view is to he had in the county where the bill is pre- 
ferred certiorari is unnecessary. See B. v. Martin, L. E. 1 C. C. E. 378; 
41 L. J. (M. C.) 113.] 



CERTIORARI. 115 

5. That, by reason of [here state what has occurred to create prejudice], 
I verily believe thai strong prejudices have been created in the minds of some 
of the justices who may preside at the sessions upon the trial of the said indict- 
ment. And also among that class of persons in the said place, from whom 
the common jurors are selected for the trials at the said sessions, and some 
of whom are likely to be called upon the jury for the trial of the said indict- 
ment, unless the same be removed into this honourable court. And therefore, 
that a fair and impartial trial of the same cannot be had at the said sessions. 

6. That [add any othei allegation which may be likely to induce the court 
or a judge to grant the writ of certiorari, consistent with the facts and 
circumstances of the case required to be removed.] 

[Omit any of the foregoing allegations which may not be applicable to the 
case.] 

The affidavits, if sworn in England, must be sworn before a judge, district 
registra^r, commissioner to administer oaths {see 52 & 53 Vict. c. 10, Commis- 
sioners for Oaths Act, 1889), first or second class clerk in the Crown Office 
Department, or officer empowered under the Rules of the Supreme Court to 
administer oaths. Cr. Off. Rules, 1906, r. 7. As to the persons before whom 
affidavits may be sworn out of England, see r. 5, and E. S. C. 0. 38, r. 6. 
The affidavits must be intituled " In the High Court of Justice, King's Bench 
Division." Cr. Off. Rules, 1906, r. 6. "Every application for a writ of 
certiorari, or for an order to remove an indictment into the King's Bench 
Division, at the instance of any person other than the attorney-general on 
behalf of the crown, shall, during the sittings, be made to a divisional court 
of the said division by motion for an order nisi to show cause, and in the 
vacation or when there is no sitting of a divisional court to a judge at chambers 
for a summons to show cause : Provided that where, from special circum- 
stances, the court or a judge may be of opinion that the writ should issue 
forthwith, the order may be made absolute, or an order be made in the first 
instance, either ex parte or otherwise, as the court or judge may direct." 
Id. r. 12. No summons to show cause before a judge at chambers shall 
be issued for a writ of certiorari withouh the leave of a judge upon an ex parte 
application. Id. r. 266 (b). For forms of summonses at chambers, see 
Appendix to Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, Eorms 3 & 5, and for form of judge's order 
for certiorari to remove indictment into the King's Bench Division, see Id. 
Form 4; and for form of judge's order to remove indictment from assizes or 
Central Criminal Court into the King's Bench Division, see Id. Form 6. 

Allowance.] — " No writ of certiorari for the removal of an indictment into 
the King's Bench Division at the instance of a defendant or defendants before 
trial had, shall be allowed by the Court to whom it may be directed, unless 
the defendant or defendants, at whose instance the writ of certiorari shall 
have been awarded, shall have entered into a recognizance before a judge 
of the High Court, or before the court before whom such defendant or defen- 
dants shall stand indicted, or before one or more justices of the peace of the 
county or place in which such indictment may be found, or in which such 
defendant or defendants reside, in such sum and with such sufficient sureties 



116 INDICTMENT. 

as the court or judge awarding the writ ehall, by endorsement on the writ, 
order or direct, conditioned to appear and plead (and in cases of felony in 
open court) to the said indictment, and give notice of trial, and proceed to 
trial of the indictment at the next assizes to be held for the county wherein the 
indictment was found, or if in London or Middlesex forthwith at the sittings 
of the High Court of Justice, and personally to appear from day to day at the 
trial of such indictment, and if necessa»y in the King's Bench Division of the 
High Court u{ Justice, and not depart till he or they shall be discharged by 
the court, and to pay the costs of the prosecution subsequent to the removal 
of the indictment, if he or they be convicted." Cr. Off. Rules, 1906, r. 14. 

A certiorari obtained by one lof several co-defendants removes the indictment 
as to all. B. v. Boxall, 4 A. & E. 513. 

" No writ of certiorari for the removal of an indictment into the King's 
Bench Division at the instance of any prosecutor (other than the attorney- 
general acting on behalf of the Crown or the prosecutor of an indictment 
against a body corporate) shall be allowed by the court to whom it may be 
directed unless the prosecutor at whose instance the writ of certiorari shall 
have been awarded, shall before the allowance of such writ by the court to 
whom it may be directed, enter into a recognizance in the maimer and for 
such sum as ia the preceding rule,i provided and directed, conditioned on the 
return of such writ, to mate up the record, and give notice of trial and pro- 
ceed to trial of the indictment at the next assizes to be held for the county 
wherein the indictment was found, or if in London or Middlesex forthwith at 
the sittings of the High Court of Justice, and to pay the costs of the defendant 
subsequent to the removal of the indictment, if he be acquitted." E. 15. 

Rules 14, 15 generalize a provision made as to certain misdemeanors by 
21 Jac. 1, c. 8, s. 4, and as to appeals from judgments and orders of quarter 
sessiona by 5 Q-. 2, u. 19, ss. 2, 3. 

On removing an indictment containing seven counts into the High Court, 
the prosecutors bound themselves to pay the defendant's costs if she were 
acquitted on the indictment. Defendant having been acquitted on five out of the 
seven counts, it was held that this was not an acquittal upon the indictment 
within the meaning of the recognizance, and that she could not claim her 
costs of the counts on which she bad been acquitted. R. v. Bayard [1892] 
2 Q. B. 181 ; 17 Cox, 502. 

" If the person at whose instance any writ of certiorari for the removal of 
an indictment shall have been awarded, shall not before the allowance thereof 
enter into a properly conditioned recognizance, the court to which such writ 
or order may be directed shall proceed to the trial of the indictment,, as, if 
such writ had not been awarded." R. 16. 

The " allowance" of the writ mentioned in this rule means by the court 
or person to whom it is directed. R. v. Abergele, 5 A. & E. 795 : R. v. Dunn, 
8 T. R. 217 : R. y. Jones, 9 Dowl. 504. 

The provisions of rules 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 shall in like manner apply in 
the case of a removal of an indictment into the King's Bench Division before 
trial had by order without writ of certiorari when such writ may not be 
required or used. E. 17. 



CERTIORARI. IIV 

When a oertiorari, or an order to remove from the assizes, is granted, the 
divisional conrt or judge at chambers on granting it fixes the amount of the 
recognizances (to be entered into before a judge, or a justice of the county 
or place in which the party resides), and the amount of the recognizances ia 
indorsed on the vrrit. By r. 15, supra, the prosecutor of an indictment against 
a body corporate is not bound to enter into recognizances on the removal of 
an indictment by certiorari, because the corporation can plead only in the 
High Court. R. v. Birmingham di Gloucester Rail. Co., 9 C. & P. 469. 
The rule in this respect foUovys the construction put upon 16 & 17 Vict. c. 30, 
B. 5 (rep.), in R. v. Mayor, etc., of Manchesier, 7 E. & B. 453; 26 L. 3. 
(M. C.) 65. As to the mode of entering into recognizances when they are 
required from a parish, etc., or other such large quasi corporate bofly, see 
R. Y. Abergele, 6 A. & E. 795. When they are required from a corporation, 
it ia the practice to allow one of the members of the corporation, on behalf 
of himself and the rest of the corporation, to enter into the recognizance, with 
such sureties as may be required. Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 26. 

For the forms of recognizances by prosecutor and defendant on certiorari 
to remove indictment into, the King's Bench Division, see Gr. Off. Rules, 
1906, Forms 10, 11, 12. 

The following is the form of the rule to compel the defendant to put in 
better bail : — 

The King Unless the defendant shall put in better bail within four days 
against next after motice of this rule given to him or to his solicitor, 

A. B. let a procedendo issue. 

' Tbbvethin. 

The recognizance must be lodged, together with the writ, with the clerk 
of the peace or clerk of assize, as the case may be; and after they are lodged 
all proceedings upon the indictment in the court below are stayed. 

" Every recognizance acknowledged on the removal of an indictment, order, 
or other proceeding, or to prosecute any information granted by the King's 
'Bench Division, or for the appearing or answering of any party in the said 
Division, or for good behaviour, or for any other purpose, shall after the 
acknowledgment thereof be transmitted to the Crown Office and filed there." 
Cr. OSE. Eules, 1906, r. 112. 

Where a defendant has entered into insufficient recognizances, the court will 
discharge them, and compel him to give better security. B. v. Hooper, 1 Chit. 
Eep. (K. B.) 491. 

Keturn to writ.] — The return is made by indorsing on the. writ of certiorari 
the following memorandum ; — The execution of this writ a/ppears by the 
schedules hereunto annexed. The answer of A. B., Esquire, one of the 
heepers of the peace and justices within mentioned. This memorandum must 
be signed and sealed by A. B. The schedules mentioned in it as thereunto 
annexed are the indictment and other documents to be returned in pursuance 
of the certiorari. See Appendix to Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, Form 21. 



118 INDICTMENT. 

Sending back the record.]— If the writ of certioran has been improvidently 
issued, e.g., if it appears to have been obtained by misrepresentation of the 
facts, the court (or a judge at chambers, R. v. Scaife, 18 Q. B. 773; 2 Den. 
513; 3 G. & K. 211; 21 L. J. (M. C.) 221) may award a writ of supersedeas to 
the certiorari and a procedendo to carry back the indictment, and so send back 
the record to the original jurisdiction, there to be dealt with as if no certiorari 
had issued. See 1 Burn's J. 648 (30th ed.); 4 Co. Inst. 67. The same course 
may be taken if the defendant neglects to perform the condition of the recog- 
nizance, or if bad or insufficient bail be put in. B. v. Jones, 9 Dowl. 604: 
B. V. Dunn, 8 T. E. 217 : R. y. Abergele, 5 A. & B. 795 : Com. Dig. Certiorari 
(G-.) : 1 Chitty Cr. L. 397. And where the defendants in a case originally 
removed from quarter sessions by certiorari, having obtained a rule in the 
Queen's Bench for a new trial, neglected to bring down the record and proceed 
to trial at the assizes, a writ of procedendo was awarded, and the record was 
sent back to sessions, where the parties were tried and sentenced to trans- 
portation. B. Y. Scaife, supra. 

For the form of writ of supersedeas to certiorari and procedendo to carry 
back indictment, see Appendix to Cr. Off. Rules, 1906, Form 169. 

Trial at Central Criminal Court of indictments removed by certiorari.] — By 

19 & 20 Vict. c. 16, s. 1 (" The Palmer Act "), the Court of King's Bench in 
term time, or any judge thereof in vacation, is authorized, whenever any 
indictment or inquisition for any felony or misdemeanor committed or supposed 
to have been committed at any place out of the jurisdiction of the Central 
Criminal Court shall have been removed by certiorari in the King's Bench 
to order, if it appear to be expedient to the ends of justice, that such indict- 
ment or inquisition shall be tried at the Central Criminal Court. Or such 
court or judge may, in any such case of felony or misdemeanor, order a 
certiorari to issue to the court before which the indictment or inquisition shall 
be pending, or shall thereafter be found, or to the coroner before whom such 
inquisition shall have been or shall thereafter be taken, to remove the indict- 
ment or inquisition directly into the Central Criminal Court (s. 3). Under 
this section the Court hag power to order the removal into the Central Criminal 
Court of an indictment, notwithstanding that abortive trials have already taken 
place at the court to which the order is addressed. The court has a very wide 
discretion, the only condition being that the court deems it expedient to the 
ends of justice. R. v. Bamett [1919] 1 K. B. 640; 83 J. P. 134; 35 T. L. E. 
344. Provisions are made for the transmission of the indictment or inquisition, 
and for the return of the recognizances, depositions, etc., into that court 
(as. 2, 4) ; for the removal of the offender to the prison appointed for the 
Central Criminal. Court (s. 5) ; for his arraignment, pleading and trial at the 
Central Criminal Court (19 & 20 Vict. u. 16, ss. 6, 7) ; for the allowance of 
the expenses of prosecutions (s. 13) ; and otherwise in relation to the objects 
of the Act. The powers of the Court of King's Bench were transferred to 
the High Court of Justice (King's Bench Division) by 36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, 
B. 34. The court has refused to make it a condition, under 19 & 20 Vict. c. 16, 
s. 24 (rep. and superseded by Cr. Off. Kules, 1906, rr. 14, 15, ante, p. 116), 



CERTIORARI: COSTS. 119 

that the prosecutor should furnish the defendant with evidence which it was 
suggested had been obtained by the prosecutor since the depositions were taken. 
B..V. Palmer, 5 B. & B. 1024. 

" An application for an order that an indictment or inquisition removed 
into the King's Bench Division shall be tried at the Central Criminal Court, 
or a motion to remove an indictment or inquisition by certiorari into the Central 
Criminal Court for trial under 19 [& 20] Vict. c. 16, shall, during the sittings, 
be made to the King's Bench Division by motion for an order nisi : and in the 
vacation, [ ? or] when there is no sitting of a divisional court, to a judge at 
chambers for a summons; and the order may be made absolute or granted 
upon such' terms as to recognizance or otherwise as the court or judge may 
consider reasonable." Cr. Off. Bules, 1906, r. 19. No appeal lies from the 
refusal of the King's Bench Division to grant a. certiorari to remove an indict- 
ment to the Central Criminal Court under 19 & 20 Vict. c. 16. B. v. 'Budge, 
16 Q. B. ,D. 459; 55 L. J. (M. C.) 112. 

Costs.] — The liability of the parties to costs on the removal of an indictment 
by certiorari was first imposed by 21 Jac. 1, u. 8, o. 4, and 5 & 6 W. & M. 
i;. 11; s. 3 (rep.), and was extended by 16 & 17 Vict. u. 30, s. 5 (rep.). It is 
now regulated by Cr. Off. Rules, 1906, rr. 14, 15 (ante, p. 116), and by 
8 Bdw. 7, c. 15, 8. 6, post, pp. 116 et seq. Under 16 & 17 Vict. c. 30, s. 5, 
it was held that the prosecutor was entitled to costs in the case of an indict- 
ment removed by the defendant by certiorari, where the defendant was con- 
victed, though the prosecutor was not the party aggrieved or injured. B. Y. 
Oastler, L. E. 9 Q. B. 132; 43 L. J. (Q. B.) 42; and as s. 5 is embodied in 
Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, rr. 14, 15 (ante, p. 116), B. v. Oastler would be an 
authority on the construction of those rules. If a defendant dies after verdict 
and before judgment, bis bail will be liable for the costs to the extent of their 
recognizances; B. v. Turner, 3 B. & C. 160; B. v. Finmore, 8 T. R. 409; but 
under ordinary circumstances the prosecutor is not entitled to costs till the 
court has pronounced judgment, for it may be that judgment will be arrested. 
B. V. Turner, 15 East, 570. If an indictment against several defendants is 
r6m,oved into the King's Bench Division without the consent of all of them, 
those who did not consent to the application for the certiorari are not liable 
for the costs, even though they have pleaded to the indictment and have been 
convicted upon it. B. v. Hassell, 5 Dowl. 531. But under 16 & 17 Vict. c. 30, 
8. 5 (rep.), where the certiorari was applied for at the instance of one of two 
defendants, the judge might in his discretion make it a condition of the recog- 
nizance that the defendant applying for the writ should pay the prosecutor's 
costs, in case either he or the other defendant should be convicted, B. Y. Jewell, 
7 B. & B. 140; 36 L. J. (Q. B.) 177; and an express provision t6 that effect 
is contained in Cr. Off. Bules, 1906, r. 14, ante, p. 115. The prosecutor is 
not entitled under the recognizance to the costs of any counts of the indictment 
on which the defendant has been acquitted, B. Y. Hawdon, 11 A. & B. 143, 
nor to costs incurred prior to the certiorari. B. v. Passman, 1 A. & B. 603, 
606, n. : B. V. Higgins, 5 Dowl. 375; 6 L. J. (M. C.) 9. The defendant is to 
pay all reasonable costs occasioned by the removal of the indictment by the 



120 INDICTMENT. 

certiorari, or incurred in consequence of it, in order to carry the prosecution 
to its legal conclusion : B. v. Gilbie, 5 M. & Sel. 520; and the amount of costs 
is not limited by the recognizance. R. v. Teal, 13 Bast, 4. If a prosecutor, 
being entitled to costs, dies after taxation of costs, hifi' personal representatives 
are entitled to them. As to the effect on the defendant's liability of 8 Edw. 7, 
0. 15, s. 6 (1), vide post, pp. 284, et seq. 

The prosecutor's liability to pay costs to the defendant, if acquitted, only 
arises where the prosecutor has entered into the recognizance with the con- 
dition mentioned in Cr. Off. Bules, 1906, r. 15, ante,'^. 116, or in cases 
falling within 8 Edw. 7, c. 15, s. 6 (2), which is not limited to trials in courts 
of assize or quarter sessions. To entitle the defendant to costs he must be 
acquitted on all counts of the indictment. R. v. Bayard [1892] 2 Q. B. 181; 
17 Cox, 572, If the prosecutor has merely entered into a recognizance con- 
ditioned to prosecute with effect, and to do and perform such orders and things 
as the court shall direct, he is not liable to costs. R. v. East Stoke, 6 B. & 8. 
536; 34 L. J. (M. C.) 190. 

The costs are taxed in the Supreme Court Taxing Office, and payment is 
enforced by estreat of the recognizances under Cr. Off. Bules, 1906, rr. 112 — 115, 
which is effected by order of the court made after calling upon the party 
liable to perform the conditions. 16 & 17 Vict. c. 30, s. 6, which permitted 
attachment, was repealed in 1892. As to costs of a special jury, see R. v. MoatS) 
3 B. & Ad. 237 ; 1 L. J. (K. B.) 78. 

As to the cases in which the defendant may, by reason of poTerty or bank- 
ruptcy, have relief from the payment of the costs, see R. Y. Thornton, 4 Ex. 
820; 19 L. J. (M. C.) 113 : R. v. HilU, 2 E. & B. 176; 22 L. J. (Q. B.) 322. 

As to the general law with respect to the payment of the costs of indictments, 
and as to the costs in cases where the indictment, after its removal by 
certiorari, is tried at the Central Criminal Court, under 19 & 20 Vict. c. 16, 
BS. 25, 26, see post, pp. 267 et seg. 

Change o£ Yenue.] — The removal of an indictment by certiorari at common 
law does no more than change the court of trial, and does not affect the venue. 
The original practice was to try the indictment at bar in the Court of King's 
Bench, unless after issue joined a writ of nisi prius were issued with the 
attorney-general's consent to try in the proper county. 2 Co. Inst. 424. The 
court was by 6 H. 8, c. 6 empowered thus to remit indictments for felonies. 
In the case of an offence committed outside the Central Criminal Court District, 
if it is desired to change the venue, this can be effected by obtaining an order 
under 19 & 20 Vict. c. 16, a. 3, for the trial of the offence in that court. On 
the removal of a case jrom that court the venue is determined by the court 
on issuing the certiorari and stated in the writ. Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, r. 18, 
which provides that " every writ of certiorari for removing an indictment 
from the Central Criminal Court shall specify the county or jurisdiction in 
which the same shall be tried; and a jury shall be summoned, and the trial 
proceed, in the same manner in all respects as if the indictment had been 
originally preferred in that county or jurisdiction." The true construction of 
this rule is, that the King's Bench Division has discretion to name in the 



TRIAL AT BAR. 121 

certiorari the county or jurisdiction in which the trial is to take place, and 
that by the jurors summoned from that j.urisdiction the same issues shall be 
tried that would have been tried in the Central Criminal Court had the 
indictment not been removed. B. v. Castro, L. E. 9 Q. B. 350, 355; 43 L. J. 
(Q. B.) 105, 107. 

In cases not dealt with as above it is necessary to obtain an order to change 
the venue, which may be made by a judge of assize without certiorari, or by 
the King's Bench Division after the grant of a certiorari and joinder of issue. 
Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 106. The right to make such an order 
appears to be established as to felonies. See B. v. Penprase, 4 B. & Aid. 
573 : B. V. Holden, 5 B. & Ad. 347 : and B. v. Barrett, Ir. Eep. 4 C. L. 285; 
18 W. E. 671 : B. v. Fay, Ir. Eep. 6 C. L. 436 : B. v. M'Eneany [1878] 
2 L. E. Ir. 236 : B. v. Phelan, 14 Cox, 579 (Jr.). And it is certainly estab- 
lished as to misdemeanors. But it is not exercised unless (1) demanded ob 
of right by the attorney -general acting on behalf of the crown ; . (2) the 
inhabitants of a county are indicted and all are interested in the verdict : 
B. V. Southampton (Inhabitants) 17 Q. B. D. 424; (3) a view in another 
county is necessary : Clerk v. B., 9 H. L. C. 184; 31 L. J. (Q. B.) 175 : B. v. 
Sheldon, 32 L. T. (N. S.) 27; or (4) a fair trial cannot be had in the original 
venue. B. v. Simpson, 5 Jur. 462 : B. v. Dunn, 11 Jur. 287 : B. v. Patent 
Eunka Co., 13 L. T. (N. S.) 365 : B. v. Hunt, 3 B. & Aid. 444; 2 Chit. Eep. 
(K. B.) 130 : B. V. Harris, 3 Burr. 1330 : B. v. Duggan, Ir. Itep. 7 C. L. 94 ; 
B. V. Boughton [1895] 2 Ir. Eep. 386. Mere possibility of prejudice is not a 
sufficient reason for change of venue. B. v. King, 2 Chit. Eep. (K. B.) 217 : 
B. V. Stephenson, 5 Jur. 341 : and see B. y. Casey, 13 Cox, 614 : B. v. Walter, 
14 Cox, 579 : Ex parte Gyde, 72 J. P. 504. Any extra expense caused by the 
change falls on the person who applies for it. B. v. Newton, 1 Cox, 195. 
It is usual, but not necessary, to change the venua to the nearest county on 
the same circuit in which a fair trial can be had. Anon., 6 Jur. 131 -.'B. v. 
Browne, 6 Jur. 168 : B. v. Palmer, 5 E. & B. 1024, 1028, Campbell, C.J. See 
Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2ud ed.) 106. As to the trial in a county at large 
of offences committed in counties of cities, see ante, p. 38. An application 
change the venue is made during the Sittings to a Divisional Court of the 
King's Bench Division, in vacation to a judge. Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. 
(2nd ed.) 107. 

Trial at bar.] — A trial at bar can be obtained only by order of the Court, 
Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, r. 150. Where an indictment has been removed by 
certiorari into the King's Bench Division the attorney-general, if prosecuting 
on behalf of the crown, has the right to demand a trial at bar as- a matter of 
course ; r. 151. B. v. Hales, 2 Str. 816 : B. v. Castro, L. E. 9 Q. B. 350. In 
other cases the procedure is by motion for a rule nisi, and the court may 
impose terms on making the rule absolute (rr. 151, 162) ; and see rr. 153-155 : 
Anderson v. Gorrie, 10 T. L. E. 383 : Dixon v. Farrer, 17 Q. B. D. 661 : 
Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 297. The most recent instances of trials 
at bar are B. v. Jameson [1896] 2 Q. B. 426; 65 L. J. (M. C.) 218 : and 
West Band Co., Ltd. v. B. [1906] 2 K. B. 391; 74 L. J. (K. B.) 753. In 



122 INDICTMENT. 

B. y. Lynch [1903] 1 K. B. 444, no demand was made by the attorney-general 
for a trial at bar, as treason committed abroad is triable before the King's 
Bench Division under 35 H. 8, c. 2, b. 1. 

Bemoval without certiorari.] — Where a defendant has been convicted at the 
assizes and has entered into a recognizance to keep the peace, the King's Bench 
Division can, on breach of the recognizance being committed, by order, and with- 
out issuing a writ of certiorari, direct that the indictment and record of the 
trial be filed in the crown office in order that the defendant may be further dealt 
with. R. V. Chambers, Ex parte Klitz [1919] 1 K. B. 638. 



Sect. 12. 

POWERS OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OYER 
PROSECUTIONS. 

When sanction of attorney-general necessary.] — In the following cases a 
prosecution may not be instituted without the sanction of the attorney-general. 
Offences under the Explosives Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 3, s. 7) ; the Public 
Bodies Corrupt Practices Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 69, s. i) ; the Preventim 
of Corruption Act, 1906 (6 Edw. 7, c. 34, s. 2); the Official Secrets Act, 1911 
(1 & 2 Geo. 5, c. 28, s. 8) ; under s. 327 of the Lunacy Act, 1890 (53 & 54 Viet. 
c. 5) and s. 2 (1) (a) of the Moneylenders Act, 1900 (68 & 64 Vict. u. 51, 
D 2 (3) ); fraudulent concealment of documents of title (22 & 23 Vict. c. 35, 
s. 24j; frauds by a trustee under an express trust in writing (6 & 7 Geo. 5, 
c. 60, ss. 21 (a), 46); incest unless the director of public prosecutions com- 
mences the prosecution (8 Edw. 7, c. 45, s. 6). In the case of offences by 
aliens within the Territorial Waters Jurisdiction Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 73), 
the consent of a secretary of state is necessary (s. 3). 

Where a prosecution is instituted on the fiat of the attorney-general it is suffi- 
cient td lodge the fiat with the clerk of the court of trial and it need not be 
proved at the trial. R. v. Dexter, 19 Cox, 360. See also R. v. Metz, 84 L. J. 
(K. B.) 1462; 79 J. P. 384; 11 Cr. App. E. 164. 

Interyention ol attorney-general.] — The attorney-general or the director of 
public prosecutions under the special or general directions of the attorney- 
general is always entitled to take over and continue a private prosecution. 
See 2 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 1923 et seq. As to the position of the attorney- 
general with reference to cases within the Vexatious Indictments Act, 1859, 
see ante, pp. 67 et seq. 

Nolle prosequi.] — A nolle prosequi to stay proceedings upon an indictment 
or information pending in any court may be entered, by leave of the attorney- 



POWERS OF ATTORNEY -GENERAL. 123 

general, at the instance of either the prosecutor or the defendant, at any time 
after the bill of indictment is found, and before judgment. B. v. Dunn, 1 0. 
& K. 730 : R. V. Colling, 2 Cox, 184; but not before the indictment has been 
presented; B. v. Wylie, 83 J. P. 295. "This power of the attorney-general 
is not Bubieot to any control by the courts ; but does not interfere with the 
right of a judge to allow a case to be withdrawn on the application of a 
private prosecutor." B. v. Gcrniptroller of Patents [1899] 1 Q. B. 909, 914, 
per Smith, L.J. If the office of attorney-general is vacant, semble that the 
solicitor-general may give leave to enter a nolle prosequi; Id., and see 42 & 43 
Vict. c. 22, H. 9. Leave is never given except upon good cause shown, and 
is never refused when the interests of justice require it. A nolle prosequi is 
distinct from, and has not the same effect as, offering no evidence and sub- 
mitting to acquittal. Elworthy v. Bird, 2 Bing. 258; 9 Moore (G. P.) 430. 
It appears to be preferable to an applicant to discharge the recognizances of 
the prosecutor and witnesses. See B. v. Freakley, 6 Cox, 75. The following 
is the form of the attorney-general's fiat or warrant to the King's coroner and 
attorney in the Eing's Bench Division to enter a nolle prosequi, in order to 
admit a prisoner, indicted for a conspiracy, a-s a witness for the crown : — 

Whereas at the general quarter sessions of the peace holden for the West 
Biding of the county of York, etc., an indictment was found by the grand jury 
of the said Biding against H. S., T. S., G-. E. and S. C, for a conspiracy 
falsely to charge J. H. to be the father of a bastard child, whereof the said 
H. S. was pregnant, which indictment has since been removed into the King's 
Bench Division of his Majesty's High Court of Justice; and whereas it is 
represented to me on the part of the prosecutor of the said indictment, that 
he considering that the said H. S. was rather an object of the conspiracy of 
the other defendants than a willing actress in it, and from recent information 
that she is comparatively innocent; and considering that the ends of justice 
would be best answered were she in a situation to undergo examination as u, 
witness upon the subject-matter of the indictment, is desirous, with the advice 
of his counsel, to have a nolle prosequi entered as against the said H. S., and 
that he prays the saime accordingly; these are therefore to authorize and 
require you to enter or cause to be entered a nolle prosequi upon the said 
indictment as to the said H. S. And for so doing this shall be your warrant. 
Dated, etc. 

To Sir L. W. K., Knight, coroner and attorney of our lord the King, in 
the King'.s Bench Division, of his Majesty's High Court of Justice. 

Where the application is made at the instance of the prosecutor, the opinion 
of counsel as to the desirability of having the defendant examined as a witness 
is laid before the attorney-general, who will order the nolle prosequi to be 
entered without issuing any summons to the defendant : but where the 
application proceeds from the defendant, the attorney-general will direct his 
clert to Summon the prosecutor to show cause before him at his chambers why 
proceedings should not be stayed, and on hearing the parties will grant his 
warrant, if he thinks the circumstances of the case demand it. 



124 INDICTMENT. 

The attorney-general may, however, on an ex parte application by the 
defendant, and without calling the prosecutor before him, enter a nolle prosequi 
to an indictment. R. v. Allen, 1 B. & S. 850 ;. 31 L. J. (M. C.) 129. 

The usual occasion of granting a nolle prosequi is either where in cases of 
misdemeanor a civil action is depending for the same cause : R. v. Fielding, 
2 Burr. 719 : J(mes v. Clay, 1 B. & P. 191; or where any improper and vexa- 
tious attempts are made to oppress the defendant, as by repeatedly preferring 
defective indictments for the same supposed offence : R. v. Guerchy, 1 W. Bl. 
545 ; or if it is clear that an indictment is not sustainable against the defendant. 
R. V. Pond, 1 Comyns B^p. 312; 1 Chitty Cr. L. 479. Where an indictment 
is preferred against a defendant for an assault, and at the same time an 
action of trespass is commenced in one of the civil courts for identically the 
same assault, upon af&davit of the facts, and hearing the parties, the attorney- 
general may, if he sees fit, order a nolle prosequi to be entered to the indictment, 
or compel the prosecutor to elect whether he will pursue the criminal or civil 
remedy. R. v. Fielding, 2 Burr. 719 ; 1 Chitty Cr. L. 479. 

The following may be the form of the af&davit in such a case : — 

I, A. B., of the parish of , in the county of . etc., make oath and 

say, that I, this deponent, did see the clerk of the peace of the county of 

sign a certificate hereto annexed, on the day of , at , and thwt 

since \^or beforel the time of preferring the indictment, in the said certificate 
mentioned, I was served with a copy of a writ of summons, issuing out of the ' 
King's Bench Division of his Majesty's High Court of Justice, at the suit of 
C. D., the prosecutor of the said indictment, requiring me within eight days 
to cause an appearance to be entered for me in the said King's Bench Division, 

in an action of trespass at the suit of the said C. T>. ; and that on the 

day of I, this deponent, did receive a notice of a declaration being filed 

against me at the suit of the said C. D., the prosecutor of the said indictmend, 
in the master's office of the said King's Bench Division, for assaulting him, the 
said C. D., which said declaration and indictment, I say, are for the same assault 
and not for different offences. 

A certificate from the clerk of assize or clerk of the peace, stating the 
substance of the indictment, and the time when it was preferred, must be 
annexed to this affidavit. Cro. Circ. Comp. 25 (10th ed.) For form of certi- 
ficate, see ante, p. 123. And if the attorney-general thinks the case a proper 
one for his interference, he will sign a warrant under his hand and seal, 
directed to the clerk of the peace, if the indictment has been found at sessions, 
directing him to enter a stet processus. R. v. Fielding, 2 Burr. 719 : Jones v. 
Clay,-1 B. & P. 191. If the cause of the application is the vexatious conduct 
of the prosecutor, the attorney-general may direct the proceedings to be removed 
into the King's Bench Division, where counsel will be heard in support of 
the nolle prosequi. R. v. Guerchy, 1 W. Bl. 545. A nolle prosequi may he 
entered as to one of several defendants at any time before trial. R. v. Teai, 
11 East, 307. And on motion for a new trial in the King's Bench on an indict- 
ment for a conspiracy against several defendants, counsel for the crown, at the 



NOLLE PROSEQUI. 125 

suggestion of the court, and having received the assent of the attorney-general 
(the attorney-general' appearing as counsel for one of the defendants) entered 
a nolle prosequi as to two defend_ants, when the rule for a new trial was refused 
as to the rest; R. v. Rowlands, 17 Q. B. 671, 685; 2 Den. 364; 21 L. J. 
(M. C.) 81 : and see R. v. Hempstead, E. & E. 344 : and R. v. Butterworth, 
E. & E. 520. In R. v. Leatham, 30 L. J. (Q. B.) 205 ; 8 Cox, 498; 3 B. & B. 
658, when the defendant had been found guilty on several counts of an informa- 
tion for bribery, the solicitor-general entered a nolle prosequi on one of them 
after a rule nisi for a new trial : and in R. v. Rowlands, supra, on application 
for a rule nisi to arrest the judgment on an indictment for a conspiracy, a 
nolle prosequi was entered on three counts of an indictment, as to the sufficiency 
of which some doubts were entertained, and the court pronounced judgment on 
the remaining good counts, a verdict having been taken on each count 

The following is the form of entering a nolle prosequi on record, given In 
Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, Form 120 :— 

Afterwards on the day of , before our said lord the King ait the 

Royal G<mrtA of Justice, London, come as well the said coroner and attorney 
of our said lord the King, in the King's Bench Division of his Majesty's High 
Court of Justice, who for our said lord the King in this behalf prosecutes in 
his proper person, as the said A. B. by his solicitor. And the said coroner and 
attorney for our said lord the King says that he will not further prosecute {ait se 
nolle ulterius prosequi) the said A. B. upon the indictment [or information'] 
aforesaid. Whereupon all and singular the premises being seen and fully 
understood bi) the court now here, it is considered and adjudged, by the said 
court here, that all proceedings upon the said indictment [or information'] 
against the said A. B. be altogether stayed, and that the saicBt A. B. he dis- 
charged of and from the said indictment [or information']. 

[Note. — In the case of an information filed by the attorney-general his name 
must be used instead of that of the King's coroner and attorney.] 

A nolle prosequi puts an end to the prosecution (see Gilchrist v. Gardner, 
12 N. S. W. Eep. (Law) 184, and English authorities therel cited) ; but does 
not operate as a bar or discharge or an acquittal on the merits. Goddard v. 
Smith, 6 Mod. 261; 3 Salk. 245 : R. v. Ridpath, 10 Mod. 162; and the party 
rattiaina liable to be re-indicted. It has been said that fresh process may be 
awarded on the same indictment. Goddard v. Smith, supra; Com. Dig. 
Indict. (K.) : but this dictum appears not to be law. See the judgment in 
R. V. Allen, 1 B. & S. 850; 31 L. J. (M. C.) 129 : R. v. Mitchel, 3 Cox, 93; 
6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 545; and Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 142. 



126 CRIMINAL INFORMATION. 



CHAPTEE II. 



CEIMINAL INPOEMATION. 



Sect. 1. Prdiminary, p. 126. 

2. Information, ex officio, p. 127. 

3. Information by the Masteir of the Crown Office, p. 129. 



Sect. 1. 



PRELIMINABT. 



Pkosboutions by information in respect of indictable misdemeanors or upon 
penal statutes, are not now in use before courts of oyer and terminer, or gaol 
delivery, or before courts of quarter sessions (Archbold, Quarter Sessions 
(6th ed.) 482, 483). Informations on penal statutes are subject to the provisions 
of 18 Eliz. c. 5 and 31 Eliz. c. 5, except where the proceedings are of a civil 
nature, or are taken under the Summary Jurisdiction Acts. Informations for 
misdemeanor are still occasionally filed in the King's Bench Division of the 
High Court. These are dealt with in sects. 2 and 3, post. Informations in 
that court in customs and revenue cases are treated as civil proceedings for 
purposes of evidence and appeal : see The Grown Suits Act, 1865 (28 & 29 Vict, 
c. 104), ss. 31, 32, 34 (which got rid of doubts expressed in Att.-Oen. y. 
Radloff, 10 Ex. 84; 23 L. J. (Ex.) 240), and s. 259 of the Customs ConsoKdatim 
Act, 1876 (39 & 40 Vict. c. 36) ; and judgments thereon for the Crovm are not 
convictions within the Criminal Appeal Act, 1907. R. v. Hausmann [1909] 
73 J. P. 516; 3 Cr. App. E. 3 : see Att.-Gen. v. Bradlaugh, 14 Q. B. D. 667; 
54 L. J. (Q. B.) 206. B. v. Hausmann was a proceeding under 39 & 40 Vict. 
u. 36, o. 186, to recover penalties for smuggling. Informations in quo wwranto 
are now civil proceedings : 47 & 48 Vict. c. 61, s. 15. 



INFORMATION EX OFFICIO. 127 



Sect. 2. 



INFORMATION EX OFFICIO. 

What and in vhat cases.] — The information ex officio is a formal written 
suggestion on 'behalf of the King of a misdemeanor committed, filed by the 
King's attorney-general (or, in the vacancy of that of&ce, by the solicitor- 
general, R. V. Wilkes, i :Burr. 2527; 19 St. Tr. 1075; 2 Eng. Eep. 244; 
4 Bro. Pari. Cas. 360) in the King's Bench Division of the High Court of 
Justice, without the intervention of a grand jury. The attorney-general for 
the Duchy of Lancaster cannot file an ex officio information in the High Court. 
Att.-Gen. of Duchy of Lancasiter v. Duke of Devonshire, 14 Q. B. D. 195; 
54 L. J. (Q. B.) 271. 

It lies at common law for misdemeanors only, and not for treason or felony ; 
Com. Dig. Information (A. 1) : R. v. Prynn, 5 Mod. 459; R. v. Berchet, 

1 Show. 106: R. Y. Magee, Eowe (Ir. K. B.) 416; nor for misprision of 
treason : for wherever any capital offence is charged, or an ofEence so highly 
penal as misprision of treason, the law of England requires that the accusation 
should be warranted by the oath of twelve men, before the defendant can be 
put to answer it; 2 Hawk. u. 26, b. 3. The usual objects of an information 
ex officio are properly such enormous misdemeanors as peculiarly tend to 
disturb or endanger the King's government, or to molest or affront him in 
the regular discharge of his royal functions; 4 Bl. Com. 308; such, for instance, 
as seditious or blasphemous writings or speeches [R. v. Home, 2 Cowp. 672; 
20 St. Tr. 651 : R. v. Wilkes, supra: R. v. Burdett, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1 : 
R. V. Waddington, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1339; 1 B. & C. 26 : B. v. Mary Ann 
Carlile, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1038); seditious riots not amoimting to high treason; 
libels upon the King or his ministers, the judges, or other high officers, reflecting 
upon their conduct in the execution of their official duties (R. v. Harvey, 

2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1 : fl. V. Hunt, 31 St. Tr. 367, 408 : R. v. Lord George 
Gordon, 22 Id. 177) ; libels on foreign sovereigns or ambassadors (B. ▼. Peltier, 
28 St. Tr. 529 : B. v. Vint, 27 Id. 627) ; obstructing pubUc officers in the 
execution of their duties; obstructing the King's officers in the coueotion, etc., 
of the revenues; bribery at parliamentary elections (R. v. Leatham, 8 Cox, 
425, 498 : R. v. Gharlesworth, 1 B. & S. 460); bribery, corrupt or oppressive 
conduct or neglect oi duty by magistrates and public officials {R. v. Pinney, 

3 St. Tr. (N. S.) 11) ; or misconduct by public officials outside Great Britain. 
See 11 W. 3, c. 12; 42 G. 3, c. 85 : R. v. Shawe, 5 M. & Sel. 403; Short and 
Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 85. In R. v. Brown, Q. B. Feb. 1858; 7 Cox, 442; 
sub nom. R. v. Esdaile, 1 P. & P. 213, informations ex officio were filed against 
directors of a banking company, for a conspiracy to defraud the shareholders 
by false reports of the pecuniary condition of the bank and otherwise. In 
R. V. Parnell, 14 Cox, 505, an ex officio information was laid in Ireland for 

. conspiracy to commit an offence against the State. Ex officio informations 
are now rarely filed in England. The latest was R. V. Gate d Tarry, 9 July, 



128 CRIMINAL INFORMATION. 

1887, for a libel imputing corruptibility to the Middlesex Justices. See Short 
and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 151, 169. 

Form.]— Under the IndictmenU Act, 1915 (5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90), s. 8 (3), the 
provisions of that Act applying to indictments apply to criminal informations in 
the High Court with such modifications as may be made by rules under the Act.. 
By rules dated 23rd May, 1916, rule 1 (5) of the Sules in the Schedule to the 
Indictments Act {ante, p. 28) does not apply to criminal informations; but 
rule 2 and the other rules in the schedule do apply. 

The form is now therefore assimilated to that of an indictment, except that 
the heading is as follows : — 

The King v. A. B. 

In the High Court of Justice, King's Bench Division. 

Criminal Information filed by the King's Attorney-General. 

A. B. is charged with the following offence. 

Statement of offence. 

As in the case of an indictment. See passim. 

Filing,] — This information is filed in the crown office, without any leave 
previously obtained of the court for that purpose ; and the court will not 
entertain a motion by the attorney-general for a criminal information at the 
suit of the crown : R. v. Philipps, 8 Burr. 1564 : R. v. Phillips, i Burr. 2089; 
1 Deacon Cr. Law, 672 n. : R. v. Magee, Eowe (Ir. K. B.) 416 ; nor will the 
court, upon the application of the defendant, restrain the attorney-general 
from filing an ex officio information upon the ground that a criminal informa- 
tion has already been granted for the same cause. R. y. Alexander, MS., 
B. T. 1830. But in that case, after both informations had been filed, the 
court stayed the criminal information until further order. See post, p. 134. 

Copy to be filed.]— By rule 2 of the Indictments Rules, dated May 23, 1916, 
the attorney-general or any person procuring any criminal information to be 
exhibitedr^ received, or filed at the crown office shall deliver to the master of 
the crown of&ce a true copy thereof for each accused person, who shall on 
request be supplied therewith free of charge. 

Quashing.] — ^The conrt will not qnaah an ex officio information at the instance 
of the prosecutor, because the attorney-general may, if he will, enter a nolle 
prosequi; R. v. Stratton, 1 Doug. 239; 21 St. Tr. 1046; and even upon the 
motion of the defendant, they will seldom quash it, but will generally put the 
defendant to demur, etc., see Com. Dig. Information (D. 4) : R. v. Gregory, 
1 Salk. 372. After demurrer the information may be amended. R. v. Holland, 
4 T. B. 457. The attorney-general is also entitled as of right to amend the 
information on paying costs. Att.-Gen. v. Ray, 11 M. & W. 464; and the 
provisions of the Indictments Act, 1915, with regard to amending indictments 
{ante, p. 54) apply to criminal informations. 5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, 
ss. 5, 8 (3). 



BY MASTER OF CROWN OFFICE. 129 

Procedure.] — When the information has been filed, the defendant, after 
appearance, upon application to the court, is entitled to a copy of it free of 
expense. 60 G. 3 and 1 G. 4, c. 4, s. 8; 5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, r. 13. See 
also rule 2 of the Indictments Rules, 1916, ante, p. 128. This provision applies 
also to indictments for misdemeanor prosecuted by the attorney-general 
(or solicitor-general) in the King's Bench Division. Id. If the attorney- 
general delays bringing the information to trial, the defendant cannot 
take it down by proviso; R. v. M'Leod, 2 East, 202; but if it is not brought 
to trial vfithin twelve calendar months next after the plea of not guilty has 
been pleaded, the defendant may, after twenty days' notice to the attorney- 
general or' solicitor-general, apply to the court, which may authorize the 
defendant to bring on the trial, and he may bring it on accordingly, unless ac 
nolle prosequi is entered. 60 G. 3 and 1 G. 4, c. 4, s. 9. See also Cr. Off.- 
Enles, 1906, as to pleading (rr. 117—122) and procedure (rr. 32—39), fbr- 
securing the speedy trial of the defendant, and his being speedily brought ups' 
for judgment, when he is in custody. The attorney-general is entitled, if he- 
wishes, to a trial at bar; R. v. Johnsorn 1 Str. 644 : .Paddock v. Forrester,, 
4 St. Tr. (N, S.) 657; 1 Man. & G. 583 : R. v. Pinney, 3 St. Tr. (N. S.) 17 n.;.- 
and to bring on the case out of its turn. Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed. !■ 
171. As to the venue and procedure on a trial at bar, vide ante, pp. 120, 
121. At the trial the attorney-general has the right of reply, even though 
the defendant calls no witnesses. R. v. Marsden, M. & M. 439 

Costs. ]^0n the trial of an ex officio information in the High Court there 
is no jurisdiction to give costs for or against the crown, nor to direct their 
payment out of local funds; 8 Edw. 7, c. 15, ss. 1, 6. As to the position of 
the crown with respect to costs, see HuUock, 557 : R. v. Beadle, 26 L. J. (M. C.) 
Ill : Thomas v. Pritchard [1903] 1 K. B. 209; 72 L. J. (K. B.) 23 : R. v. 
Archbishop of Canterbury [1902] 2 K. B. 503, 572; 71 L. J. (K. B.) 932: 
Johnson V. R. [1904] A. C. 817, 824; Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 389. 



Sect. 3. 

INFORMATION BY THE MASTER OF THE CROWN OFFICE. 

What and in what cases.] — ^An information by the master of the crown 
office is a formal written suggestion of a misdemeanor committed, filed in 
the King's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice at the instance of 
an individual, with the leave of the court, by the inaater of the crown office 
(King's coroner and attorney) without the intervention of a grand jury. The 
right of private prosecutors to file informations for trespass, battery, or' other 
misdemeanors without the leave of tfee court was taken away by 4 W. and 
M. c. 18, ss. 1, 5. See R. v. Bobins(m, 1 W. Bl. 541. 

A.O.P. 9 



130 CRIMINAL INFORMATION. 

Like the information ex officio (ante, p. 127) this kind of information lies for 
misdemeanor only (2 Hale, 151; 2 Hawk. c. 26, ss. 7-12), and not for treason, 
felony, or misprision of treason. The court hae power to give leave to file a 
criminal information of this description for any misdemeanor whatever, but 
usually grants leave only in the case of gross and notorious misdemeanore, 
riots, batteries, libels, and other immoralities of an atrocious kind, not specially 
concerning the state : Ex parte Grawshay, 8 Cox, 356; nor peculiarly tending 
to disturb the government, for those are left to the care of the attorney-general 
{R. V. Harvey, 2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1; 2 B. & C. 257; 3 D. & B. 464), but which, 
^n account of their magnitude or pernicious example, deserve the most public 
.animadversion. 4 Bl. Com. 309. In substance informations are granted only 
in cases which before the abolition of the Star Chamber went to that courl 
as too serious for the ordinary courts, or because justice could not be obtained 
in them. See B. v. Sedley, 1 Sid. 168; 17 St. Tr. 155 n. ; Baildon, Star 
Chamber Reports. In a few cases informations have been granted for non- 
repair of roads or bridges where the grand jury has ignored a bill of indictment. 
R. v. Uptm, St. Leonards, 10 Q. B. 827 • and see Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. 
(2nd ed.) 161 et seq. The cases in which they have been granted fall under 
the following heads : — 

Blasphemy.] — Publishing a blasphemous libel : B. v. Richard Carlile, 
4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1423 ; 3 B. & Aid. 161 ; or an invective upon the established 
religion of the country. R. v. Waddington, 1 Str. Tr. (N. S.) 1339; 1 B. & C. 
26 : jR. V. Curl, 2 Str. 788 ; 17 St. Tr. 153. 

Bribery and corruption.] — An attempt to bribe a privy councillor to obtain 
a patent of an offence uuder government : R. v. Vaughan, 4 Burr. 2494; an 
attempt to bribe at an election for members to serve in parliament : R. v. 
Robinson, 1 W. Bl. 541 : R. v. Isherwood, 2 Ld. Ken. 202 : R. v. Pitt, 

1 W. Bl. 380; 3 Burr. 1335; bribing persons, either by money or promises, to 
vote at elections of officers of corporations : B. v. Plympton, 2 Ld. Eaym. 1377 ; 
R. v. Mayor of Tiverton [1723] 8 Mod. 186; bribery in the election of an 
alderman, who, by virtue of his office, is a justice of the peace; R. v. Steward, 

2 B. & Ad. 12; attempting to bribe jurymen : R. v. Young, 2 Bast, 14, cit. ; 
or clerks in public offices : R. v. Beale, 1 East, 183, cit. ; endeavouring to 
procure the appointment of certain persons to be overseers of the poor, with 
a view to derive a private advantage to the party. R. v. Jolliffe, 1 East, 
154 n. ; 4 T. E. 285. 

Immorality.] — ^Where a music-master, in consideration of a sum of money, 
assigned over his female apprentice to a gentleman under pretence of her 
receiving lessons from him in music, but really for the purposes of prostitution, 
the court upon application granted a criminal information against the gentle- 
man, the music-teacher, and the attorney who drew up the assignment. R. T. 
Delaval, 3 Burr. 1434; 1 W. Bl. 410, 439 : and see R. v. Sedley, 1 Sid. 168; 
17 St. Tr. 155 n. 



BY MASTER, OF, CROWN OFFICE. 131 

Libel.] — The court at one time used to grant criminal informations for libels 
reflecting on the conduct of private individuals, if attended with circumstances 
of aggravation. R. Y. Benfield, 2 Burr. 980 : B. v. Miles, 1 Doug. 284 : B. v. 
Haswell, Id. 387 : B. v. Staples, Andr. 228. With the repeal of the Acts 
de scandalis magnatum and change in opinion and circumstances the rule 
established by modem decisions is that a criminal information for libel will 
not be granted at the suit oi private persons, but only on the application of 
persons in a public office or position; B. v. Labouchere, 12 Q. B. D. .330; 
53 L. J. (Q. B.) 362 : Ex parte Freeman Mitford, 30 T. L. E. 693; for instance, 
for libels reflecting on the conduct of magistrates in the execution, , of ; their 
duties ; B. v. Waite, 1 Wils. (K. B.) 22; of conduct of the mayor <)t a city 
during his term of office; B. v. O'Brien; Cooke <b Alcock (Ir. K. B.) 128; of 
members of .parliament in the execution of their duties in parliE^rnent ; B. v. 
Haswell, 1 Doug. 387; of persons high in office under government in the 
execution of their several dutiesi; of a public body; B. v. Williams, 5 B. & Aid. 
595; 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1291; and the like. See B. v. Jenour, 7 Mod. 400 : 
B. V. Dennison, Lofft, 148 : B. v. Kinnersley, 1 W. Bl. 294, and n. ; B. v. 
Bussell, 93 L. T. 407 ; 21 T. L. R. 749 ; 69 J. P. 450. 

Offences against tlie administration of justice.] — Informations have been 
granted for prejudging a criminal case by representing in a theatrical exhibition 
a man in the act of committing the offence. B. v. Williams, 2 L. J. (0. S.) 
K. B. 30 : and cf. Mmson v. Tussauds, Ltd. [1894] 1 Q. B. 671. And in 
R. V. Tibbits d Windust [1902] 1 K. B. 77 (0. C. R.) it was held to be an 
indictable offence to attempt to pervert the course of justice by publishing 
articles affecting the conduct and character of persons about to be tried. The 
court followed B. v. Williams, supra, and B. y. Fisher, 2 Camp. 563. So, 
where a defendant to an information immediately before the trial distributed 
handbills in the assize town, vindicating his own conduct, and reflecting on 
that of the prosecutor, the court, considering the handbills to have been 
distributed by the defendant for the purpose of influencing thg jury in hie 
favour at the trial, granted a criminal information against him. B. v. Jollijfe, 
i T. R. 285. So, the court granted a criminal information against a person 
for publishing the proceedings before » coroner, with comments prior to the 
trial, although the statement was correct, and no malicious motive shown; 
for such publications have a tendency improperly to influence the public mind, 
and particularly the jury by whom the cause is afterwards to be tried. R. v. 
Fleet, 1 B. & Aid. 379. See B. v. Wright, 8 T. R. 293. It is now found 
more expeditious in such a case to proceed for contempt of court where the 
proceedings affected is in one of the branches of the High Court : iJ. v. Parke 
[1903] 2 K. B. 432 : R. v. Freeman's Journal [1902] 2 Ir. Rep. 82 : R. v. 
Davies [1906] 1 K. B. 32. But the existence of the summary remedy is no 
bar to proceedings by indictment or information : B. v. Tibbits, supra. 
Informations have also been granted for procuring a grand jury to throw out 
bills: Anon., Eowe (Ir. K. B.) 644, 727; for attempting to suborn witnesses 
'n a civil suit : B. v. Phillips, Gas. (K. B.) temp. Hardw. 241 ; and for 
attempting to induce witnesses to keep out of the way : B. v. Lawley, 2 Str. 



132 CRIMINAL INFORMATION. 

904,- and also for a conspiracy to obtain a false verdict by unlawful means, 
viz., by -getting two of the conspirators on to the jury. jR. v. Opie, 1 Wms. 
Saund. 300 k. 

An information has been granted for publishing an invectiye against judges 
and juries, with a view to bring into suspicion and contempt the adminis- 
tration of justice. B. V. White, 1 Camp. 359; 30 St. Tr. 1131. And where 
an order was made by a corporation, and entered on their books, stating that 
J. S. (against whom a jury had given a verdict with large damages in an 
action for a malicious prosecution for perjury, which verdict had been con- 
firmed in the Court of Common Pleas) was actuated by motives of public 
justice, etc., in preferring the indictment, the court, deeming the order to be 
a libel reflecting upon the administration of justice, upon application granted 
a criminal information against the parties concerned in making it. R. v. 
Watson, 2 T. E. 199. See also B. v. Gray [1900] 2 Q, B. 36. 

A criminal information will not be granted for words imputing miseondnet 
to a justice of the peace in his office, unless tending to a breach of the peace, 
or spoken to the magistrate when sitting as such. Ex parte Duke of Marl- 
borough, 5 Q. B. 955 ; Ex parte Chapman, 4 A. & E. 773. 

Misconduct by judicial ofBcers.]— There are no modern precedents of indict- 
ments or inforn^ibtions against judges of a superior court of record for 
oppression or extortion under colour of office. See Anderson v. Gorrie [1895} 
1 Q. B. 668; Mayne, Ind. Cr. L. [1896] 342. For an early precedent, see 
Y. B. 14 & 15 Edw. 3 (ed. Pike), Preface. An information will lie against 
a, judge of an inferior court of record for misconduct in office. A rule for a 
criminal' information against a county court judge, for miscondi»ct in his office, 
was discharged on the ground that the applicant had made the same mis- 
conduct the subject of a memorial to the Lord Chancellor, praying for inqraiiy, 
and so had elected his remedy. B. v. Marshall, 4 E. & B. 475; 94 L. J. 
(Qi B.) 242; see Anon., 4 A. & E. 576 n. 

The court ean grant a criminal information against a justice of the peace 
for any illegal act committed by him from fraudulent, corrupt or vindictive 
motives, or for manifest illegality and oppression, or gross abuse of power, or 
partiality and wilful abuse of discretion, or wilful disobedience of the orders 
of a superior court. B. v. Wykes, Andr. 238 : B. Y. Soane, Id. 272 : R. ^. 
Cozens, 2 Doug. 426 : B. v. Jonas, 1 Wils. (K. B.) 7 : cf. B. v. Newton, 1 Str. 
413: B. V. Staffordshire J J., 1 Chit. (K. B.) 217. The following cases 
illustrate the occasions on which the power has been exercised : — 

1. A justice acting where he had direct interest. B. v. Davis, Lofft, 62: 
B. V. Whateley, 4 Man. & Ey. 431 : B. v. Hoseason, 14 East, 605, or failing 
without lawful excuse to return to the assizes examinations taken by him. 
B. V. Going, Eowe (Ir. K. B.) 663. 

2. Grant or refusal of alehouse licences, from corrupt motives or resent- 
ment. B. V. Young, 1 Burr. 566, 560, 561 : B. v. Nottingham J J., Say, 216: 
B. y. Holland, 1 T. E. 692: B. v. Dams, B. v. Williams, 3 Burr. 1817: 
B. V. Hann, 3 Burr. 1716. In Boulter v. Kent Justices [1897] A. C. 556, it 
was held' that justices sitting for the grant or renewal of liquor licences do 



BY MASTER OF CROWN OFFICE. 133 

not ait as a court : c/. R. v. Howard [1902] 2 K. B. 363 (C. A.) ; eo that it 
may be doubted whether the old cases as to information are now of authority. 
But see R. v. Manchester JJ. [1899] 1 Q. B. 571 : R. v. Nicholson [1899] 

2 Q. B. 455. 

3. Illegal appointment of overseers from corrupt and improper motives. 
R. V. Somersetshire JJ., 1 D. & E. 443 : cf. R. v. Jolliffe, 1 East, 154, cit., 

4. Corruptly making a false return to » mandamus. R. v. Lancashire JJ., 
1 D. & E. 485. 

6. Abuse of authority by an obviously improper conviction : R. v. Webster, 

3 T. B. 388 : R. v. Martin, Eowe (Ir. K. B.) 726 : or an obviously illegal 
sentence : R. v. Mather, 2 Barnard (K. B.) 249; or by interfering with order 
of another justice: R. v. Brooke, 2 T. E. 190; or by refusing bail from 
improper motives : R. v. Badger, 4 Q. B. 468; 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1387; or by 
destroying a house on not finding the men he wa« searching for : Anon., Eowe 
(Ir. K. B.) 645; or by abusing the prosecutor in a, case before him. R. v. 
Manley (Id.) 646. 

But to induce the court to act there must be primA facie evidence that the 
justice acted from corrupt motives (C. O. E. 1906, r. 37, post, p. 135), and 
not from mistake or ignorance of law or in boni fide exercise of discretion. 
R. V. Palmer, 2 Burr. 1162 : R. v. Davie, 2 Doug. 588 :^ R. v. Brooke, 2 T. E. 
190 : JJ. V. Jackson, 1 T. E. 653 : R. v. Seton, 7 T. E. 373 : R. v. Barker, 

1 Bast, 186 : R. v. Baylis, 3 Burr. 1318 : R. v. Fielding, 2 Id. 719 : R. v. 
Borrm, 3 B. & Aid. 432; 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1347 : Ex parte Fentiman, 2 A. & E. 
127. If the act complained of was done at general or quarter sessions the 
evidence of deliberate misconduct or corruption must be very strong. R. v. 
Seaford JJ., 1 W. Bl. 432 : R. v. Shrewsbury JJ., 2 Barnard (K. B.) 272 : B. v. 
Phelps, 2 Ld. Kenyon, 570 : R. v. Eyres, 2 Barnard (K. B.) 250. 

Misconduct by ministerial officers.] — The court will grant an information 
against ministerial officers, for any act of oppression, or for any illegal act 
committed by them in the execution of their duties, from 'Corrupt, vindictive, 
or other improper motives ; but not where they act from ignorance or mistake 
merely. R. v. Friar, 1 Chit. Eep. (K. B.) 702. Informations have been 
granted against overseers for forcing a pauper to marry another pauper then 
pregnant with a bastard; R. v. Tarrant, 4 Burr. 2106; for a conspiracy by 
pariah officers to marry persons settled in different parishes ; R. v. Compton, 
Cald. 246 : R. v. Herbert, 2 Ld. Ken. 466; and for procuring one to marry an 
idiot chargeable to the parish ; R. v. Watson, 1 Wils. (K. B.) 41 ; but it has 
long been settled practice to refuse informations in such cases, and to leave 
the applicant to seek his remedy by indictment : see Cald. 447 n. (a) ; 2 
Nolan, 262. 

The court has granted a criminal information against a person for refusing 
to take upon himself the office of sheriff, because the vacancy of the office 
occasioned an interruption of public justice, and the year would be nearly 
expired before an indictment could be brought to trial. R. v. Woodrow, 

2 T. E. 731. See R..\. Grosvenor, 2 Str. 1193; 1 Wils. (K. B.) 18 : R. v. 
Sh^ickUngton, Andr. 201 n. 



134 CRIMINAL INFORMATION. 

Discretion of the court.] — The grant of the information isi in the discretion 
of the court, and is not of right nor ex debito justitia, as the remedy is extra- 
ordinary and is alternative to proceedings by indictment. In the exercise of 
this discretion the court has refused to grant a criminal information for an 
illegal act committed by a person under a bond, fide conviction that he was 
merely exercising a legal right; B. v. Parkyns, 3 B. & Aid. 668; and where 
the application was made against a poor man residing at a distance, to whom 
it would be very inconvenient, if not impossible, to show cause against the 
rule, or to appear afterwards to receive judgment if convicted. See B. v. 
Compton, Cald. 246 : Cf. Lofft, 155. The court has refused it also against the 
members of a corporation, for a misapplication of the corporation funds, it 
being rather a subject for an application in the Chancery Division. B. v. 
Watson, 2 T. E. 199. The court has also refused to grant it where the 
applicant himself was not free from imputation; Loilt, 314; or had already 
taken civil proceedings; Anon., 4 A. & E. 576 n. ; or had, before applying for 
the rule, entered into a correspondence with the person sought to be made 
defendant. Ex parte Haviland, 44 J. P. 789. So, where an application was 
made for a criminal information on a charge of raising great sums by eubecrip- 
tion for trading purposes, as being one of those schemes denounced by 6 G. 1, 
c. 18, ts. 18 (rep.), the court refused to grant it, as the statute had not been 
acted upon for a great length of time, and was now sought to be enforced by 
a private relator, who seemed not to have been deluded by the project, but to 
have subscribed with a view to an application to the court. B. v. Dodd, 
9 East, 516. See B. v. Webb, 14 East, 406. Informations have been granted 
' for sending a challenge to fight a duel. B. v. Y ounghusband , 4 N. & M. 850: 
B. V. Holmes, Eowe (Ir. K. B.) 239 : B. v. B(ywe, Id., 288, 418 : B. v. Harman, 
Id., 441 : B. V. Staunton, 1 Ir. Law Eec. (0. S.) 7 : B. v. Maunsell [1839] 

1 Ir. Law Eec. 257 : Armstrong v. Kiernan, 7 Cox, 6 (Ir). But an informa- 
tion for a challenge has been refused, when it appeared that the party applying . 
had previously written letters to the other, provoking him to fight ; but the 
court said that, if both parties had applied for informations, they would have 
granted them. B. v. Hankey, 1 Burr. 316. And an information has been 
refused, where the application was made by notorious gamesters against other 
gamesters, for a conspiracy to cheat them at a race. B. v. Peach, 1 Burr. 648. 
Even in cases which would warrant an information, if the court think it will 
be sufficient punishment for the defendant to pay the costs already incurred 
by the prosecutor, they will discharge the rule nisi upon these terms, if 
acceded to by the defendant. B. v. Morgan, 1 Doug. 314 : B. v. Cozens, 

2 Doug. 426. 

When and how to be moved tor, etc.] — "No application shall be made for 
a criminal information against a justice of the peace for misconduct in his 
magisterial capacity unless a notice containing a distinct statement of the 
grievances, or acts of misconduct complained of, be served personally upon 
him, or left at his residence with some member of his household, six days 
before the time named in it for making the application." Crown Office Eules, 
1906, r. 36. This rule perpetuates what had been the established practice 



BY MASTER OF CROWN OFFICE. 135 

both in England and Ireland. R. v. Heming, 5 B. & Ad. 666; 3 L.' J. (M. C.) 
3: B. V. Rae, Ir. Eep. 8 C. L. 524. 

"The application for a criminal information shall be made to a Divisional 
Court by a motion for an order nisi, within a reasonable time after the offence 
complained of, and if the application be made against a justice of the peace 
for misconduct in his magisterial capacity, the applicant must depose on 
affidavit to his belief that the defendant was actuated by corrupt motives, and 
further, if for an unjust conviction, that the defendant is innocent of the charge." 
E. 37. The first part of this rule adopts the practice as laid down in B. v. 
Harries, 13 East, 270 : B. v. Marshall, 13 Bast, 322 : B. v. Smith, 7 T. E. 80 : 
R. V. Bishop, 5 B. & Aid. 612 : B. v. Saunders, 10 Q. B. 484. The motion 
must be founded upon an affidavit disclosing all the material facts of the case. 
It is a strong, although not a conclusive, reason for rejecting an application 
for leave to file a criminal application that the applicant does not reside in 
this country. B. v. Labouchere, 12 Q. B. T>. 320; 53 L. J. (Q. B.) 362." If 
the court grants the order nisi, it is afterwards, upon showing cause, discharged 
or made absolute, as in ordinary cases. But the court cannot comprel the 
prosecutor to proceed to make it absolute. R. v. Sherwood, 2 L. J. (0. S.) 
K. B. 78. The latter part of the rule embodies the practice as stated in 
B. V. Saunders, 2 Cox, 249. 

The motion must be made by counsel, and is not entertained if made by a 
private individual. R. v. Lancaster JJ ., 1 Ohit. Eep. (K. B.) 602 : Anon., 
2 Ir. Law Eec. (0. S.) 479. The words "innocent of the charge" continue 
the practice as laid down in R. v. Athay, 2 Burr. 653 : R. v. Webster, 3 T. R. 
388, as to the necessity of removing or quashing the conviction before a rule 
will be granted : see R. v. Heber, 2 Str. 915. The abolition of the division of 
the legal year into terms so far as relates to the administration of justice by 
a. 26 of the Judicature Act,. 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. u. 66), appears to render it 
unnecessary to refer (for the purposes of r. 37) to the old division into terms 
in computing the time within which an application may be made for a criminal 
information against a magistrate for anything done in execution of his office. 
On the construction of that section see Re College of Christ, Brecknock, ar^d 
Martin, 3 Q. B. D. 16 ; 46 L. J. (Q. B.) 591. 

The motion must in all cases be made upon affidavits disclosing all the 
material facts of the case ; if a material fact is suppressed or misrepresented, 
the court will discharge the rule : R. v. Wrcmghton, 3 Burr. 1683, very probably 
with costs against the applicant : R. v. Wroughton (supra); or perhaps, in an 
extreme case, against his solicitqr : R. v. Anderson [1840] 2 Ir. Law Eep. 262 ; 
B. V. Thomas, 7 A. & E. 608. And, as the court is in a manner substituted for 
a grand jury, it will in general expect that the fact so disclosed shall amount 
to such evidence as would satisfy a grand jury, if an indictment was preferred 
for the offence. B. v. Willett, 6 T. E. 294 : B. v. Williamson, 3 B. & Aid. 582. 
The affidavit must connect the person complained of with the offence by legal 
evidence. B. v. Stanger, L. E. 6 Q. B. 352; 40 L. J. (Q. B.) 96. Therefore 
where a rule nisi had been granted calling upon S. to show cause why an 
information should not be exhibited against him for publishing a libel in a 
newspaper, and the affidavit simply showed that copies of the newspaper had 



136 CRIMINAL INFORMATION. 

been purchased at the publishing office of the paper, that by a footnote printed 
at the end of the copies S. was stated to be the printer and publisher of them, 
and that the deponent believed that S. was the printer and publisher, the court 
discharged the rule on the ground that the affidavit was insufficient. Id. The 
question was raised, but not decided, whether, under such circumstances, 
recourse can be had to the affidavits used by the defendant in showing cause, 
to supply the defeet in those for the prosecution. Id. An information may 
be granted upon the uncontradicted affidavit of one' who was particeps criminis. 
R. V. Steward, 2 B. & Ad. 12. If the subject of the application is a libel 
upon an individual charging him with a particular offence, the court always 
requires the prosecutor to deny the charge upon oath, before they will grant 
the information; R. v. Miles, 1 Doug. 284 : B. V. Harwell, Id. 387. But it is 
otherwise if the charge is general or be against a public body of men; R. v. 
Williams, 5 B. & Aid. 595; 1 D. & B. 197; or if it relates t-o anything said, 
or supposed to have been said, by the prosecutor in parliament as a member : 
R. V. Haswell, 1 Doug. 387. As to the practice on such applications, see 
R. V. The World, 13 Cox, 305 ; R. v. Labouchere, 12 Q. B. D. 320. Where 
a criminal information was applied for against a magistrate, for improperly 
convicting a person, the court refused to grant it, unless the party complaining 
would make an exculpatory affidavit denying the charge. B. v. Webster, 
3 T, R. 388. The affidavit upon which the order nisi is moved for must not 
be intituled in any cause. R. v. Harrison, 6 T. R. 60 : R. v. Robinson, Id. 
642, cit. ; but must be intituled, " In the High Court of Justice, King's Bench 
Division : " and see also R. v. Jones, 2 Str. 704 : King (qui tarn) v. Goie, 
6 T. R. 642 ; Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 162. 

If it is intended to file a joint information against several persons, the 
application should be joint against all in the first instance : for, where distinct 
rules were obtained against five persons severally, and one information there- 
upon filed against them jointly, the court, upon application, set aside the 
proceedings. R. v. Heydon, 3 Burr. 1270. 

Proceedings for a criminal information once instituted cannot be withdrawn 
o); compromised without the sanction of the Court. R. v. Newton, 67 J. P. 453. 

A rule for a criminal information was granted, and discharged upon an 
affidavit of the truth of- the charge ; subsequently it was discovered that the 
affidavit in answer to the rule was false, and the court granted another rule, 
which was made absolute. R. v. Eve, 5 A. & E. 780. 

The Law of Libel Amendment Act, 1888 (51 & 52 Vict. c. 64, s. 8), forbids 
prosecution by indictment of libels in registered newspapers without the leave 
of a judge of the High Court; see Ex parte Pulbrook {1892] 1 Q. B. 86; 
61 L. J. (M. C.) 91. That Act repealed s. 3 of the Newspaper Libel ani 
Registration Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 60), whi(Sh did not prevent proceedings 
by criminal information. R. v. Yates, 11 Q. B. D. 750; 52 L. J. (Q. B.) 776: 
Yates V. R., 14 Q. B. D. 648; 54 L. J. (Q. B.) 268. It has been assumed, 
but has not been decided, that e. 8 of the Act of 1888 does not bar proceedings 
by criminal information. Odgers on Libel (4th ed.) 663. 

Form.]— Under the Indictments Act, 191S (5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, s. 8 (3)), the 



BY MASTER OF CROWN OFFICE. 137 

provisions of that Act shall apply to criminal infoiiiatioii in the High Court 
and to any plea, replication or other criminal pleading, with such modifications 
as may be made by rules under the Act. By rules made May 23, 1916, 
rule 1 (5) in the first schedule to the Act is not to apply to criminal information 
in the High Court, but rule 2 is made to apply with the substitution of 
"Criminal Information filed by the King's Coroner and Attorney " for "Pre- 
sentment of the Grand Jury." And by rule 5 of the rules dated May 23, 
1916, the other rules relating to indictments are to apply to criminal informa- 
tions and to any plea, replication, or other pleading relating thereto. The 
form, therefore, is now : 

In the High Court of Justice, King's Bench Division . 

Criminal information filed by the King's Coroner and Attorney. 

A. B. is charged with the following offence. 

Statement of offence. 

As in the case of an indictment. See -passim. 

Filing, etc.] — ^After the court has made the rule absolute, the information 
may be filed at the crown office, upon the prosecutor's entering into the usual 
recognizances for costs. " With the exception of ex officio informations filed 
by the attorney-general on behalf of the crown no criminal Information . 
shall be exhibited, received, or filed at the Crown Office Department without 
express order of the King's Bench Division in open court, nor shall any process 
be issued upon any information other than an ex officio information, until the 
person procuring such information to be exhibited shall have filed at the 
Crown Office Department a recognizance in the penalty of 501. effectually to 
prosecute such information and to abide and observe such orders as the court 
shall direct, such recognizance to be entered into before the King's coroner and 
attorney or the master of the Crown Office, or a justice of the peace of the 
county, borough, or place in which the cause may have arisen." Cr. Off. Eules, 
1906, r. 35. See form of recognizance, App. to Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, Form 27. 

Appearance and pleading,] — ^When the information is filed, process issues to 
compel the appearance of the defendant, if an appearance be not already 
entered for him. He then either pleads to it, or applies to quash it ; and en 
issue joined, the proceedings are brought on to trial. See Short and Mellor 
Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 167; Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, rr. 35-39, 79, 83, 84. " If the 
prosecutor on any information not ex officio does not proceed to trial within a 
year after issue joined, or if the prosecutor causes a nolle prosequi to be entered, 
or if the defendant be acquitted (unless the judge at the time of trial certifies 
that there was reasonable cause for the information), the court, on motion for 
the same, may award the defendant his costs to the amount of the recognizance 
entered into by the prosecutor on filing the information." Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, 
r. 38. See also rr. 33, 34, for securing the speedy trial of the defendant, and 
his being speedily brought up for judgment, when in custody. 

In what cases quashed or stayed.] — The court will very seldom quash an 
information filed by the master of the crown office; indeed, in some of the 



138 CRIMINAL INFORMATION. 

books it is laid down that they will not quash it in any case. See R. v. Nixon, 
1 Str. 185 : B. v. Fountain, 1 Sid. 152. They have, however, interfered in 
this manner in a very few cases, under peculiar circumstances. See B. v. 
Roper, 2 Str. 1072 : B. v. Williams, 1 Burr. 385. If quashed on the motion 
of the prosecutor, it must be upon payment by him of the defendant's coats, 
at least to the extent of the recognizance. {See ante, p. 99.) Where a 
criminal information had been granted, and the attorney-general afterwards, 
for the same cause, filed an information ex officio, the court stayed the former 
until further order. R. v. Alexander, MS., B. T. 1830. It seems to have been 
laid down as a rule of practice of the court, that a person who applies for a 
criminal information must waive his right of action in that court for the same 
cause, unless the court'should, on hearing the whole matter, be of opinion that 
it was a proper subject to be tried in a civil action, and should specifically 
give him leave to do so ; and it was said that, if an information was granted, 
it was of course to stay the proceedings in an action for the same cause. 
R. V. Sparrow, 2 T. E. 198. And in R. v. Mahon [1836] 4 A. & B. 575, the 
court refused to pass sentence in a conviction for assault by the 'Gorman 
Mahon while a civil action was pending for the assault. See Short and Mellor 
Cr. Pr. (2nd ed) 152. However, where a rule for a criminal information for a 
libel was discharged on cause shown, this was held not to preclude the applicant 
from bringing an action in another court for the publication of the same libel. 
Wakley v. Cooke, 16 M. & W. 822; 16 L. J. (Ex.) 225. 

Appeal.] — On conviction on a criminal information for an indictable offence 
an appeal lies to the Court of Criminal Appeal ; 7 Edw. 7, c. 23, b. 20 (2). 

Costs.] — ^At common law the defendant upon acquittal is not entitled to any 
costs beyond the extent of the recognizance. R. v. File-wood, 2 T. E. 145 : 
see R. V. Brooke, 2 Id. 190. See also R. v. Savile, 18 Q. B. 703, and Cr. Off. 
Eules, 1906, i. 38, ante, p. 137. In cases of informations for libel a more 
extensive remedy for costs was given by the Libel Act, 1843 (6 & 7 Vict, 
c. 96, s. 8), which enacted, that in case of any indictment or information by 
a private prosecutor for the publication of any defamatory libel, if judgment 
shall be given for the defendant, he shall be entitled to recover from the 
prosecutor the costs sustained by the defendant by reason of such indictment 
or information ; and upon a special plea of justification to such indictment or 
information, if the issue be found for the prosecutor, he shall be entitled lo 
recover from the defendant the costs sustained by the prosecutor, by reason 
of such plea, such costs so to be recovered by the defendant or prosecutor 
respectively to be taxed by the proper of&cer of the court before which the 
said indictment or information is tried. Under this section it was held, that, 
on a criminal information for libel, the defendant, having recovered judgment, 
was entitled to costs, though the only plea on the record was not guilty, and 
though the judge had certified, under 4 W. & M. o. 18, s. 2 (rep.), that there 
was reasonable cause for exhibiting the information : ij. v. Latimer, 15 Q. B. 
1077 ; 20 L. J. (Q. B.) 129; and that where, on such an information, judgment 
was given for the defendant, he was entitled to costs incurred previously to 



BY MASTER OF CROWN OFFICE. 139 

the filing of the information, as well as to costs incurred subsequently to the 
filing of the information. R. y. Steel, 1 Q. B. D. 482 ; 45 L. J. (Q. B.) 391. 
The provisions of s. 8 were embodied in Or. Off. Eules, 1906, r. 39; but s. 8 
was repealed as to England by s. 10 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1908 
(8 Edw. 7, c. 15). The part as to acquittal is re-enacted by s. 6 (2) of that 
Act, but that as to conviction after plea of justification is replaced by a more 
general provision in s. 6 (1). Section 6 applies to prosecutions on criminal 
information as well as to prosecutions on indictment; vide post, pp. 284 et seq. 



140 CORONER'S INQUISITION. 



CHAPTEE III. 

CORONER'S INQUISITION. 

CoBONEES are ancient officers of the common law : so called because they 
deal principally with, the pleas of The Crown, and were of old time the 
principal conservators of the peace within their county ■ 2 Hawk. c. 9, s. 1; 
Stephen, 1 Hist. Cr. L. 217; Seld. Soc. Publ. vol. 9. 

Coroner's inquisition as a mode of criminal prosecutions.] — The finding of a 
coroner's inquest is equivalent to the finding of a grand jury ; and a defendant 
may be prosecuted for murder or manslaughter upon such inquisition, which 
is the record of the finding of a jury ewom to inquire concerning the death 
of the deceased, super visum corporis. Such an inquisition amounts to an 
indictment {R. v. Ingham, 5 B. & S. 257; 33 L. J. (Q. B.) 183), and by Coke,, 
and the older law-writers, is frequently designated by that name, and a 
defendant is arraigned upon it in the same way as upon an indictment, and 
may plead, or take exception to it" precisely as if it had been found by a 
grand jury, and he may be tried and sentenced on such inquisition. Re Ward, 
30 L. J. Ch. 775, 776, Lord Campbell. It is the practice at assizes, where 
a prisoner stands charged upon a coroner's inquisition with murder or man- 
slaughter, in order to guard against any failure of justice, also to prefer a 
bill of indictment for the same offence before the grand jury. It is usual 
when a bill of indictment for the offence charged in the inquisition has been 
ignored, to offer no evidence on the coroner's inquisition, but it is occasionally 
found convenient to proceed on the inquisition, and cases have occurred when 
this was done and the defendant was convicted. If a true bill is found the 
defendant is arraigned on both the indictment and the inquisition at the 
same time ; 1 East, P. C. 371. If the bill is ignored the defendant must 
still be arraigned on the inquisition. Where a defendant is arraigned and 
tried upon one only and acquitted he must afterw.ards be arraigned upon the 
other ; to which, however, he may effectually plead autrefois acquit. 2 Hale, 
246; 4 Bl. Com. 301; 1 Chitty Cr. L. (2nd ed.) 163 : R. v. Cole, 3 Camp. 371; 
2 Leach, 1095 : R. v. Maynard, E. & E. 240. 

Authority and duty of coroner in holding inquests in cases ot murder and 
manslaughter.] — The duty of a coroner, in cases " where any be slain or 
suddenly dead," was pointed out with great particularity by the statute 
4 E^w. 1 (De Officio Coronatoris) , which is said to have been merely declaratory, 
and in affirmance of the common law. (See Seld. Soc. Publ. vol. 9,«p. xiv. et seq.) 
That statute was repealed by b. 45 of the Coroners Act, 1887 (50 & 51 Vict. 



DUTY OF CORONER. 141 

c. 71), a consolidating Aet. Section 3 of the latter statute provides that " where 
a coroner is informed that the dead body of a person is lying within his 
jurisdiction, and there is reasonable camse to suspect that such person has died 
either a violent or an unnatural death, or has died a sudden death of which 
the cause is unknown (see Ee Hull, 9 Q. B. D. 689), or that such person has 
died in prison (R. y. Robinson, 19 Q. B. D. 322), or in such place or under 
such circumstances as to require an inquest in pursuance of any Act,, the 
coroner, whether the cause of death arose within his jurisdiction or not, shall, 
as soon as practicable, issue his warrant for summoning not less than twelve 
nor more than twenty-three good and lawful men to appear before him at a 
specified time and place, there to inquire as jurors, touching the death Of such 
person as aforesaid " (sub-s. 1). 

Upon the statute 4 Edw. 1. (De Officio Goronatoris), it was held that a, 
coroner was bound to take his inquest upon view of the dead body, and that 
an inquest otherwise taken is void; R. v. F errand, 3 B. & Aid. 260; and it 
is still the law that the coroner and jury shall, at the first sitting of the 
inquest, view the body. 50 & 51 Tiet. u. 71, », 4, sub-a. 1 (post, p. 143). It 
was also held under the old statute that a coroner might inquire as well 
respecting accessories before the fact to a murder or manslaughter, or respecting 
a principal in the second degree, aiding and abetting a murder or manslaughter, 
as concerning the actual murderer or slayer; but that he had no power' to 
inquire concerning accessories after the fact; and the same rule appears to 
continue under 50 & 51 Vict. u. 71, s. 4, sub-s. 3 of which enacts that the 
inquisition shall in cases of murder or manslaughter set forth " the persons, 
if any, whom the jury find to have been guilty of such murder or manafeughter, 
or of being accessories before the fact to such murder." It was held before 
the passing of the Coroners Act, 1887, that if the dead body, whereon an 
inquest ought to be held, be interred, or suffered to putrefy before the coroner 
viewed it, the township, or, if the death occurred in a prison, the gaoler should 
be amerced; and that it was a misdemeanor to bum or otherwise dispose of a 
dead body, upon which an inquest ought to be held, with intent to prevent 
the coroner from holding the inquest (see R. v. Price, 12 Q'. B. D. 247; 
53 L. 3. (M. C.) 51 : R. v. Stephenson, 13 Q. B. D. 331; 53 L. J. (M. C.) 176; 
Cremation Act, 1902 (2 Edw. 7, c. 8), s. 10); or in any other way to obstruct 
the coroner or his jury in the view or inquiry ; Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.) 6, 86. 
The ratio decidendi of these- cases will apply to similar cases arising since the 
passing of the Act. The coroner himself may be indicted for misdemeanor 
if guilty of corruption or wilful neglect of duty or of misbehaviour in abstaining 
from holding an inquest where it is his duty to do so. See 50 & 51 Vict, c. 71, 
a. 8, sub-s. 2. Gn the other hand, the holding of inquests unnecessarily was 
most strongly censured by Lord Ellenborough in iJ. v. Kent J J., 11 East, 229. 
The coroner has not. an absolute right to hold inquests iii every case in which 
he chooses to do sO'. It would be intolerable if he had power to intrude without 
adequate cause upon the privacy of a family in distress, and to interfere with 
their arrangements for a funeral. Wotbing can justify such interference except 
a reasonable suspicion that there may have been something peculiar in the 
death, — that it may have been due to other causes than common illness'. In 



142 CORONER'S INQUISITION. 

such cases the coroner not only may, but ought to hold an inquest. R. v. Price, 

12 Q. B. D. 247, 248, Stephen, J. And a coroner is justified in holding an 
inquest if he honestly believes in the truth of information given to him which, 
if true, would make it his duty to hold such inquest. B. v. Stephenson, 

13 Q. B. D. 331. A coroner, also, may lawfully, within a reasonable time after 
the death, order a dead body to be disinterred in order to view it, not only for 
the purpose of taking an inquest where none has been held before, but of 
taking a good inquest where an insufficient one has been taken before. Jervis 
on Coroners (6th ed.) 27. For, where the first inquest was not held surpir 
visum corporis, or is afterwards quashed by the High Court (K. B. D.), the 
coroner may hold another. 2 Hawk. c. 9, s. 23; 2^Hale, 58 : Arum., 1 Str. 533. 
But where an inquest has been held super visum corporis, and a verdict 
recorded, the coroner cannot, mero motu, hold a second inquest. 2 Hale, 59 : 
R. V. White, 3 E. & B. 137; 29 L. J. (Q. B.) 257: and, see 
R. v. Coulson, 55 J. P. 202. Where a coroner rejected evidence whicH he 
ought to have admitted and the jury returned an open verdict the inquisition 
was qua,shed by the Q. B. D., and a melius inquirendum awarded before the 
same coroner and another jury. R. v. Garter, 13 Cox, 220. By s. 6 of the 
Coroners Act, 1887 (50 & 51 Vict. o. 71), " where his Majesty's High Court 
of Justice, upon application made by. or under the authority of the attorney- 
general, is satisfied either (a) that a coroner refuses or neglects to hold an 
inquest which ought to be held ; or (b) where an inquest has been held by » 
coroner that by reason of fraud, rejection of evidence, irregularity of proceedings, 
insufficiency of inquiry or otherwise, it is necessary or desirable, in the interests 
of justice, that another inquest should be held, the court may order an inquest 
to be held touching the said death . . , and where an inquest has been already 
held may quash the inquisition on that inquest." That section also makes 
provisions as to the costs of the application, the coroner before whom the 
inquest provided for by it is to be held, and the proceedings at such inquest. 
See Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.) 54. R. v. Wood, 73 J. P. 40. Having regard 
to the terms of s. 6, it seems doubtful whether if a coroner neglects to take 
an inquisition, it can now be taken by the justices of gaol delivery, of oyer 
and terminer, or of the peace, as stated in Bac. Abr. Coroner; 2 Hark. c. 9, 
s. 23 (5) et seq. 

In view of the powers given to the secretary of state to license exhumation 
(20 & 21 Vict. c. 81, s. 25), and the terms of s. 6 of the Cormiers Act, 1887, 
it has been doubted whether a coroner has now the power, proprio motu, to 
order exhumation. See Brooke Little on Burials. The form of order in Jervis 
on Coroners (6th ed.) 247, is not a statutory form. The coroner has also a 
duty to hold inquests on all prisoners dying in a prison (50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, 
s. S: R. V. Graham [1905] 69 J. P. 324 : R. v. Robinson, 19 Q. B. D. 322); 
including persons executed under sentence of a court of justice (31 & 32 Vict, 
c. 24, b. 5; 42 & 43 Vict. u. 1, s. 3; 44 & 45 Vict. c. 64, s. 2); on lunatics dying 
m his district if he considers there is any reasonable ground of suspicion 
(53 & 54 Vict. c. 5, ss. 84, 319) ; and on the bodies of infants nursed for hire, 
unless a satisfactory medical certificate of the cause of death is available 
(8 Edw. 7, c. 67, =. 6). 



PROCEEDINGS AT INQUEST. 143 

Proceedings at the inquest.] — " When not less than twelve jurors are 
assembled they shall be sworn by or before the coroner diligently to inquire 
touching the death of the person on whose body the inquest is about to be 
held, and a true verdict to give according to the evidence." 50 & 51 Vict. 
0. 71, s. 3, sub-B. 3. Though the jury cannot consist of less than twelve 
persons, it may consist of any greater number not exceeding twenty-three. 
50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 3, sub-s. 1 {ante, p. 141). "The coroner and jury 
shall, at the first sitting of the inquest, view the body, and the coroner shall 
examine on oath touching the death all persons who tender their evidence 
respecting the facts, and all persons having knowledge of the facts whom he 
thinks it expedient to examine." 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 4, sub-s. 1. The 
coroner has power to require and compel the attendance of such witnesses as 
he deems necessary for the investigation of the truth of each case, and may 
fine them for non-attendance or for refusing to answer questions. 50 & 51 Vict, 
c 71, s. 19, sub-s. 2. The Act of 1887, s. 4, sub-s. 1 (supra), requires that the 
evidence at the inquest shall be given upon oath. This leaves the law as it 
stood before 1887. Wakley v. Cooke, 4 Ex. 611 ; 19 L. J. (Ex.) 91 : Jervis on 
Coroners (6th ed.). But the fact that evidence not upon oath was received 
by the coroner is no ground for a certiorari to bring up the inquisition. B. Y. 
Ingham, 5 B. & S. 257 ; 9 Cox, 508. It might, however, furnish ground for 
an application to the High Court of Justice for an order for another inquest 
under 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 6, supra. " Where it appears to the coroner that 
the deceased was attended at his death or during his last illness by any 
legally qualified medical practitioner, the coroner may summon such practi- 
tioner as witness ; but if it appears to the coroner that the deceased person 
was not attended at his death or during his last illness by any legally qualified 
medical practitioner, the coroner may summon any legally qualified medical 
practitioner who is at the time in actual practice in or near the place where 
the death happened, and any such medical witness as is summoned in pursu- 
ance of this section, may be asked to give evidence as to how, in hisi opinion, 
the deceased came to his death." 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 21, sub-s. 1. " The 
coroner may, either in his summons for the attendance of such medical witness 
or at any time between the issuing of that summons and the end of the inquest, 
direct such medical witness to make a post-mortem examination of the body 
of the deceased with or without an analysis of the contents of the stomach 
or intestines. Provided that where a person states upon oath before the coroner, 
that in his belief the death of the deceased was caused partly or entirely by 
the improper or negligent treatment of a medical practitioner or other person, 
such medical practitioner or other person shall not be allowed to perform or 
assist at the post-mortem examination of the deceased." Id. sub-s. 2. " t'i 
a majority of the jury sitting at an inquest are of opinion that the cause of 
■ death has not been satisfactorily explained by the evidence of the medical 
practitioner or other witnesses brought before them, they may require the 
coroner in writing to summon as a witness some other legally qualified medical 
practitioner named by them, and further to direct a post-mortem examination 
of the deceased, with or without an analysis of the contents of the stomach <t 
intestines, to be made by such last mentioned practitioner, and that whether 



144 CORONER'S INQUISITION. 

Bnch examination has been previously made or not, and the coroner shall 
comply with such requisition, and in default shall be guilty of a misdemeanor." 
Id. sub-s. 3. 

" It shall be the duty of the coroner in a case of murder 6r manslaughter to 
put into writing the statement on oath of those who know the facts and circum- 
stances of the case, or so much of such statement as is material, and any such 
deposition shall be signed by the witness and also by the coroner." 50 & 51 
Vict. c. 71, s. 4, sub-s. 2. [As to the admissibility in evidence of depositions 
taken before coroners, see post, p. 148.] 

As to summing up by the coroner, see Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.) 40. 

" After viewing the body and hearing the evidence the jury shall give their 
verdict, and certify it by an inquisition in writing, setting forth, so far as 
such particulars have been proved to. them, who the deceased was, and 
how, when, and where the deceased came by his death, and if lie 
came by his death by murder or manslaughter, the persons, if any, whom 
the jury find to have been guilty of such murder or manslaughter, or of being 
accessories before the fact to such murder." 60 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 4, sub-s. ii. 
If twelve at least of the jury do not agree on a verdict, the coroner may adjourn 
the inquest to the next assizes for the county or place for which the inquest is 
held, and if after hearing the charge of the judge or commissioner of assize 
twelve of the jury fail to agree on a verdict they may be discharged without 
a^ verdict. 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 4, sub-s. 5 : Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.) 44. 

Requisites and form of inquisition in cases of murder and manslaughter.]— 

The form of an inquisition is contained in the second schedule of 50 & 51 Vict. 
c. 71, and by sect. 37 of that Act : — " the schedules to this Act shall be con- 
strued and have effect as part of this Act, and the forms given in any of those 
schedules, or such other forms as the Lord Chancellor from time to time directs 
may be used in all matters to which they apply, and when so used shall be 
sufficient in law." " The inquisition shall be under the hands, and in the 
case of murder or manslaughter also under the seals, of the jurors who concur 
in the verdict, and of the coroner." 60 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 18, sub-s. 1. 

By the Indictments Act, 1915 (5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, s. 8 (3) ), the provisions 
of that Act shall apply to . . inquisitions . . . with such modifications as 
may be made by rules under the Act. By rules dated May 23, 1916, rule 3 (1) : 
Eule 1 (5) and rule 2 in the First Schedule to the Act shall not apply to coroners 
inquisitions. By rule 3 (2) : In coroners' inquisitions the form of inquisition 
provided by the Coroners Act, 1887, may be used with such alterations as may 
be made under that Act, but any offence charged thereon shall be stated in 
accordance with the form of indictment relating thereto prescribed by the 
Indictments Rules, 1915-1916. By rule 5 : Except as in these rules otherwise 
provided, the Indictments Rules, 1916-1916, relating to indictments shall apply ' 
to . . inquisitions. 

" All inquisition need not be on parchment, and may be written or printed, 
or partly written and partly printed, and may be in the form contained in the 
second schedule to this Act, or to the like effect, or in such other form as the 
Lord Chancellor from time to time prescribes, or to the like effect, and the state- 



FORM OF INQUISITION. 145 

ments therein may be made in concise and ordinary language." 50 & 5TVict. 
0. 71, s. 18 (2). Formerly an inquisition in the case of murder or manslaughter 
had to be on parchment, but this is now repealed by the Indictments Act, 1915., 
6 & 6 Geo. 5, e. 90, s. 8 (3). An inquisition consists of three parts— the caption 
or incipitur, the verdict of the jury, and the attestation. 

Yenue.] — The venue should be in the county or jurisdiction within which the 
inquisition is holden. See ante, pp. 28 et seq. To avoid difficulty in cases 
whelre the cause of death arose within one county or jurisdiction, and the body 
was lying dead within another county or jurisdiction, the Act of 1887 provides 
that " the coroner only within whose jurisdiction the body of a person upon 
whose death an inquest ought to be holden is lying shall hold the inquest, and 
where a body is found dead in the sea, or any creek, river, or navigable canal 
within the flowing of the sea where there is no deputy coroner for the juris- 
diction of the Admiralty of England, the inquest shall be held oily by the 
coroner having jurisdiction in the place where the body is first brought to 
land;" s. 7, sub-s. 1; and " for the purpose of holding coroners' inquests, every 
detached part of a county shall be deemed to be within the county by which it 
is wholly surrounded, or, where it is partly surrounded by two or more counties 
within the county with which it has the longest common boundary." Sec. 
40, sub-s. 1. 

Verdict.] — The inquisition must show of what place the person who took it 
was coroner, and that he had competent jurisdiction. 2 Ld. Eaym. 1305. 
It is essential that the inquest shall be taken upon view of the body (2 Hawk. 
0. 9, s. 23), for the coroner can take an inquisition super visum corporis only 
(excepting where the inquest is ordered by the High Court of Justice, ante, 
p 142), the view being absolutely necessary to give him jurisdiction. (B. v. 
Perrand, a,nte, p. 141). If the body of the deceased is identified, and his 
christian name and surname is known, or the name by which he was usually 
known is ascertained, they ought to be correctly stated; but the provisions of 
the Indictments Act, 1915, relating to descriptions in indictments apply to 
inquisitions. 6 & 6 Geo. 5, i;. 90,o.8(3); see ante, pp. iTetseq. It is essential 
to every inquisition that it be found by twelve jurors at the least ; 2 Hale, 
161 n. ; 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 4, sub-s. 5. 

Attestation.] — -The names of the jurors ought to be inserted in the body of 
the inquisition, and the inquisition ought to be subscribed by them with their 
names. R. v. Evett, 6 B. & C. 247. It was held in the last-mentioned case 
that the jurors ought to subscribe their names in full. 60 & SI Vict. c. 71, 
8. 18, sub-s. 1 {ante, p. 144) merely directs that the inquisition shall be under 
their hands, and in the case of murder or manslaughter also under their seals. 
See 2 Co. Inst. 388. Where the inquisition is taken before a deputy coroner, 
the proper mode of signing the attestation is " E. D. (l.s.), coroner, by B. M. 
his deputy duly appointed," etc. R. v. Perkins, 7 Q. B. 165; 14 L. J. (M. C.) 
87. As to the jurisdiction of deputy coroners, and the mode of proving It, see 
55 & 66 Vict. c. 56, s. 1. When the inquest takes place in a county other than 

A.o.p. 10 



146 CORONER'S INQUISITION. 

that fa which the offence is charged by the inquisition, the inquisition should be 
returned to the court of assize for the county in whioh the offence is charged. 
B. V. Wight, 59 J. P. 746. 

Process upon a coroner's inquisition.] — " Where a coroner's inquisition 
charges a person with the offence of murder or manslaughter, or of being 
accessory before the fact to a murder (which latter offence is in this Act 
included in the expression " murder ') , the coroner shall issue . his warrant for 
arresting or detaining such person (if such warrant has not previously been 
issued) and shall bind by recognizance all such persona examined before him 
as know or declare anything material touching the said offence, to appear at 
the next court of oyer and terminer or gaol delivery at which the trial is to 
be, then and there to prosecute or give evidence against the person so charged." 
SO & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 5, sub-s. 1. For form of recognizances to prosecute and 
give evidence, Id. Sched. 2. " The coroner shall deliver the inquisition, deposi- 
tions, and recognizances, with a certificate under his hand that the same 
have been taken before him, to the proper officer of the court in which the 
trial is to be, before or at the opening of the court." Id. s.-5, sub-s. 3. By 
Home Office circular of May, 1891, coroners are requested to see that the 
depositions are legibly written and accompanied by all exhibits. If the coroner 
does not take them properly, and return them to the proper court or person, 
he is liable to fine under 60 & 51 Vict. n. 71, s. 9. When an inquisition is 
returned to the justices of oyer and terminer, or of gaol delivery, if the person 
against whom the coroner's jury have found their verdict of guilty has been 
taken, he is tried before them; but if he cannot be taken, the inquisition is 
to be certified by them into the King's Bench Division, and process may then 
be awarded as upon an indictment. See ante, p. 78; 2 Hale, 64; 1 Chitty 
Cr. L. 163; and for all the forms of proceeding upon inquests, see Jervis on 
Coroners (6th ed.) and Sched. 2 of 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71. 

Person charged vith murder or manslaughter entitled to copy of inquisition 
and oJ depositions.] — By the Indictments Rules, 1916, dated May 23, 1916, 
rule 4 : It shall be the duty of the clerk of assize to supply on request free of 
charge to a person committed for trial on a coroner's inquisition a copy of so 
much of the inquisition as charges him with an offence, and the cost of such 
copy shall be treated as part of the costs of the prosecution for the purpose of 
section 1 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1908. The Coroners Act, 1887, 
3. 18 (5), provides for copies of the inquisition and depositions at a charge not 
exceeding three halfpence for every folio of ninety words. 

This has not been repealed by the Indictments Act, 1915; but, so far as the 
inquisition is concerned, is practically superseded by rule 4 of the Indictments 
Rules, supra. 

By the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1908, s. 1 (3), post, p. 268, where a 
prisoner has obtained a certificate for legal aid under the Poor Prisoners Dejenoe 
Act, 1903, the costs which may be directed to be paid out of local funds in- 
clude the costs of a copy of the depositions. 



CORONER'S INQUISITION. 147 

Depositions to be sent to Director of Public Prosecutions.] — ^Where a prosecu- 
tion for murder or manslaughter is undertaken by the Director of Public 
Prosecutions, the coroner must send the inquisition and depositions to that 
officer. 42 & 43 Vict. c. 22, s. 5. By the Eegulations of Jan. 25, 1886, 
under the Prosecution of Offences Acts, 1879, 1884 and 1908 {see Douglas Summ. 
Jur. Proc. (9th ed.) ; Stat. Eules and Orders Eevised (ed. 1904), vol. 4, tit. 
Criminal Procedure, England, p. 7), it is the duty of the Director of Public 
Prosecutions to take up charges of murder, and it has been the practice, since 
the issue of a Home Office circular of September, 1884, for the coroner to send 
to that officer copies of depositions taken on inquisitions of murder or man- 
slaughter. See Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.) 52. 

Bail where the coroner has committed a person to prison.] — The provisions as 
to bail contained in the Indictable Offences Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. c. 42), 
the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. o. 43), and the Bail Act, 
1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 7), ante, pp. 87 et seq., do not apply to cases of 
commitment upon an inquisition by the warrant of a coroner ; but by 50 & 51 
Vict. c. 71, s. 6, sub-s. 2, " Where the offence is manslaughter, the coroner 
may, if he thinks fit, accept bail by recognizance with sufficient sureties for 
the appearance of the person charged at the next court of oyer and terminer, 
or gaol delivery at which the t-rial is to be, and thereupon such person if in 
the custody of an officer of the coroner's court or under a warrant of commit- 
ment issued by such coroner, shall be discharged therefrom." As to the form 
of such recognizances, and the notices to be given to the persons bound thereby, 
see Id. B. 18, sub-s. 4, and Sched. 2. Where the jury find a verdict of murder, 
or where the coroner refuses bail, the High Court (K. B. D.) can grant bail. 
The procedure is the same as in other cases of bail. It is now usual to proceed 
by summons for bail, and not by writ of habeas corpus and certiorari. See 
ante, p. 93. 

Trial of Inquisition.] — On the trial of an inquisition, the court has the same 
powers of amendment as in the case of the trial of an indictment. See 
5 & 6 Geo. 5, u. 90, ss. 5, 8 (3), {ante, pp. 54, 144). And by s. 20 of 50 & 
51 Vict. c. 71, — " If in the opinion of the court having cognizance of the case an 
inquisition find sufficiently the matters required to be found thereby, and where 
it. charges a person with murder or manslaughter sufficiently designates that 
person and the offence charged, the inquisition shall not be quashed for any 
defects, and the court may order the proper officer of the court to amend any 
defect in the inquisition, and any variance occurring between the inquisition and 
the evidence offered in proof thereof, if the court are of opinion that such defect 
or variance is not material to the merits of the case, and that the defendant or 
person traversing the inquisition cannot be prejudiced by the amendment in 
his defence or traverse on the merits, and the court may order the amendment 
on such terms as to postponing the trial to be had before the same or another 
jury as to the court may seem reasonable, and after the amendment the trial 
shall proceed in like manner, and the inquisition, verdict, and judgment, shall 
be of the same effect, and the record shall be drawn up in the same form, in 



148 CORONER'S INQUISITION. 

all respects, as if the inquisition had originally been in the form in which it 
stands when so amended." The jurisdiction to amend belongs only to the 
court of trial, R. v. Directors of G.W.R., 24 Q. B. D. 410; 16 Cox, 410. If 
the inquisition is defective it may be brought up with the depositions by 
certiorari to the King's Bench Division of the High Court and quashed; B. v. 
Clerk of Assize of Oxford Circuit [1897] 1 Q. B. 370; 18 Cox, SIS: and cf. 
Six-mile Bridge Case, 6 Cox, 122 (Ir.). Where the defects are on the face of 
the inquisition the application is usually made to the court to which it is 
returned, and before plea pleaded.. See Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.) 54, 35. 

Admissibility of depositions at trial.] — Depositions taken before a coroner do 
not fall within 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 17, but are admissible at the trial if 
the deponent is dead, on proof that the person against whom they are tendered 
in evidence was present at the inquest and had opportunities afforded him for 
cross-examining the deponent. B. v. Cowle, 71 J. P. 172 : B. v. Black, 74 
J. P. 71; 2 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 2244. This rule applies only to statements in 
the deposition which would have been admissible on a vivd voce examination 
of the deponent. B. v. Black, supra. 

Costs.]— Ajs to the costs of a trial on a coroner's inquisition, see 8 Bdw. 7, 
c. 15, post, pp. 267 et seq. 



ORDER AND TIME OF PLEADING. 149 



CHAPTBE IV. 

PLEAS, KEPLICATIONS, ETC. 

Sect. 1. Order and Time of Pleading, p. 149. 

2. Plea to the Jurisdiction, p. 150. 

3. Demurrer, p. 151. 

4. Special Pleas in Bar, p. 154. 

1. Autrefois acquit, p. 155. 

2. Autrefois convict, p. 160. 

3. Autrefois attaint, p. 163. 

4. Pardon, p. 164. 

5. General issue, p. 165. 



Sect. 1. 

ORDER AND TIME OF PLEADING. 

Criminal proceedings have been specially excepted from statutes changing 
the system of pleading {e.g., 4 & 5 Anne, c. 3; 4 Anne, c. 16, Euffhead), and 
are still to a great extent subject to the common law rules of pleading ; 1 Chit. 
Cr. L. 434. At common law no more than one plea can be pleaded to any 
indictment or criminal information for misdemeanor. R. v, Charlesworth , 

1 B. & S. 460 ; 31 L. J. (M. C.) 26 : R. V. Strahan, 7 Cox, 85. In felonies 
if the defendant pleads specially in bar, he may (R. v. Charlesworth, supra), 
and should in strictness, at the same time, plead over to the felony. See post, 
p. 160; and R. v. Drury, 8 C. & K. 196, 200; 18 L. J. (M. C.) 189. 

When brought to the bar and arraigned, after any question raised as to his 
capacity to plead has been decided, the prisoner either confesses the charge in 
the indictment or some other charge of which he can lawfully be convicted on 
that indictment (see 4 & 5 Geo. 5, c. 58, s. 39 (1) ), or stands mute, or does 
not answer directly to the charge (see 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 28, s. 2) ; or pleads to 
the jurisdiction — or demurs — or pleads specially in bar — or pleads the general 
issue, i.e., that he is " not guilty." Except under the express provisions of 
a statute, it is not permissible to plead double or to join any other plea with 
the general issue. R. v. Strahan, 7 Cox, 85. And see R. v. Banks, [1911] 

2 K. B. 1095 ; 81 L. J. (K. B.) 120 ; 22 Cox, 663 ; 6 Cr. App. E. 276. "When the 



150 PLEAS, REPLICATIONS, ETC. 

defendant has pleaded "not guilty," he is not entitled afterwards, and while 
that plea is standing, to plead specially in bar. Id. "When he has any special 
matter to plead in bar, or if the indictment be demurrable, he should plead, or 
demur at the time of arraignment, before the plea of not guilty. See R. y. 
Binkes, 2 Smith (K. B.) 620. 

Where a defendant prosecuted in the King's Bench Division of the High 
Court in England or Ireland, by information or indictment, for any misdemeanor 
there found or removed into that court, appears in court in term time in person 
to answer the indictment or information, he cannot " imparle " to a following 
term, but must plead or demur thereto within four days from the time of Ms 
appearance; and in default of his pleading or demurring within four days, 
judgment may be entered against him for want of a plea. If he appears to 
the indictment by attorney, he cannot " imparle " to the following term, but 
may forthwith be ruled to plead ; and a plea or demurrer may be enforced, 
or judgment by default entered thereupon, in the same manner as before the 
passing of the Act might have been done, had the defendant appeared by his 
attorney in the preceding term. 60 G. 3 and 1 G. i, u. 4, s. 1. But the court 
or a judge may, for suf&cient cause, allow further time to plead or demur. 
60 G. 3 and 1 G. 4, c. 4, s. 2. These provisions do not apply to prosecutions 
for non-repair of a bridge or highway. 60 G. 3 and 1 G. 4, u. 4, s. 10; Short 
and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.1 105. 



Sect. 2. 



PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION. 



When available,] — Where an indictment is taken before a court which has 
no cognizance of the offence, the defendant may plead to the jurisdiction 
without answering at all to the crime alleged ; 2 Hale, 268 ; 1 Chit. Or. L., 437 ; 
as if a man were indicted for treason at the quarter sessions, or for a rape 
at the sheriff's tourn, or the like; Id.; or if another court have exclusive 
jurisdiction of the offence. 4 Bl. Com. 333. 

But it is seldom necessary to have recourse to this plea. For it is bad unless 
it shows a court or jurisdiction in which the defendant could lawfully be 
tried. If the offence were committed out of the jurisdiction of the English 
courts, the defendant may take advantage of this matter under the general 
issue; R. v. Johnson, 6 East, 583; or if the defect of jurisdiction appears upon 
the face of the record, he may demur, or (it would seem) move in arrest of 
judgment; R. v. Hewitt, E. & E. 158; and if convicted may appeal. If, on 
the other hand, the offence were committed within the local jurisdiction of the 
court, but the court has not cognizance of it (which can occur only in the case 
of indictments in inferior courts, such as a court of quarter sessions), the 
defendant may have advantage of it upon general demurrer ; R. v. Feamley, 
1 T. E. 316; 1 Leach, 425; or the High Court, upon the indictment being 



DEMURRER. 151 

removed by certiorari, will quash it : B. v. Sainton, 2 Str. 1088. And the 
court before which the indictment is preferred will, in general, give the 
defendant advantage of the objection at the trial, under the general issue. In 
R. V. Balfour, Q. B. D. Oct. 15th, 1895, Bruce, J., it was proposed to put 
in a plea to the jurisdiotion on the ground that the indictment contained counts 
for offences in respect of which the defendant had not been extradited from 
the Argentine Eepublic; but the doubtful counts were withdrawn, and the 
plea was not in fact pleaded. In B. v. Jameson [1896] 2 Q. B. 425; 65 L. J. 
(M. C.) 218; objections on the ground of want of jurisdiction were taken (1) on 
motion to quash the indictment; and (2) when this failed, under the plea cf 
not guilty. 

Form.] — By s. 8 (3) of the Indictments Act, 1915, ante, p. 144, the provisions 
of that Act are applied to any plea, replication, or other criminal pleading. The 
form of a plea to the jurisdiction is as follows : — 

The King v. A. B. 

Central Criminal Court. 

A. B. says that the court ought not to take cognizance of the. indictment 
against him because [state in ordinary language the matter of the pieo]. 

The form of the replication to this plea is : — 

The King v. A. B. 

Central Criminal Court. 

H. A. (the Clerk of the Court) joins issue on behalf of the King. 
If a plea to the jurisdiction is quashed on demurrer or otherwise fails the 
defendant may be ordered to plead over instanter. R. v. Johnson, supra. 



Sect. 3. 



DEMURRER. 



By a demurrer to an indictment or information the defendant refers it to the 
court to pronounce whether, admitting the matters of fact alleged against him 
to be true, they do, in point of law, constitute him guilty of an offence sufficiently 
charged against him. 1 Starkie Cr. PL 315 (2nd ed.). By a demurrer to a 
plea the prosecutor refers it to the court to determine whether the plea is good 
in law. Demurrers are of two kinds : 1. Special, usually called demurrers in 
abatement, based on some formal defect in the indictment : these, like pleas 
in abatement, are obsolete, on account of the wide powers of amendment given 
formerly by the Criminal Procedure Act, 1851 (14 & 15 Vict. c. 100), and now 



152 PLEAS, REPLICATIONS, ETC. 

by the Indictments Act, 1915 (5 & 6 Geo. 5, u. 90) ; see ante, p. 54. 2. General, 
founded on some substantial defect in the indictment or last preceding pleading. 
And if the party pleads to the indictment, or replies to a plea in bar, it will then 
be too late to demur unless the court consents to withdrawal of the plea or 
replication. , 

General demurrers.] — Where there is a defect in substance apparent on the 
face of the indictment, the defendant may take advantage of it by general 
demurrer, but if he pleads over, instead of demurring or moving to quash the 
indictment (as to which see ante, p. 98), the defect will in numerous cases 
be cured by verdict; e.g., in cases within 7 Gr. 4, c. 64, s. 21, ante, p. 44. 
Even independently of that enactment, it is a general rule of pleading at 
common law — in criminal as in civil cases — that, where an averment which is 
necessary for the support of the pleading is imperfectly stated, and the verdict 
on an issue involving that averment is found, if it appears to the court after 
verdict that the verdict could not have been found on this issue without proof 
of this averment, the defective averment, which might have been bad on 
demurrer, is cured by the verdict. Heymann v. B., L. E. 8 Q. B. 102, 105 : 
B. V. Goldsmith, L. E. 2 C. C. E. 74; 42 L. J. (M. 0.) 94: Taylor v. B. 
[1895] 1 Q. B. 25 ; 64 L. J. (M. C.) 11. In the cases of defects in substance 
apparent on the face of the indictment which do not fall within one of the 
classes mentioned either in 7 G-. 4, c. 64, s. 21 (ante, p. 44) or in Heymann 
V. B. (supra), and are therefore not cured by verdict, the defendant may, 
instead of demurring, plead ''not guilty;" and then if convicted, move in 
arrest of judgment, thus giving himself the same advantage which he could 
have had upon demurrer, after having had a chance of an acquittal on his 
plea of not guilty. The usual adoption of this course in practice appears to 
be one of the main causes of the infrequency of demurrers in criminal practice. 
An additional reason for its adoption lies in the fact that points of law raised 
at the trial may on conviction be made the subject of appeal or case stated. 

B. V. Martin, 1 Den. 398; 18 L. J. (M. 0.) 137. For these reasons, coupled 
with the wide powers of amendment in all cases of defective indictments under 
sub-s. 1 of s. 5 of the Indictments Act, 1915, ante, p. 54, demurrers may in 
practice be regarded as obsolete. 

Time.] — The proper time for the defendant to demur is when arraigned and 
called upon to plead. But the court has a discretion to allow a plea to be 
withdrawn in order that the defendant may demur. Thus, in B. v. Purchase, 

C. & Mar. 617, where a man indicted for felony had in the absence of his 
counsel pleaded to a demurrable indictment, the judge, on counsel's application, 
allowed him to demur, before the evidence was gone into. But this would not 
be permitted in order to take advantage of a merely verbal objection. B. '■ 
Odgers, 2 M. & Eob. 479, and see B. v. Brown, 1 Den. 291, 293 n. It was in 
some cases held that a defendant might demur and plead to the indictment at 
the same time. B. v. Phelps, C. & Mar. 180 : B. v. Adams, Id. 299. But this 
was denied to be law by Cresswell, J., in B. v. Odgers (supra), and see B. v. 
Duffy, 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 795, 853; 2 Cox, 45; BuUen & Leake Pleading 
(3rd ed.) 692. 



DEMURREE. 153 

Form.] — A demurrer in the High Court must be written or printed on paper 
and filed at the Crown Of&oe, and a copy delivered to the opposite party, and, 
if settled by counsel, must be signed by him. Cr. Off. Eules, 1906, rr. 117, 119. 
A demurrer in other courts must also be written or printed on durable paper or 
parchment and filed. As to demurring ore terms, see R. v. Swan, Fost. 105; 
1 Chit. Cr. L. (2nd ed.) 440. The following are forms of demurrers and 
joinders : — 

Demurrer to an Indictment. 

The King v. A. B. 

Central Criminal Court. 

A. B. says that the indictment is not sufficient in law and that he is not 
bound by law to answer it. 

Joinder. 
The King c. A. B. 
Central Criminal Court. 
H. A. (the Clerk of the Court) joins issue on behalf of the King. 

Effect.] — A demurrer, on the part either of the crown or of the defendant, has 
the effect of laying open to the court not only the pleading demurred to, but the 
entire record, for their judgment upon it as to the matter of law ; Hob. 56 ; 
1 Saund. 284, n. 5 ; and if two or more of the pleadings are bad in substance 
the court will give judgment against the party who committed the first fault. 
Thus, for instance, if the indictment is bad, there shall be judgment for the 
defendant, although the plea in bar is also insufficient: Piggot's case, ,5 Co. 
Eep. 29 a. Even if it appears upon the face of the record that the court have 
no jurisdiction of the offence charged in the indictment, the defendant may take 
advantage of this matter upon the demurrer. R. v. Fearnley, 1 T. E. 316; 

1 Leach, 425. 

Judgment,] — The judgment for the defendant upon demurrer is, that he be 
dismissed and discharged from the premises. The judgment against the defen- 
dant in misdemeanors is final as on demurrer in civil cases : R. v. Taylor, 3 B. & 
C. 502 ; 5 D. & E. 422 ; but the court has the power to permit the defendant 
afterwards to plead over. R. v. Birmingham and Gloucester Rail. Co., 3 Q. B. 
224; 10 L. J. (M. C.) 136 : R. v. Mitchel, 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 545. Demurrers in 
felonies have been so rare, that it has been doubted what judgment ought to be 
pronounced against the defendant. The older authorities went to show it to be 
final; 2 Hawk. c. 31, s. 5; but by some this was questioned, and it was said 
that, in favorem vittB, the defendant should plead over to the felony. Id. s. 6; 

2 Hale, 255, 257; 4 Bl. Com. 384 : R. v. Taylor, 5 D. & E. 422; 3 B. & C. 502 : 
JS. V. Oihson, 8 Bast, 107 - see R. v. Purchase, 0. & Mar. 617 : R. v. Bowen, 



154 PLEAS, REPLICATIONS, ETC. 

1 C. & E. 501, 504. In B. v. Duffy, 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 795; 4 Cox, 24, which 
was an indictment for a felony not capital, the judges sitting on the commission 
of oyer and terminer in Dublin, agreed that the defendant was entitled to plead 
over to the felony, after judgment against Mm on demurrer to the indictment. 
But in B. V. Fadermann, 1 Den.' 569; 3 C. & K. 353, it was held that on 
general demurrer to an indictment for felony, the judgment for the crown was 
final; and see Mulcahy, v. B., L. E. 3 H. L. 306, 323 n. 



Sect. 4. 

SPECIAL PLEAS IN BAB. 

When used.] — As all matters of excuse and justification may be given in 
evidence under the general issue, a special plea in bar seldom occurs in practice. 
In fact, the only instance (with the exception of the pleas of autrefois acquit, 
etc., post, pp. 165 et seg.) in which a special plea in bar seems requisite in 
criminal cases is, where a parish or county is indicted for not repairing a road 
or bridge, etc., and wishes to throw the onus of repairing upon some person or 
persons not bound of common right to repair it ; in which case they must plead 
specially the liability of the party to repair, and the reason of his liability, so 
as to take the case out of the common law presumptions, that every highway 
is repairable by the parish, and every bridge by the county in which it is 
situate. 

Form.] — The following are forms of special pleas in bar, replications, and 
rejoinders : — 

Special Plea. 

The King v. A. B. 

Central Criminal Court. 

A. B. says that the King ought not further to prosecute the said indictment 
against him because [state the matter of the plea in ordinary language}. 

Beplication. 
The King ,,. A. B. 
Central Criminal Court. 
H.A. (the Clerk of the Court) joins issue on behalf of the King. 

When the plea is to an indictment in the King's Bench Division, the replica- 
tion is similar, substituting the High Court of Justice, King's Bench Division, 



AUTREFOIS ACQUIT. 155 

and the Master of the Crown Office, King's Coroner and Attorney for the 
Central Criminal Court and the Clerk of the Court. 

In making up the record it is usual to add what is known as the similiter: 
" And the said A. B. doth the like. Therefore, let a jury come." See Stephen, 
Pleading (5th ed.), 271. No judgment after verdict upon any indictment can 
be stayed or reversed for want of a similiter. 7 Q-. 4, c. 64, s. 21; (ante, p. 44). 

Having thus given the forms of special pleas, etc., generally, it remains to 
treat of those which usually occur in practice, in this order : — 

1. Autrefois acquit, infra. 

2. Autrefois convict, p. 160. 

3. Autrefois attaint, p. 163. 

4. Pardon, p. 164. 

1. Autrefois acquit. 

"It is an established rule of the common law that a roan may not be put 
twice in peril for the same offence." 2 Hawk. c. 35. 

The principle on which the right to plead autrefois acquit or autrefois 
convict depends, is that a man should not be put twice in jeopardy for the 
same matter, and it does not rest on any doctrine of estoppel. But it seems 
always to have been held that a previous acquittal can only be pleaded in bar 
to a subsequent indictment (1) where the acquittal is for the exact offence 
charged in the subsequent indictment ; or (2) where the subsequent indictment 
is based on the same acts and omissions in respect of which the previous 
acquittal was made, and some statute directs that the defendant shall not 
be tried or punished twice in respect of the same acts or omissions. The 
statutory provisions on the subject are as follows : The Piracy Act, 1744 
(18 Gr. 2, c. 30), directs that persons tried and acquitted or convicted for piracy, 
felony, and robbery under the Act shall not be liable to be tried again "for 
the same fact " as high treason. The Incitement to Mutiny Act, 1797 (37 
G. 3, c. 70), contains a similar provision (s. 2), as do the Unlawful Oaths 
Acts, 1797 (37 G. 3, ^. 123, b. 7) and 1812 (52 G. 3, i;. 104, a. 8), and the 
Treason Felony Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. c. 12, s. 7). The Criminal Procedure 
Act, 1851 (14 & 15 Vict. c. 100), provides (s. 12) that a person tried for mis- 
demeanor shall not be entitled to acquittal because the evidence proves a 
felony, and shall not be tried again on the same facts for felony unless the 
court so directs, and s. 9, while permitting conviction of an attempt on a. charge 
for the full offence, forbids a second trial for the attempt. By ». 33 of the 
Interpretation Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. u. 63), it is provided that " where an 
act or omission constitutes an offence under two or more Acts or under an 
Act and at common law (whether any such Act was passed before or after the 
commencement of this Act (January 1, 1890) ) the offender shall, unless the 
contrary intention appears, be liable to be prosecuted and punished under either 
or any of those Acts or at common law, but shall not be liable to be punished 
twice for the same offence." Perhaps this enactment would have been clearer 
if for the word ' ' offence ' ' at the end had been substituted the words ' ' act or 
omission." But it does no more than extend to statutory offences the common- 
law rule as laid down in R. v. Miles, 24 Q. B. D. 423; 59 L. J. (M. C.) 56. 



156 PLEAS, REPLICATIONS, ETC. 

If, therefore, a man has been tried and found to be not guilty of an offence 
by a court competent to try him, the acquittal is a bar to a second indictment 
for the same offence. And the rule apphes not only to the offence actually 
charged in the first indictment, but to any offence of which he could have been 
properly convicted on the trial of the first indictment. Thus an acquittal on a 
charge of murder is a bar to a subsequent indictment for manslaughter : 
2 Hale, 246 ; but is not a bar to an indictment for arson arising out of the same 
facts : R. V. Serni, 107 Cent. Grim. Ct. Sess. Pap. 418, Charles, J. It is 
immaterial whether the first acquittal were in a summary proceeding or on 
indictment : Wemyss v. Hopkins, L. R. 10 Q. B. 378; 44 L. J. (M. C.) 101. If 
the crimes were so distinct that the evidence necessary to prove one will not 
prove the other, it cannot properly be said that they were so far the same that 
an acquittal of one is a bar to a prosecution for the other. B. v. Vahdercomh, 
2 East, P. C. 519, 520; 2 Leach, 708; R. v. Barron [1914] 2 K. B. 570; 83 L. J. 
(K. B.) 786 ; 10 Cr. App. E. 81. See also B. v. Bird, 2 Den. 94; 20 L. J. (M. C.) 
70 (C. C. E.) : R. v. Emden, 9 Bast, 487 : R. v. Sheen, 2 C. & P. 634 : R. v, 
Drury, 3 C. & K. 193; 18 L. J. (M. C.) 189 : R. v. Miles, 24 Q. B. D. 423; 
59 L. J. (M. C.) 56; and 2 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 1982 et seq. Whether the facts 
are the same in both trials is not a true test : the test is rather whether the 
acquittal on the first charge necessarily involves an acquittal on the second 
charge. R. v. Barron, supra. An acquittal of the whole of an ofteno* 
does not necessarily involve an acquittal of every part of it. R. v. Sahi, 
10 Cox, 481. 

In R. v. Miles, 3 Cr. App. E. 13, the defendant after acquittal on an indict- 
ment for larceny was again tried on exactly the same evidence for an offence 
against s. 7 of the Prevention of Crimes Act, 1871 (84 & 35 Vict. c. 112,) for 
being found in a public place with intent to commit a felony, and it was held 
that the first acquittal was no bar to the second trial. 

An acquittal upon an indictment for burglary and larceny may be pleaded 
to an indictment for larceny of the same goods : because, upon the former 
indictment the defendant might have been convicted of the larceny. But if 
the first indictment were for a burglary, with intent to commit a larceny, and 
did not charge an actual larceny, an acquittal on it would not be a bar to a 
subsequent indictment for the larceny; 2 Hale, 246 : R. v. Vandercomh, swprai 
because the defendant could not have been convicted of the larceny on the 
first indictment. But in R. v. O'Brien, 15 Cox, 29 (C. C. E.) an acquittal 
for larceny at common law and feloniously receiving the goods so stolen was 
held no bar to a subsequent indictment for stealing a fixture, framed on 24 4 
26 Vict. u. 96, s. 31, now repealed -and replaced by the Larceny Act, 1916 
(6 & 7 Geo. 5, c. SO, b. 8). An acquittal upon an indictment for manslaughtM 
is, it seems, a bar to an indictment for murder on the same facts : Holoroft's 
case, 2 Hale, 246 ; 3 Co. Eep. 46 b, cit. : R. v. Tancock, 13 Cox, 217. Whether 
a person accused of a minor offence is acquitted or convicted he may not be 
charged again on the same facts in a more aggravated form. R. v. Elrington, 
1 B. & S. 688; 31 L. J. (M. C.) 14, Cockburn, C.J. : R. y. Miles, 24 Q. B. D, 
423; 59 L. J. (M. C.) 56. But this rule does not apply when the subsequett 
charge is of murder or manslaughter. R. v. Morris, L. E. 1 C. C. E. 90; 



AUTREFOIS ACQUIT. 157 

36 L. J. (M. C.) 84; 10 Cox, 480 : R. v. Saltii, 10 Cox, 481 u. A person 
cannot, after acquittal on an indictment for felony or misdemeanor, be indicted 
for an attempt to commit it, for he might have been convicted for the attempt 
on the indictment for the felony. 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, o. 9. Nor can a 
person indicted and acquitted for robbery, afterwards be indicted for an 
assault with intent to rob : 6 & 7 Geo. 5, c. 50, s. 44 (1) ; a person indicted and 
acquitted for a misdemeanor, which upon the trial appears to be a felony, 
cannot afterwards be indicted for the felony : 14 & 15 Vict. o. 100, ». 12. A per- 
son indicted and acquitted for embezzlement cannot afterwards be indicted for 
larceny; or if tried and acquitted for larceny, cannot afterwards be indicted 
for embezzlement, upon the same facts : 6 & 7 G-eo. 5, c. 50, s. 44 (2). R. 
V. Gorbutt, Dears. & B. 166; 26 L. J. (M. C.) 47. A person indicted for 
stealing and acquitted cannot be afterwards indicted on the same facts for • 
obtaining the same thing by false pretences : 6 & 7 Geo. 5, c. 60, s. 44 (3). 
The rules are equally applicable, though the first indictment is against the 
defendant jointly with others, and the second against him alone ; for upon 
the second indictment he may be convicted of an offence committed by him 
separately or jointly with others ; and the plea avers the identity of the offence 
charged in both the indictments. R. v. Dann, 1 Mood. 424. An acquittal 
on an indictment under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 97,. s. 35, for the felony of unlawfully 
and maliciously putting across any railway anything with intent to obstruct 
any engine using such railway, is no bar to a subsequent indictment upon 
the same facts, under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 97, s. 86, for the misdemeanor of unlaw- 
fully obstructing an engine using a railway. R. v. Oilmore, 15 Cox, 85, 
Huddleston, B. And where a conviction for unlawful carnal knowledge of a 
girl was quashed in a case where serious injuries were also inflicted upon her, 
a plea of autrefois acquit to a subsequent charge of felonious wounding was held 
to be bad as the facts were entirely distinct. R. v. Norton, 5 Cr. App. E. 97. 
So also an acquittal of sodomy is not a bar to an indictment for gross indoiency 
as there are essential elements in the former charge which are not essential 
in the latter. R. v. Barron, supra. Nor is an acquittal of conspiracy to do an 
act a bar to an indictment for aiding and abetting the commission' of the same 
act. R. V. Kupferberg, 13 Cr. App. E. 166. 

An acquittal by a competent jurisdiction outside England is a bar to an indict- 
ment for the same offence before any tribunal in England. R. v. Roche, 1 Leach, 
134; R. V. Hutchinson, 3 Keb. 785; 1 Leach, 135, cit. ; Bull. (N. P.) 245. See 
also R. V. Aughet, 82 J. P. 174; 13 Cr. App. E. 101. But in this case ihe 
defendant should produce an exemplification of the record of his acquittal under 
the public seal of that state or kingdom where he has been tried and acquitted. 
See Beak v. Thyrwhit, 3 Mod. 194 : S. G. sub nom. Beake v. Tyrrell, 1 Show. 
6; Bull. (N. P.) 245 : R. v. Roche, 1 Leach, 134. Even an erroneous acquittal, 
standing unreversed, is a sufficient foundation for this plea; Y. B. 9 H. 5, 
fo. 2, pi. 7; 2 Co. Inst. 318, 319; 2 Hale, 247 : R. v. Drury, 18 L. J. (M. C.) 
189 ; 3 C. & K. 193. An acquittal on an indictment for non-repair of a high- 
way binds no right. R. v. Burbon [1816] 1 Man. & G. 392 : R. v. Hutchings, 
6 Q. B. D. 300, 306 : and see R. v. Ollis [1900] 2 Q. B. 768. 

An acquittal upon an indictment in a wrong county cannot be pleaded to a 



158 PLEAS, REPLICATIONS, ETC. 

subsequent indictment for the offence in another county. Com. Dig., Indict- 
ment (L.) ; 2 Hale, 245 : R. v. Welsh, 1 Mood. 175. 

The acquittal of a man as principal is no bar to a subsequent prosecution 
against him (o) as accessory after the fact; 2 Hawk. c. 35, s. 11; nor (b) accord- 
ing to the ancient law, as accessory before the fact. Hale says that sucli an 
acquittal is a, bar to a subsequent prosecution against him as an accessory 
before the fact. 1 Hale, 625; 2 Hale, 244; Kel. (J.) 35. This, however, is 
not the view of either Poster or Hawkins : Fost. 361; 2 Hawk. c. 35, s. 11; 
and in R. v. Birchenough, 1 Mood. 477 ; 7 C. & P. 575, where, to an indictment 
charging the defendant as an accessory before the fact to child murder, he 
pleaded autrefois acquit upon an indictment charging him with having been 
present, aiding and abetting in the said murder, the judges held that the 
■ plea was no bar, and had been properly overruled" at the trial. And by 24 & 

25 Vict. c. 94, 3. 1, an accessory before the fact may be indicted as a principal 
felon. 

An acquittal (or judgment for the defendant on demurrer, R. v. Richmond, 
1 C. & K. 240) upon an insuf&cient indictment, is no bar to another indictment 
for- the same offence. Vaux's case, 4 Co. Eep. 44b, 45a; and see R. v. Coogan, 
1 Leach, 448 : R. v. Taylor, 3 B. & C. 502. An insolvent debtor, who had 
been indicted for omitting goods from his schedule and acquitted, afterwards 
pleaded autrefois acquit to another indictment for omitting other goods from' 
the same schedule; and Patteson, J., held that the plea was no bar to the 
second indictment, but said that such a course ought not to be adopted except 
under very peculiar circumstances. R. v. Champneys, 2 M. & Eob. 26. And 
generally it may be laid down, that whenever, by reason of some defect in 
the record, either in the indictment, the place of trial, the process, or the 
like, the defendant was not lawfully liable to suffer judgment for the offences 
charged against him in the first indictment as it stood at the time of its finding, 
he h^s not been in jeopardy, in the sense which entitles him to plead the 
former acquittal (or conviction) in bar of a subsequent indictment. R. v. 
Drury, 3 C. & K. 193; 18 L. J. (M. C.) 189 : B. v. Green, Dears. & B. 113; 

26 L. J. (M, C.) 17; 7 Cox, 186 : and see R. v. Marsham, ex parte Pethick 
Lawrence, [1912] 2 K. B. 362; 81 L. J. (K. B.) 957. 

Where a conviction has been quashed on appeal, the appellant is in the 
same position with regard to a plea of autrefois acquit as if he had been 
acquitted by the jury. R. v. Barron, supra. 

Form.] — " In any plea of autrefois convict or autrefois acquit, it shall be 
sufficient for any defendant to state that he has been lawfully convicted or 
acquitted, as the case may be, of the offence charged in the indictment. 14 4 
15 Vict. c. 100, o. 28. 

The following is the form of the plea of autrefois acquit :— 
The King ». A. B. 
Central Criminal Court. 
A. B. says that the King ought not further to prosecute the indictment 



AUTREFOIS ACQUIT. 159 

against him, because he has been lawfully acquitted of the offence charged 
therein. 

The plea may be made ore tenus ; 2 Kuss. Cr. (7th ed.) 1994 ; but should be 
on paper or parchment, and be signed by counsel. The court, however, will 
not reject the plea because it is informal, but will assign counsel to prepare it 
in a projier form for the defendant. R. v. Chamberlain, 6 C. & P. 93. 

If the indictment be for treason or felony, the defendant, besides this plea 
of autrefois acquit, should also plead over to the treason or felony. R. v. 
Vandercomb, 2 Leach, 708, 712 : R. v. Drury, ante, p. 149. In such a case 
therefore, continue the plea thus : " And as to the offence of which the said 
A. B. now stands indicted he says that he is not guilty." If, however, the 
defendant pleads autrefois acquit, without pleading over to the felony, after his 
special plea is found against him, he may still plead over to the felony. 2 Hawk, 
c 23, s. 128 : R. Y. Sheen, 2 C. & F. 634 : R. v. Welsh (1828) ; MS. Carr. 
Supp. 56. 

It has been held that after a plea of " not guilty," a plea of autrefois acquit 
is bad. R. v. Banks [1911] 2 K. B. 1095; 81 L. J. (K. B.) 120; 6 Cr. App. 
E. 276. 

In the case of a plea of autrefois acquit, a jury are sworn instanter to try 
the issue: R. v. Scott, 1 Leach, 401; and therefore there is no replication 
actually pleaded on the part of the crown. But see R. v. Sheen, supra; 
2 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 1994 (x). But a replication and similiter must be 
entered upon the record, when it is made up. The form may be as follows : — 

The King v. A. B. 
Central Criminal Court. 
H. A. (Clerk of the Court) joins issue on behalf of the Eing. 

The proof of the issues lies on the defendant. To prove it, it used to be 
necessary to make up the record of the former acquittal, and to give in evidence 
the record itself, or an examined copy of it : R. v. Bowman, 6 C. & P. 101, 
387; except where the second indictment was preferred at the same assizes, 
in which case the original indictment and minutes of the verdict were and are 
receivable in evidence in support of the plea, without a record being drawn 
up. R. Y. Parry, 7 C. & P. 836. But by the Evidence Act, 1851 (14 & 15 
Vict. c. 99), s. 13, "whenever in any proceeding whatever" [whether civil or 
criminal, Richardson Y. Willis, L. E. 8 Ex. 69; 42 L. J. (Ex.) 15], " it may 
be necessary to prove the trial and conviction or acquittal of any person 
charged with any indictable offence, it shall not be necessary to produce the 
record of the conviction or acquittal of such person, or a copy thereof ; but 
it shall be sufficient that it be certified, or purport to be certified under the 
hand of the clerk of the court, or other officer having the custody of the records 
of the court where such conviction or acquittal took place, or by the deputy 
of such clerk or other officer, that the paper produced is a copy of the record 
of the indictment, trial, conviction, and judgment or acquittal, as the case 
may be, omitting the formal parts thereof." And by 34 & 35 Vict. c. 112, 
s. 18, provision is made for proving previous convictions by certificate. 



160 PLEAS, REPLICATIONS, ETC. 

If the former trial was at quarter sessions, the King's Bench Diyision can, 
if necessary, grant a mandamus to the justices to make up the record. B. v. 
Justices of Middlesex, S B. & Ad. 1113; 3 L. J. (M. C.) 32. 

The judgment against the defendant on this plea, in felonies, is that he 
answer over (respondeat ouster) ; or rather, as the defendant generally pleads 
over to the felony with the plea of autrefois acquit, the jury are 
charged again to inquire of the second issue, and the trial proceeds 
as if no special plea in bar had been pleaded. B. v. Vandercomb, 

2 Leach, 708 : B. v. Coogan, 1 Leach, 448 : B. v. Sheen, 2 C. & P. 634. In 
misdemeanors the judgment is final. B. v. Goddard, 2 Ld. Eaym. 920; 

3 Salk. 171. "When the plea is allowed, the judgment is " that the defendant 
shall go without day," and he is altogether discharged from the prosecution. 
2 Hale, 891; and see 1 Deacon Cr. Law, 90. The verdict for the defendant, 
upon the issue on the plea of autrefois acquit, cannot, it seems, be set aside, 
and a new trial had, although it be given without evidence and against the 
opinion of the judge. B. v. Lea, 2 Mood. 9. 

As to the effect of dismissal of a charge tried summarily in a subsequent 
prosecution on indictment, see post, p. 161. 

2. Autrefois convict. 

By 52 & 53 Vict. c. 63 (Interpretation Act, 1889), s. 33, "where an act or 
omission constitutes an offence under two or more Acts, or both under an Act 
and at common law, whether such Act was passed before or after the com- 
mencement of this Act, the offender shall, unless the contrary intention appears, 
be liable to be prosecuted and punished under either or any of those Acts and 
at common law, but shall not be liable to be punished twice for the same 
offence." This enactment is substantially the same as the common law rule, 
that a man must not be put twice in peril for the same offence. 2 Hawk. c. 35. 

The defence of autrefois convict applies whether the previous conviction was 
on indictment or summary, provided that it was before a court of competent 
jurisdiction after a hearing on the merits. Wemyss Y. Hopkins, L. E. 10 Q. B. 
378; 44 L. J. (M. C.) 101. 

The only cases in which «■ previous conviction can be effectually pleaded in 
bar to a subsequent indictment are : — ■ 

(1) Where the conviction was for the exact offence charged in the subsequent 
indictment, and was sufficient in law : 1 Chit. Cr. L. 461; 4 Bl. Com. 336; 
2 Hale, 215; 2 Hawk. u. 86, o. 10 : Vaux case, 4 Co. Bep. 44b, 45a. A plea 
of autrefois convict, which showed that the judgment on the former indictment 
had been reversed for error in the judgment, was held not a good bar to another 
indictment for the same offence. B. v. Drury, 3 0. & K. 193; 18 L. J. 
(M. C.) 189. 

(2) Where the subsequent indictment is based on the same acts or omissions 
as those in respect whereof the previous conviction was made, and some statute 
directs that a person shall not be punished twice in respect of the same acts or 
omissions. Interpretation Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. o. 63), s. 33 (supra); and 
statutes referred to, ante, p. 155. A conviction for obtaining credit or goods 



AUTREFOIS CONtlCT. 151 

under false pretences has been held to be a bar to a subsequent indictment for 
larceny on the same facts. R. v. King [1897] 1 Q. B. 214, 218; 18 Cox, 447, 
Hawkins, J. : explained and distinguished in JJ. v. Barron [1914] 2 K. B. 570; 
83 L. J. (K. B.) 786 ; 10 Cr. App. E. 81. 

The same rules apply generally to this plea as to the plea of autrefois acquit. 

Where on an indictment containing counts for inflicting grievous bodily 
harm, unlawful wounding, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and common 
assault, the jury convicted of common assault, but disagreed on the other counts, 
it was held, on a, retrial on the other counts, that the conviction for common 
assault would support a plea of autrefois convict. R, v. Grimwood, 60 J. P. 
809, Pollock, B.; and see R. v. Elrington, 1 B. & S. 688; 31 L. J. (M. C.) 14. 

A person who has been convicted by a court of summary jurisdiction under 
24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 42, of a common assault, but has been discharged 
under s. 16, sub-s. 2 (rep.) of 42 & 43 Vict. u. 49, without any sentence or fine or 
imprisonment, on giving security to be of good behaviour, cannot, at common 
law and independently of the defence given by 24 & 25 Vict. o. 100, s. 45 
(infra), afterwards be convicted on indictment for the same assault, although 
the indictment charges him with unlawful wounding or other circumstances of 
aggravation. R. v. Miles, 24 Q. B. D. 423; 59 L. J. (M. C.) 56. This rule 
seems applicable to release on probation. See post, p. 259. 

The Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879 (42 & 43 Vict. c. 49), which empowers 
a petty sessional court under certain circumstances to try summarily persons 
charged with certain indictable offences, enacts in ». 27, sub-s. 3, that " the 
conviction for any such offence shall be of the same effect as a conviction for 
the offence on indictment," and in aub-s. 4, that "where the court have 
assumed the power to deal with the case summarily, and dismiss the informa- 
tion, they shall, if required, deliver to the person charged a copy certified under 
their hands of the order of such dismissal, and such dismissal shall be of the 
same effect as an acquittal on a trial on indictment for the offence." 

The Offences against the Person Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 100), s. 44, 
enacts, that " if the justices on the hearing of any such case of assault or 
battery upto the merits, where the complaint was preferred by or on behalf 
of the party aggrieved, under either of the last two preceding sections (ss. 42, 43), 
shall deem the offence not to be proved, or shall find the assault or battery 
to have been justified, or so trifling as not to merit any punishment, and 
shall accordingly dismiss the complaint, they shall forthwith make out a 
certificate under their hands stating the fact of such dismissal, and shall deliver 
the certificate to the party against whom the complaint was preferred." " Forth- 
with " means so soon as it is applied for by the defendant, who has a right 
to it ex debito justitios ; Hancock v. Somes, 1 E. & B. 795; 21 L. J. (M. C.) 
196 : Costar v. Hetherington, 1 E. & E. 802; 28 L. J. (M. C.) 198; overruling 
B. V. Robinson, 12 A. & E. 672 ; 10 L. J. (M. C.) 9, where it was held that 
the certificate must be given before the justices separated. Such certificate 
of dismissal can only be granted when there has been a full hearing " upon 
the merits," If the certificate is granted on the withdrawal of the charge 
before hearing, it will be no bar to subsequent proceedings in respect of the 
same assault. Reed v. Nwtt, 24 Q. B. D. 669. By s. 45, " if any person 
A.n.p n 



162 PLEAS, REPLICATIONS, ETC. 

against whom any such complaint, as in either of the last three preceding 
sections mentioned, shall have been preferred by or on behalf of the party 
aggrieved, shall have obtained such certificate, or, having been convicted, 
shall have paid the whole amount adjudged to be paid, or shall have suffered 
the imprisonment, or imprisonment with hard labour awarded, in every such 
case he shall be released from all further or other proceedings, civil or 
criminal, for the same cause.'' But by s. 46, the justices are prohibited from 
adjudicating on any assault or battery which they shall find to have been 
" accompanied by any attempt to commit felony," or which they shall think, 
" from any other circumstance, a fit subject for prosecution by indictment," 
or ' in which any question shall arise as to the title to any lands, tenements 
or hereditaments or any interest therein or accruing therefrom, or as to any , 
bankruptcy or insolvency, or any execution under the process of any court 
of justice." 

A summary conviction under the Children Act, 1908, s. 12, for neglect- 
ing children in a manner likely to cause them unnecessary suffering or 
injury to health is not a bar to a subsequent indictment for the manslaughter 
of one of the children who has died since the summary conviction. The trae 
test in such a case is whether the accused was in peril on the first trial of being, 
convicted of the same crime as that for which he is in peril of being, convicted 
in the second proceedings. R. v. Tanks [1916] 1 K. B. 443; 85 L. J. (E. B.I 
396 ; 114 L. T. 81 ; 80 J. P. 165 ; 32 T. L. B. 137 ; 11 Or. App. E. 284. 

Where to an action for an assault the defendant pleaded that he had been 
summoned by the plaintiff before a metropolitan police magistrate, who con- 
victed him in the costs of the complaint and hearing, which the defendant had 
paid; and at the trial the magistrate's clerk produced his note-book, by which 
it appeared that the magistrate had merely ordered the defendant to enter into 
his recognizances, and pay the expense thereof, and the clerk also said that in 
such cases no conviction was ever drawn up : it was held that the plea was 
bad, and disclosed no defence under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, a. 45; that it was 
not proved, and that even if there were a conviction, the proper proof was 
not adduced. Hartley Y. Hindmarsh, L. E. 1 C. P. 553 ; 35 L. J. (M. C.) 255. 
The judgment of the court in that case proceeded upon the grounds that there 
was no record of any conviction, and further that the magistrate did not 
adjudicate upon the case, but, as a conservator of the peace, ordered the 
defendant to enter into recognizances. Per Pollock, B., in B. v. Miles, 
24 Q. B. D. 423; 59 L. J. (M. C.) 56, ante, p. 161. 

A plea of a conviction or acquittal under 9 G-. 4, u. 31, ss. 27, 28 [rep.), 
of which 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, ss. 44, 45, are in substance a, re-enactment, is a 
bar to an indictment for a felonious stabbing, etc., in the same transaction: 
R. V. Walker, infra; for the justices are to determine whether the assault was 
accompanied by any felonious transaction, and their decision on that point is 
final. R. v.- Stanton, 5 Cox, 324, Erie, J. And a plea of a dismissal of the 
complaint by the justices under 2 G. 4, c. 31, ss. 27, 28 {rep.), was held to be 
a bar to an indictment for unlawfully wounding, and for an assault occasioning 
actual bodily barm, arising out of the same circumstances; R. v. Elringtm, 
1 B. & S. 688; 31 L. J. (M. C.) 14; 9 Cox, 86, where the two cases last cited 



AUTREFOIS ATTAINT. 163 

^ere approved; but a summary conviction for assault under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, 
i. 42, is not a bar to a subsequent indictment for manslaughter upon the death 
)f the person assaulted, consequent upon the same assault. R. v. Morris', 
h. E. 1 C. C. E. 90 ; 36 L. J. (M. C.) 84 ; 10 Cox, 480 : B. v. Friel, 17 Cox, 325 : 
B. V. Bys(m [1908] 2 K. B. 454; 77 L. J. (K. B.) 813; Stephen Dig. Cr. Proc. 
325. This rule is not affected by 42 & 43 Vict. c. 49 (The Summary Jurisdiction 
Act, 1879), s. 27 (3) : R. v. Friel, supra. The production of the certificate is of 
itself sufficient evidence of the dismissal by the justices, without proof of their 
signature or official character; 8 & 9 Vict. c. 113, s. 1 : and if the defendant 
appeared before the justices, the recital in the certificate of the fact of a 
complaint having been made, and of a summons having been issued, is 
sufficient evidence of those facts, vrithout producing the complaint or summons. 
R. v. Westley, 11 Cox, 139. Where the first count of an indictment charged 
the defendant with assaulting the prosecutor and inflicting upon him grievous 
bodily harm, and the second charged him with an assault upon the prosecutor 
occasioning actual bodily harm, and the defendant pleaded one plea only 
(instead of a plea to each count), setting up a dismissal of the charge by the 
justice, and it appeared upon the trial that there had only been in fact one 
assault on the day named in the indictment, and that that assault and the one 
named in the plea took place on the same day, it was held that the plea was a 
good answer to the whole indictment. R. v. Westley, supra. 

The form of the plea of autrefois convict in such cases may be as follows : — 

The King v. A. B. 

Central Criminal Court. 

A. B. says that the King ought not further to prosecute the indictment 
against him, because he has been lawfully convicted of the offence charged 
therein. [If the indictment is for treason or felony add " and as to the charge 
in the said indictment he says he is not guilty."] 

The replication may be as follows : — 

The King v. A. B. 
Central Criminal Court. 
H. A. (The Clerk of the Court) joins issue on behalf of the King. 
The plea and any demurrer to it should be written or printed on paper or 
parchment. B. v. Walker, 8 C. & P. 446, Parke, B. ; 5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90, 
s. 8 (3) and r. 1 (ante, pp. 60, 28). 

3. Autrefois attaint, (a). 

At common law if a man were attainted of treason or felony, whilst the 
attainder remained in force he could not, with certain exceptions, be indicted 

(o) In R. Y. Jemmy Governor [1900] 21 N. S. W. Rep. (Law) 279, on an indictment 
for murder an attempt was made to plead autrefois attaint on a colonial outlawry, but 
failed on the ground that the common law of England as to outlawry did not apply to 
New South Wales, and that outlawry under the colonial statutes was not equivalent to 
a conviction. 



164 PLEAS, REPLICATIONS, ETC. 

for another felony, whether such other felony were committed before or after 
his attainder; because, being already attainted, and therefore dead in con- 
templation of law, and his property forfeited, a prosecution for any other 
offence was considered useless. 2 Hale, 251 ; 2 Hawk. c. 36, s. 10; 1 Chit. Cr. L, 
724. But in 1827 it was enacted by 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 28, o. 4, that an attainder 
should be no bar, unless it be for the same offence as that charged in the 
indictment ; and this enactment practically abrogated the plea of autrefois 
attaint. 4 Bl. Com. 337 n. Attainder for treason and felony was abolished 
in 1870, except in cases of outlawry (83 & 34 Vict, c- 23, o. 1), and in effect 
the plea of autrefois attaint is obsolete. 

The same rules apply to this plea as to the plea of autrefois acquit, with 
respect to the pleading and production of the record, the averments of identity, 
and the proceedings on the plea at the trial. 

4. Pardon. 

A pardon may be pleaded in bar to the indictment ; or, after verdict, in 
arrest of judgment; or, after judgment, in bar of execution. 2 Hawk. r. 37. 
A pardon under statute need not be pleaded, Staundf. 103 a; 3 Co. Inst. 234; 
Plowd. 83, 84; 2 Hawk. c. 37, s. 59; unless there be exceptions out of it; 
Id.; Post. 43; 2 Hale, 252; 3 Co. Inst. 334; nor can the defendant lose the 
benefit of it by his own laches or negligence. 

The King's pardon should be pleaded at the first opportunity which the 
defendant may have of so doing; if, for instance, he has obtained >» pardon 
before arraignment, and, instead of pleading it in bar, he pleads the general 
issue, he is deemed to have waived the benefit of it, and cannot afterwards 
avail himself of it in arrest of judgment. 2 Hawk. c. 37, ». 59. 

Form of plea.] — In pleading a pardon under the great seal the letters patent 
were set out with profert, and the plea concluded thus : " By reason of which 
said letters patent, the said A. B. prays that by the court here he may he dis- 
missed and discharged from the said premises in the said indictment specified." 

Formerly only a pardon under the great seal could be pleaded. Lord War- 
wick's. case, 13 St. Tr. 939, 1015 : R. v. Gully, 1 Leach, 98: Bull v. Tilt, 

1 B. & P. 199 : R. V. Miller, 2 W. Bl. 799. 

But 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 28, s. 13, provides for the grant of free or conditional 
pardons for felony under the King's sign manual countersigned by a secretary 
of state and that the discharge of the offender from custody in the former 
case, or the performance of the condition in the latter, shall have the efEect of 
a, pardon under the great seal as to the felony for which the pardon is granted, 
but shall not prevent or mitigate the punishment in any subsequent conviction 
for any felony committed after the grant of any such pardon. See B. v. Hanoi, 

2 C. & K. 294 ; 2 Cox, 242. 

This enactment seems to have given statutory effect to the practice of circuit 
pardons referred to in R. v. Beaton, 1 W. Bl. 479 : R. v. Beacall, 1 C. & P- 
454, 466 : Bullock v. Dodds, 2 B. & Aid. 258. In pleading under this enact- 
ment the stricter course would be to set out the pardon under the sign manual 



GENERAL ISSUE. 165 

and to aver compliance with the conditions, if any; but in R. v. Harrod, supra, 
the court seems not to have required a plea, but to have taken a certificate of 
discharge by the governor of a prison as evidence of the grant of a free pardon. 

Any variance between the statements in the indictment and in the pardon 
could be made' good in the plea, by averments of identity. 

A free pardon places the person in the same position as to status as he was 
in before his conviction. Hay v. Tower Division Justices, 24 Q. B. D. 561; 
69 L. J. (M. C.) 79. The endurance of the punishment awarded by the court, 
or of that substituted by the crown, has (in the case of a non-capital felony) 
■the effect of a pardon under the great seal. 9 Gr. 4, c. 32, s. 3. 



Sect. 5. 



GENERAL ISSUE. 



The general issue is pleaded by the prisoner ore tenus at the bar, in these 
words "not guilty;" by which plea, without further form, every person not 
having privilege of peerage, upon being arraigned upon any indictment for 
treason, felony, or piracy, is " deemed to have put himself upon the country 
for trial." 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 28, s. 1. And " if any person being arraigned upon, 
•or charged with any indictment or information for treason, felony, piracy, or 
misdemeanor, shall stand mute of malice, or will not answer directly to the 
indictment or information," the court may "order the proper of&cer to enter 
a plea of ' not guilty ' on behalf of such person ; and the plea so entered shall 
have the same force and effect as if such person had actually pleaded the 
same." 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 28, s. 2. If the defendant says that he declines to 
-plead, a plea of not guilty is entered. R. v. Bernard, 8 St. Tr. (N. S.) 887, 899. 

When the record is made up, the general issue appears upon it thus : — 

" And A. B. being brought to the bar of the court and having heard the 
indictment read says he is not guilty and puts himself upon the country and 
H. A. (the clerk of the court) joins issue on behalf of our lord the King." 

In informations, and in indictments for not repairing roads and bridges, 
etc., where the defendant is allowed to appear by attorney, the general issue 
is regularly engrossed, and filed with the proper officer. It is in form thus : — 
"And the said A. B., by C. D. his solicitor, saith, that he is not guilty: and 
of this the said A. B. puts himself upon the country." Afterwards, in making 
up the record, the similiter (ante, p. 154) is added thus : "And H. S., who 
prosecutes for our said lord the King, joins issue," if it be pleaded to an 
indictment at the assizes, or sessions; but if to an indictment in the King's 
Bench Division, then thus : "And, Sir Leonard Kershaw, Knight, coroner 
■and attorney of our said lord the King, in the King's Bench Division of his 
Majesty's High Court of Justice, who prosecutes for our said lord the King in 
this behalf doth the 'like;" or if to an information, then thus : " And the said 
uttorney-general [or coroner and attorney} of our said lord the King who 
-prosecutes as aforesaid for our said lord the King, doth the like." 



X66 PLEAS, REPLICATIONS, ETC. 

"Where the general issue is pleaded it is incumbent upon the prosecution to 
prove every fact and circumstance constituting the offence or offences chargei 
in the indictment or information. By sub-s. 1 of u. 8 of the Indictments Act, 
1915 {ante, p. 60), "nothing in this Act or the rules thereunder shall affect the 
law or practice relating to the jurisdiction of a court or the place where an 
accused person can be tried, nor prejudice or diminish in any respect the 
obligation to establish by evidence according to law any acts, omissions or 
intentions which are legally necessary to constitute the offence with which the 
person accused is charged, nor otherwise affect the laws of evidence in criminal 
cases." Under this plea the defendant may give in evidence, not only every- 
thing which negatives the allegations in the indictment, but also all matters 
of excuse and justification, and all matters which bring him within exceptions 
and provisoes in his favour contained in the enactment creating the offence, if 
the burden of proof thereof lies upon him [ante, p. 46). 



ARRAIGNMENT. 167 



CHAPTEE V. 

TEIAL, JUDGMENT, AND PUNISHMENT. 

Sect. 1. Arraignment, p. ,167. 

2. Summoning, impanelling, swearing, and charging the petty jury, 

p. 179. 

3. Proceedings at trial, p. 199. 
i. Verdict, p. 210. 

5. Proceedings between verdict and judgment, p. 224. 

6. Judgment and punishments, p. 229. 



Sect. 1. 



ABBAIGNMENT. 



The arraignment of prisoners, against whom true bills of indictment have 
been found by the grand jury, consists of three parts, first, calling the prisoner 
to the bar by name ; secondly, reading the indictment to him ; thirdly, asking 
him whether he is guilty or not. It was formerly the practice to require the 
prisoner to hold up his hand, the more completely to identify him as the person 
named in the indictment, but this ceremony, which was never essential (B. v. 
RadcKjfe, 1 W. Bl. 3),. is now in most courts disused. As to the necessity 
of the presence of the accused, see post, p. 173. The prisoner is to be brought 
to the bar without irons, shackles, or other restraint, unless there is danger 
of escape; and " ought to be used with all the humanity and gentleness which 
is consistent with the nature of the thing, and under no other terror or uneasi- 
ness than what proceeds from a sense of his guilt and the misfortune of his 
present circumstances." 2 Hawk. c. 28, s. 1; Kel. (J.) 10. In R. v. Layer, 
16 St. Tr. 93, 96, a distinction was taken between the time of arraignment and 
the time of trial, and the prisoner was obliged to stand at the bar in irons 
during the arraignment ; but the ruling in that case is at variance with the 
authority of all the expositors of the common law. Britton, c. 5, f. 14, says, 
" If felons come in judgment to answer, etc., they shall be out of irons and 
all manner of bonds, so that their pain shall not take away any manner of 
reason, nor constrain them to answer but at their free will." The Mirror 
of Justices, Book V., ch. 1, 54 (Seld. Soo. Publ., vol. vii., p. 160), says, " It 



168 ARRAIGNMENT. 

iB an abuse that a prisoner should be loaded with irons or put in pain before 
he is attainted for felony.'' But it is possible that this passage relates to 
peine forte et dure. See also 3 Co. Inst. 34, where Coke cites Bracton, 1. 3, 
f . 137 ; Staundf . 78 ; and a decision of the judges, 8 Edw. 2 ; also Hale's Sum. 
212. However, where there is reason to believe that the prisoner will make an 
attempt to escape, or will be guilty of violence, the gaoler may, by order of the 
judge, bring up the prisoner for arraignment in irons, and he may be kept 
ironed during the trial, and even when giving evidence on his own behalf. 
R. V. Brazier, Hants Summer Assizes [1899] Wright, J. 

Under the Indictments Act, 1915 (5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 90), rule 13 (1), it is the 
duty of the clerk of assize or of the peace, as the case may be, after a true bill 
has been found on any indictment, to supply to the accused person on request a 
copy of the indictment free of charge. The cost is to be treated as part of the 
costs of the prosecution for the purposes of section 1 of the Costs in Criminal 
Cases Act, 1908. 

If the prisoner is charged upon indictment and inquisition for the same 
offence, he may be arraigned at the same time upon both; 1 Bast, P. C. 371; 
and where several defendants are charged in the same indictment, they ought 
all to be arraigned at the same time although their trials may be several. 
Kel. (J.) 9. 

As soon as the indictment has been read to the prisoner, or its substance 
stated to him (which is now the usual practice) , the of&cer of the court deriands 
of him — How say you, are you guilty or not guilty ? The course of proceeding 
where the prisoner pleads to the jurisdiction, moves to quash the indictment, 
demurs, or raises pleas in abatement, or in bar has already been dealt with 
(ante, p. 150 et seq.). On the prisoner pleading not guilty under the old 
practice, he was asked how he would be tried, and made the answer " By God 
and my country." This form is now rarely, if ever, used. If the prisoner 
pleads guilty, and it appears to the satisfaction of the judge that he rightly 
comprehends the effect of his plea, his confession is recorded, and sentence is 
forthwith passed, or he is removed from the bar to be again brought up for 
judgment. 1 Chit. Cr. L. 415. 

It is important that there should be no ambiguity in the plea, and that where 
the accused makes some other answer than " Not guilty " or " Guilty," as 
the case may be, care should be taken that he understands the charge and to 
ascertain what the plea amounts to. Where the plea is imperfect or unfinished, 
and the court of trial has wrongly held it to amount to a plea of guilty, on 
appeal the Court of Criminal Appeal may order that a plea of not guilty should 
be entered and that the appellant be tried on the indictment : B. v. Ingleson 
[1915] 1 K. B. 512; 84 L. J.' (X. B.) 280; 24 Cox, 527; 76 J. P. 215; 11 
Cr. App. R. 21 ; or that the appellant be sent back to plead again to the indict- 
ment : R. V. Baker, 7 Cr. App. E. 217; 28 T. L. E. 363; or may merely quash' 
the conviction without sending the appellant back for trial : R. v. Alexander, 
7 Cr. App. E. 110; R. v. Golathan, 24 Cox, 704; 79 J". P. 270; 31 T. L. E. 177; 
11 Cr. App. E. 79. 

By 3. 39 (1) of the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1914 (4 & 5 Geo. 5, 
c. 58), where a prisoner is arraigned on an indictment for any offence, and can 



PRISONER STANDING MUTE. 169 

lawfully be convicted on such indictment of some other offence not charged in 
such indictment (see post, pp. 211 et seq.), he may plead not guilty of the 
offence charged in the indictment, but guilty of such other offence. 

Arraignment of peers.] — A person entitled to the privilege of peerage, if 
indicted for misdemeanor, is tried in the same manner as a commoner. 3 Co. 
Inst. 30 ; 2 Hawk. c. 44, s. 13. Put persons entitled to such privilege cannot 
be tried in pais for treason, felony, or misprision of either offence, and it would 
seem that there is no power to waive the privilege. Lord Graves'' case, 4 St. Tr. 
(N. S.) 609 n. ; 310 Hansard, 246. When on arraignment the privilege is 
claimed or its existence is established, the indictment is removed by certiorari 
to the House of Lords, and if parliament be sitting is tried before that House 
as the court) of the King in parliament : R. v. Earl of Cardigan, i St. Tr. (N. 8.) 
601 ; and if parliament be not sitting is tried in the court of the Lord High 
Steward, which is constituted by special commission. B. v. Earl Russell [1901] 
A. G. 446; 76 L. J. (K. B,) 998; 20 Cox, SI; and see 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 666. 
At such trial the pleading and punishment are the same as in the case of 
any other accused person. 4 & 5 Vict. c. 22. The trial of peers for offences 
committed in Scotland is regulated by 6 G. 4, e. 66. 

The privilege of peerage belongs to every peer except an Irish peer who 
is a member of the House of Commons, and to peeresses in their own right, 
to the wives of peers, and to the widows of peers who are not married to 
commoners; 20 H. 6, o. 9; 7 & 8 W. 3, u. 3, o. 10; but does not belong to 
archbishops or other bishops, who are lords of parliament but not peers. May 
Pari. Pr. (11th ed.). 

Prisoner standing mute.] — If the prisoner, when called upon, stands mute 
of malice, or will not answer directly, the court may order the proper officer to 
enter a plea of not guilty; 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 28, s. 2 ; see ante, p. 165. At common 
law the consequences of standing obstinately mute in cases of felony, were 
forfeiture of goods, and peine forte et dure ; Hale's Sum. 227 ; and by 12 G. 3, 
e. 20 (rep.), judgment as on a plea of guilty. See R. v. Steel, 1 Leach, 431. 
Where the defendant stands mute the court cannot itself determine whether in 
fact he is mute of malice or by the visitation of God, R. v. Isreal, 2 Cox, 263 : 
R. V. Schleter, 10 Cox, 409; but must direct a. jury to be forthwith impanelled 
and sworn, to try whether the prisoner be mute of malice or ex visitatione Dei, 
and such jury may consist of any twelve men who may happen to be present. 
Counsel may call witnesses for the defendant on the trial of the issue and may 
address the jury. R. v. Roberts, Carr. C. L. 57. The form of the oath to the 
jury in such a case may be as follows ; — " / swear by Almighty God that I will 
well and truly try whether A. B., the prisoner at the bar, who stands charged 
with felony, is mute of malice or hy the visitation of God, and a true verdict give 
according to the evidence." See Cro. Circ. Comp. 542 (9th ed.). 

A person is mute by the visitation of God who is deaf and dumb : ij. v. 
Jones, 1 Leach, 102 : B. v. Pritchard, 7 C. & P. 303 : R. v. Governor of Stafford 
Prison, Ex parte Emery [1909] 2 K. B. 81; 78 L. J. (K. B.) 629; 100 L. T. 
993; 73 J. P. 284; 25 T. L. E. 440; or bo deaf that he cannot hear the indict- 



170 ARRAIGNMENT. 

ment when read. R. v. Halton, Ey. & M. 78 : and see 1 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 
87. A finding that the prisoner is mute by the visitation of God ia not an 
absolute bar to trial on the indictment. B. v. Steel, 1 Leach, 451 : Ex parte 
Emery, supra: and the mute may be nevertheless arraigned and tried if he is 
sane, and can read Or write, or intelligence can be conveyed to him by signs 
or symbols. But before proceeding with the trial it is necessary to ascertain 
whether he can plead to the indictment or understand the proceedings. B. v. 
Jones, supra: Ex parte Emery, supra. 

Prisoner unfit to plead or take his trial.] — The Criminal Lunatics Act, 188i 
(47 & 48 Vict. c. 64), empowers a secretary of state to remove to a lunatic 
asylum all prisoners committed for trial who are certified in manner provided 
by the Act to be insane, and to order their detention as criminal lunatics until 
their remittal to prison or discharge. This power gets rid of the difficulty found 
in B. V. Dwerryhouse, 2 Cox, 446, where a prisoner was obviously unfit to be 
arraigned. If the secretary of state acts under the statute the hand of the 
court is stayed : Ex parte Collins [1899] 34 L. J. Newsp. 132. The Criminal 
Lunatics Act, 1800 (39 & 40 G. 3, c. 94), passed in consequence of Hadfieli'i 
case, 27 St. Tr. 1281, provides (s. 2) that " if any person indicted for any offence 
(B. V. Little, E. & E. 430), shall be insane, and shall upon arraignment be 
found so to be by n jury lawfully impanelled for that purpose " (that is, by a 
jury returned by the sheriff instanter in the nature of an inquest of office) " so 
that such person cannot be tried upon such indictment, it shall be lawful for 
the court before whom any such person shall be brought to be arraigned as 
aforesaid, to direct such finding to be recorded, and thereupon to order such 
person to be kept in strict custody until his Majesty's pleasure shall be known." 
Similar provisions are made by the same section as to persons brought up to be 
discharged for want of prosecution who appear to be insane. The enactment 
does not apply to grand juries. B. v. Hodges, 8 C. & P. 195. Persons detained 
after verdict under the section are dealt with as criminal lunatics. The form 
of oath to be administered to the jurors impanelled to try whether a prisoner be 
non compos or not, is as follows : — " I swear hy Almighty God that I will 
diligently inquire and true presentment make, for and on behalf of our sovereign 
lord the King, whether A. B., the defendant who stands indicted for a misde- 
meanor, he insane or not, and a true verdict give accordingly to the best of my 
understanding." The proper time to raise the question of the prisoner's fitness 
to be tried is before he pleads. B. v. Southey, 4 P. & P. 864. The issue 
to be tried is the state of the prisoner's mind at the date of arraignment, not 
at any prior time. R. v. Keary, 14 Cox, 143; 4 Bl. Com. 24. As to the 
onus of proof on the trial of the issue, see B. v. Davies, 6 Cox, 326 ; 3 0. & K. 
328; 22 L. J. (N. S.) M. C. 143 : R. v. Turton, 6 Cox, 385. In R. v. Goode, 
7 A. & E. 536, where the prisoner was tried at bar for using seditious language 
against Queen Victoria in her presence, it was held that the jury might form 
their own opinion as to the state of the prisoner's mind when arraigned, from 
his demeanor during the inquest, without any evidence being given on the 
subject : but under ordinary circumstances it is usual to require some evidence 
as to the prisoner's state of mind. In B. v. Pritchard, 7 C. & P. 303, where 



PRISONER UNFIT TO PLEAD, ETC. 171 

s. prisoner arraigned on an indictment for felony, appeared to be deaf, dumb, 
and also of non-sane mind, Alderson, B., put three distinct issues to the jury, 
directing the jury to be sworn separately on each : 1. Whether the prisoner was 
mute of malice or by the visitation , of God; 2. Whether he was able to plead; 
3. Whether he was sane or not : and on the last issue they were directed to 
inquire whether the prisoner was of sufficient intellect to comprehend the course 
of the proceedings of the trial, so as to make a proper defence, to challenge a 
juror to whom he might wish to object, and to understand the details of the 
evidence (supra, p. 169) ; and he directed the jury that if there was no certain 
mode of communicating to the prisoner the details of the evidence so that he 
could clearly understand them and be able properly to make his defence to the 
charge against him, the jury ought to find that he was not of sane mind. This 
direction follows that given in B. v. Dyson, 7 C. & P'. 305 n. See also B. v. 
Whitfield, 3 C. & K. 121. The directions in E. v. Pritchard were approved in 
B. V. Berry, 1 Q. B. D. 447; 45 L. J. (M. C.) 128; 13 Cox, 189; and again in 
Ex parte Emery; B. v. Governor of Stafford Prison [1909] 2 K. B. 81; 78 L. J. 
K. B. 629. In B. v. Berry {supra) a deaf mute being arraigned for felony, 
the jury who had been impanelled to try the case were sworn to try whether 
the prisoner stood mute of malice or by the visitation of God. The jury found 
that he was mute by the visitation of God. The judge then ordered that a plea 
of not guilty should be entered, and the trial proceeded. The better course in 
such cases would seem to be to proceed as in B. v. Pritchard, supra, and 
not to enter a verdict of not guilty at once. The jury found the prisoner guilty 
of the felony charged against him, but also found that he was incapable of 
understanding, and did not understand, the proceedings at the trial. Upon 
this finding it was held that the prisoner could not be convicted, but must be 
detained as a non-sane person during the Queen's pleasure. In B. v. Governor 
of Stafford Prism, Ex parte Emery [1909] 2 K. B. 81; 78 L. J. K. B. 629, a 
man who was totally deaf and unable to read or write was arraigned for a 
felony. On arraignment he stood mute. A jury duly impanelled and sworn 
found that he was mute by the visitation of God. They were then sworn to 
try whether he was capable of pleading to the indictment, and found that he 
was incapable of pleading to and taking his trial on the indictment and of 
understanding and following the proceedings by reason of his inability to com- 
municate with and be communicated with by others. It was held that this 
finding amounted to a finding that the accused was insane within the meaning 
of s. 2 of the Criminal Lunatics Act, 1800 (ante, p. 170). In B. v. Harris, 
61 J. P. 792, the prisoner was unable to read or write, and owing to an unhealed 
wound in his throat could not speak. A jury impanelled to try whether he 
was sane and able to plead, found that he was both, but that at present he 
was unable to give instructions for his defence, and that his condition was due 
to his own act, attempted suicide. He was then called on to plead, pleaded 
not guilty, and his trial was adjourned. Cf. B. y. Whitfield, 3 C. & E. 121. 
As to feigned madness, see B. v. Davies, 6 Cox, 326, Williams, J. : B. v. 
Berry [1897] 104 L. T. 110, Wills, J. In B. v. Wheeler, Central 
Criminal Court, May 12, 1852, where the prisoner was indicted for the murder 
of his mother, and on his arraignment pleaded " not guilty," Piatt, B., on 



172 ARRAIGNMENT. 

the motion of the prisoner's counsel, directed the jury to be sworn to inquire 
whether the prisoner was in a fit state of mind to plead to the indictment, and 
it appearing from the evidence that the prisoner seemed to understand the 
nature of the crime for which he was indicted, but that he seemed unable to 
understand the distinction between a, plea of " guilty " and of " not guilty " 
the jury, at the suggestion of the learned judge, returned a verdict that the 
prisoner was of unsound mind and incompetent to plead. Where the jury 
are sworn (in the nature of an inquest of office) to inquire whether or not a 
prisoner is sufficiently sane to plead to the indictment, the court directs the 
finding to be recorded; and the following is the form of the record of the 
finding : — 

MiDDLESKs: : — The King against J. G. — The defendant being brought here 

into court, in the custody of the keeper of his Majesty's prison of , by virtue 

of a writ of habeas corpus, it is ordered that the said writ and the return made 
thereto be filed ; and the said defendant is now here in court arraigned upon the 
indictment found against him in this court for certain misdemeanors , in speak- 
ing and pub lishing certain scandalous and seditious words of and concerning our 
sovereign lord the King, and is asked by the court here whether he be guilty 
of the premises charged upon him by the said indictment or not. Whereupon 
the said defendant doth refuse to answer to the said indictment; and it appear- 
ing to this court that the said defendant may be insane, so that he cannot be 
tried upon the said indictment : therefore, on the prayer of Sir Gordon Hewart, 
knight, his Majesty's attorney-general, it is ordered that a jury in this behalf 
do immediately come here into court, to try and inquire for and on behalf of our 
sovereign lord the King, whether the said defendant be insane or not. And 
immediately thereupon, a jury being impanelled and returned for that purpose 
by the sheriff of the said county of Middlesex, come here into court, and being 
elected, tried, and sworn to speak the truth touching and concerning the premises 
aforesaid, say upon their oath that the said defendant is insane. And the said 
attorney-general, for and on behalf of our said sovereign lord the King, prays 
the said court here that the finding of the said jury may be recorded. It is 
thereupon •ordered by the said court here, that the said finding of the said jury 
be recorded, and that the said defendant be kept in strict custody in the said 
gaol until his Majesty's pleasure in the premises shall be known. And the 
said defendant is now here in court re-committed to the custody of the keeper 
of the said gaol, to be by him kept in strict custody until his Majesty's pleasure 
shall be known. On the motion of the attorney-general : By the court. 

As to the proceedings on the trial of a person alleged to have been insane 
when the offence charged was committed, see post, p. 217. 

Arraignment for subsequent offence.] — S. 116 of the Larceny Act, 1861 
(24 & 25 Vict. c. 96), provides that the mode of arraigning a defendant on an 
indictment for any offence committed after a previous conviction is, in the 
first instance, to arraign him upon so much only of the indictment as charges 
the subsequent offence, and, if he pleads not guilty or the court orders a plea 
of not guilty to be entered, to charge the jury in the first instance to inquire 
only concerning the subsequent offence. A similar course is to be pursued 



PRESENCE OP ACCUSED. 173 

where the prisoner is indicted for an offence against the Coinage Offences 
Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 99), after a previous conviction (s. 37). 
The procedure prescribed by s. 116 of the Larceny Act, 1861, has been 
construed as applying not merely to proceedings on an indictment for 
an offence within that Act committed after a previous conviction, but 
to proceedings for any offence, e.g., an attempt to commit larceny. Faulkner 
V. B. [1905] 2 K. B. 76; 74 L. J. (K. B.) 562. And s. 9 of the Prevention 
of Grimes Act, 1871 (34 & 35 Vict. c. 112), provides that the rules 
contained in 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 116, in relation to the form of and the 
proceedings upon an indictment for any offence punishable under that Act 
committed after previous conviction shall, with the necessary variations, apply 
to any indictment for committing a " crime " as defined by s. 20 of 34 & 35 Vict, 
c. 112 (viz., any felony, or the offence of uttering false or counterfeit coin, or of 
possessing counterfeit gold or silver coin, or the offence of obtaining goods or 
money by false pretences, or the offence of conspiracy to defraud, or any misde- 
meanor under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 58, repealed and re-enacted by 6 & 7 
Geo. 5, c. 50, s. 28), after previous conviction for a crime, whether the crime 
charged in such indictment or the crime to which such previous conviction 
relates be or be ijot punishable under 24 & 25 Vict. u. 96. And a similar 
procedure is prescribed on a charge of being a habitual criminal, under the 
Prevention of Grime Act, 1908 (8 Edw. 7, c. 59, s. 10 (4) ). 
The arraignment is not complete till the prisoner has pleaded. R. v. Duffy; 

7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 795, 799. If the defendant pleads " not guilty," his plea is 
recorded by the of&cer of the court ; either by writing on the indictment with the 
words " fo. se " (an abbreviation of the words ponit se super patriam) or, as 
at the Central Criminal Court, the word " puts," and by an entry in the minute 
book of the court. See B. v. Newman, 2 Den. 390; 21 L. J. (M. C.) 74, 76. 
A plea of not guilty may by leave of the judge be withdrawn during the trial, 
and a plea of guilty substituted. B. v. Brown, 17 L. J. (M. C.) 145. There 
is a case to the contrary as to a trial on a nisi prius record. B. v. Barrett, 
2 Lew. 264; but it is inconsistent with old precedent and modern practice. 
R. V. Turner, 24 L. J. Newsp. 469 (see post, p. 380). A plea of " guilty " may bs 
withdrawn before sentence : B. v. Plummer [1902] 2 K. B. 339 ; 71 L. J. 
(K. B.) 805 ; but not after sentence. B. v. Sell, 9 C. & P. 346 : B. v. Glouter, 

8 Cox, 237. It is no bar to the right of the court to reserve a special case, or of 
the prisoner to appeal. See post, pp. 300 et seq. 

Presence of accused.] — No trial (a) for felony can be had except in the 
presence of the defendant, and he must, it is said, stand in the dock to be 
tried. B. v. St. George, 9 C. & P. 483 : B. v. Douglas, C. & Mar. 193 : B. v. 
Zulueta, 1 C. & K. 215 ; 1 Cox, 20. But if the jury, for any reason, are dis- 
charged without giving a verdict, it is not necessary in order to constitute a 
valid discharge that the prisoner should be present. B. v. Richardson, 29 
T. L. K. 228. If he creates a disturbance it is said that the trial may go on 
without his presence. Steph. Dig. Cr. Proc. art. 302 : R. v. Berry [1897] 

(a) The presence of the accused seems not to be necessary during the proceedings 
prior to arraignment, such as swearing the grand jury or finding the indictment. See 
R. v. Maturin [1903] 12 Quebec L. E. (K. B.) 494. 



174 DEFENCE BY COUNSEL. 

104 L. T. Joum. 110, Wills, J. The prisoner may be punished for contempt 
of court for the disturbance created. B. v. Giles [1895] Wilts Assizes, Wills, J. 
A charge, of misdemeanor may be tried in the absence of the accused, if he has 
previously pleaded; 8 Eep. Crim. L. 143 : B. v. Browne [1906] 70 J. P. 472; 
and it is not necessary for the defendant to be in the dock : B. v. Lovett, 
9 C. & P. 462 ; 3 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1177. For sufficient reason a defendant may 
be removed out of sight though remaining within hearing distance. B. v. 
Smellie, 14 Cr. App. E. 128. Where a defendant, tried at bar for perjury, was 
taken ill in the course of the trial, he was allowed to absent himself from the 
court until his recovery, and the trial proceeded in his absence. B. v. Orton, 
alias, Castro, Queen's Bench, July, 1873, MS. The absence of one of several 
persons who are accused together does not affect the validity of the conviction 
of those who appear. Ex parte O'Brien Dalton, 28 L. E. Ir. 36. 

Trial of fugitive offenders.]— The Fugitive Ojfenders Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. 
c. 69), which regulates the arrest in one part of the British Empire of fugitives 
from the justice of another part of the empire and their reconveyance for trial 
contains no provision precluding an offender returned under that Act from 
being tried for offences other than those for which he was returned. It super- 
seded the Colonial Arrest Act (6 & 7 Vict. i>. 34), under which the same rule 
applied : see B. v. Philip, 1 P. & P. 105 ; 27 L. J. (N. S.) M. C. 199. The 
Act of 1881 has been extended to certain places subject to the Foreign Jurisdic- 
tion Act, 1890 (53 & 54 Vict. c. 37), by Orders in Council printed in the 
Statutory Eules and Orders Eevised (ed. 1904), vol. 5, tit. Foreign Jurisdiction, 
and in the annual volumes of the Statutory Eules and Orders. 

Under the Extradition Acts, 1870 to 1896, a fugitive criminal surrendered 
by a foreign state for an extradition crime in pursuance of a treaty can be tried 
only for offences "proved by the facts on which the surrender is granted" 
(33 & 34 Vict. c. 62, s. 19); i.e., by the extradition documents submitted to 
the authorities of the foreign state for the purpose of securing the surrender. 
As to the mode of raising the question, see ante, p. 150. The burden of proof 
that he was surrendered under the treaty and that the offences charged were 
not included in the order for surrender seems to rest upon him and not on the 
crown. B. v. Butler, 18 New South Wales Eep. (Law) 146. Where he has 
been arrested or surrendered irrespective of treaty he can be tried for any 
offence. Ex parte Scott, 9 B. & C. 446 : Lord Advocate v. Sinclair, 17 Eettie 
(Justiciary Sc.) 38. 

Defence by counsel.] — In trials for treason and misprision of treason the 
prisoner is entitled to defence by counsel, by 7 & 8 W. 3, u. 3, b. 1. And the 
court on his request will assign him not more than two counsel. ■ iJ. v. Casement 
[1917] 1 K. B. 98, at p. 114 : B. v. Lynch [1903] 1 K. B. 444; 72 L. J. 
K. B. 167 : B. V. Frost, 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 85, 106; 9 C. & P. 129, 135, and n. 
Since 1836 (6 & 7 W. 4, u. 114, s. 1) all persons tried for felony have been 
entitled, " after the close of the prosecution, to make full answer and defence 
by counsel learned in the law, or by solicitor in courts where solicitors practise 
as counsel," e.g., at courts of quarter sessions where less than tour counsel 



LEGAL AID FOR POOR PRISONERS. 175 

attend. Archbold Q. S. (6th ed.) 100, 101, citing Ex parte Evans, 9 Q. B. 279; 
15 L. J. Q. B. 335. In trials for misdemeanors the accused has always been 
entitled to be defended by counsel. King's counsel cannot appear for the 
defence except by licence from the crown, now granted through the Home 
Office without fee. See R. v. Bartlett, 2 0. & K. 321 : B. v. Jones, 9 C. & P. 
401. 

Defence at request of judge.] — Quite apart from statute and the practice 
of the superior courts, where the prisoner is not defended by counsel, the court 
may properly request some member of the bar present to give his honorary 
services to the prisoner, if the prisoner is willing to accept them. R. v. 
Fogarty, 5 Cox, 161 (Ir.) : R. v. Yscuado, 6 Cox, 386. This course has hitherto 
been adopted only in the case of murder or other grave crime, or where the 
circumstances of the case are special. In B. v. Gillingluim, 5 Cr. App. R. 187, 
the Court of Criminal Appeal considered that in cases of rape or offences of a 
similar nature the judge at the trial should endeavour to see that the defendant 
was defended by counsel. 

.Pro¥ision ol legal aid for poor prisoners.] — The Poor Prisoners Defence Act, 
1908 (3 Edw. 7, u. 38), enacts as follows :— 

Sect. 1. — " (1) Where it appears, having regard to the nature of the defence 
set up by any poor prisoner, as disclosed in the evidence given or statement 
made by him before the committing justices, that it is desirable in the interests 
of justice that he should have legal aid in the preparation and conduct of his 
defence, and that his means are insufficient to enable him to obtain such 
aid — 

" (a) the committing justices, upon the committal of the prisoner for trial; cr 

" (b) the judge of a court of assize or chairman of a court of quarter sessions, 
at any time after reading the depositions, 
may certify that the prisoner ought to have such legal aid, and thereupon the 
prisoner shall be entitled to have solicitor and counsel assigned to him, subject 
to the provisions of this Act." 

The best guide at present available in the application of this sub-section is 
contained in the following Home Office circular to justices' clerks : — 

"Home Office, Whitehall, Aug. 31, 1904. 

" Sib, — I am directed by the Secretary of State to inform you that he has 
received a number of communications respecting the Poor Prisoners Defence 
Act, 1903, from which it would appear that magistrates have in many instances 
found some difficulty in determining what action they should take to give effect 
tn the intention of the Act. He thinks, therefore, that the remarks made by the 
Lord Chief Justice when charging the grand jury at the recent Warwick Summer 
Assizes may afford magistrates valuable assistance in the proper administration 
of the Act, and he will be glad if you will bring them to the notice of the magis- 
trates of your bench. The following is the report which appeared in The Times 
of July 26, 1904, corrected by the Lord Chief Justice himself : — 

" ' At Warwick, on Saturday, Lord Alverstone, in charging the grand jury, 
referred to the working of the Poor Prisoners Defence Act. He said that during 



176 LEGAL AID FOR POOR PRISONERS. 

the six months since the Act had come into force there had been some difference 
of practice among magistrates as to its scope and the principle upon which it 
should be applied, and the Home Office had received many communications on 
the subject. This made it desirable that he should explain the guiding principles 
of the Act. The Act was not intended to give a prisoner legal assistance in order 
to find out if he had got a defence. He was not to }iave solicitor or counsel 
assigned to him for such u, purpose. The governing principle of the Act was 
that people who had a defence should have every inducement to tell the truth 
about it at the earliest opportunity. Assistance under the Act could only be 
given where both (1) the nature of the defence as disclosed was such that in 
the interests of justice the prisoner should have legal aid to make his defence 
clear ; and (2) where also his means were insufficient for that end. Magistrates 
would have little difficulty in deciding the second point, upon which they could 
inform themselves by the ordinary means of information. As regards the first 
point, they should bear in mind that by a defence disclosed was meant not only 
a defence stated by the prisoner at the end of the hearing, but a defence dis- 
closed on cross-examination, or by questions the prisoner might ask, or by 
remarks he interposed, or even in some cases such as might appear on the face 
of the evidence called for the prosecution. All they had to be sure of was that 
a defence requiring legal consideration was disclosed at the time by a prisoner 
devoid of pecuniary means. The Act was passed in the interest of innocent 
persons; and such would be advised in future not to " reserve their defence," 
but to disclose it at once, so that it could be investigated. The prisoner would 
thus prevent the suggestion that he had kept back his defence so as to give the 
prosecution no opportunity of investigating it.' 

" / am. Sir, your obedient servant, 

" M. D. Chalmbes." 

As to cists of defence under this Act, see post, p. 281.. 

Sect. 2. Bules.'i — " Bules for carrying this Act into effect may be made in 
the same manner and subject to the same conditions as rules under the 
Prosecution of Offences Act, 1879 " (42 & 43 Vict. u. 22). {See infra.) 

Sect. 3. Definitions.} — " In this Act — 

" ' Prisoner ' includes a person committed for trial on bail. 

' ' ' Committing justices ' includes a magistrate of the police courts of the 
metropolis and a stipendiary magistrate. 

" ' Chairman ' includes recorder or deputy-recorder or deputy-chairman." 

That Act does not extend to Scotland or Ireland (s. 4), and appears not to 
apply to trials in the King's Bench Division (see post, p. 178). But the term 
"court of assize" includes the Central Criminal Court (52 & 53 Vict. c. 63, 
s. 13 (4) ). 

The following rules were made by the Attorney- General, dated May 13, 1904, 
with the approval of the Lord Chancellor and the Secretary of State for the 
Home Department, in pursuance of ». 2 of the Poor Prisoners Defence Act, 
1903 (Stat. Eules and Orders, 1904, No. 1056, Legal Series, No. 8)— 

1. " Every clerk of assize and clerk of the peace shall keep a list of solicitors 
who are willing to undertake the defence of poor prisoners, and shall insert in 
such list the names of all solicitors who are willing so to act. The name of any 



LEGAL AID FOR POOR PRISONERS. 177 

olioitor shall be removed from the list, eithei on the application of the solicitor 
limselt or by direction of any judge of a&size or chairman of quarter eessionsi 
L copy of such list shall be sent to every clerk to justices in the county of 
uarter sessions district." 

2. " Every clerk of assize and clerk of the peace shall keep a list of the 
oembers of the bar attending the circuit or sessions who are willing to act as 
ounsel for poor prisoners, and shall insert in such list the names of all such 
nembers of the bar who are willing so to act." 

3. " Any certificate given by the justices in pursuance of s. 1 of the Poor 
Msoners Defence Act, 1903, shall be in Form A in the Schedule hereto. It 
ihall as soon as it has been given be sent by the clerk to the justices to the clerk 
if assize or clerk of the peace, together with the name of the solicitor assigned. 

" The certificate given by a judge of assize or chairman of quarter sessions 
ihall be in Form B in the schedule hereto." 

4. " Any justices, judge of assize, or chairman of quarter sessions, who give 
mch a certificate shall at the same time assign to the prisoner from the list kept 
mder Eule 1 a solicitor to whose services the prisoner shall be entitled. 

" A copy of the depositions shall be furnished to the solicitor so assigned 
jy the justices' clerk, clerk of assize, or clerk of the peace, as the case may be." 

5. " Any member of the bar whose name appears upon the list kept under 
Rule 2 may be instructed on behalf of the prisoner by thesolicitor so assigned." 

Schedule. 



Form A. — Certificate of Committing Justices. 

We [or J] the committing j«stice[s] in the case of , having regard to the 

iwbure of the defence set up by him, as disclosed in the evidence given before us 
or me] [or in the statement made by him before us] [or in the evidence given 
md statement made by him before ««,] are [or ani] satisfied that it is d'Csirable 
n the interests of justice that he should have legal aid in the preparation and. 
■.tmduct of his defence, arid that his means are insufficient to obtain such aid, 
md me [or I] therefore certify that the said ought to have such legal aid. 

A.B., 

CD., 

Justice[s] of the Peace. 

Note. — The prisoner has been committed to Prison [or has been released 

>n bail and may be communicated with at ]. 

Form B. — CebtiPicatb of Judge or Chairman. 

I, A.B. , having regard to the nature of the defence set up by , as 

isclosed in the evidence given [or in the statement made by him} [or in the 
vidence given and statement made by himj before the Committing Justices, 
m satisfied that it is desirable in the interests of justice that he should have 
!gal aid in the conduct of his defence, and that his means are insufficient to 



178 PROCEEDINGS IN FORMA PAUPERIS. 

enable him to obtain su-ch aid, and I therefore certify that the said ought 

to have such legal aid. 

A.B. 

Judge of Assize or 
Chairman of Quarter Sessions or 
Eecorder of 
Xiaw Officers' Department, 
May 13, 1904. 

R. B. PiNLAY, Attorney-General. 
(■ Halsbury, C. 
Approved, | a. Akers Douglas. 

Proceedings in toimS, pauperis In the High Court, K. B. D.] — By the 

Cr. Off. Rules, 1906, r. 257, " any person may be admitted to prosecute or 
defend any proceedings on the Crown side as a pauper on proof that he is not 
worth 25!., his wearing apparel only excepted." By x. 258, " the provisions 
of Order XVI. of the. Rules of the Supreme Court, 1883, rr. 23-31, so far as the 
same may be applicable, shall apply to any proceedings under the foregoing 
rule, provided, nevertheless, that no person shall be allowed to prosecute any 
proceedings on the Crown side as a, pauper unless a counsel and solicitor have 
been assigned to him." 

The effect of these rules is to supersede most, if not all, of the old practice 
as to pauper litigants on the Crown side of the King's Bench Division, as to 
which see Archb. Or. PI. (23rd ed.) 190; Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 386. 

The application, which is ex parte, is usually made to a judge in chambers, 
but may be made to a divisional court. 

It must be supported by an affidavit as to means to the following effect :— 

" In the High Court of Justice, King's Bench Division. — The King on the 
prosecution of A. B. against C. D. — I, 0. D. [or intending prosecutor] make 
oath an'd say, that I am not worth twenty-five pounds in the world, save and 
except my necessary wearing apparel. Sworn, etc. C. D. 

If the application is to prosecute in formd pauperis a case must have been 
submitted to counsel and his opinion obtained that there is probabilis causa 
litigandi, and there must be an affidavit by the party or his solicitor exhibiting 
the case and opinion, and stating that the case contains a full and true state- 
ment of the material facts. No particular forms are prescribed, but they can be 
adapted from those used in civil cases. See Chitty's Archbold's K. B. Forms 
(13th ed.) 592 ; Ann. Pr. 1910, pp. 201 et seg. 

If the application is granted an order is drawn up at the Crown Office without 
any fee, which must be produced when the pauper requires anything to be done 
without payment of fees. See Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 142, 386. 



QUALIFICATION, ETC., OF JURORS. 179 



Sect. 2. 

SUMMONING, IMPANELLING, SWEARING, AND CHARGING 
THE PETTY JURY. 

Calling.] — The prisoner having put himself upon the country, the next 
jroceeding is to call the petty jurors, which an of&cer of the court does in the 
'oUowing or like terms : — 

" You good men, who are returned and impanelled to try the issue joined 
between our sovereign lord the King and the prisoner at the bar, answer to 
four names and save your fines," [then calling the jurors by name]. It is not 
necessary in law that the names should be called over in the order in which 
they stand on the panel, although it is generally proper to do so : it was not, 
therefore, ground of error that the names were not so called over. Mansell v. 
B., 8 St. Tr. (N. S.) 831; 8 E. & B. 54; Dears. & B. 375; 26 L. J. (N. S.) 
M. C. 137. 

Where, on a trial for felony, the jury panel contained the names of J. T. and 
W. T., and when the name of J. T. was called, a person supposed to be J. T. 
went into the box and was sworn without objection; and it was discovered, 
after conviction of the accused, that W. T., by mistake, had answered to the 
name of J. T. and had served on the jury, it was held by a majority of the 
judges that this was not a mis-trial, but only ground of challenge (see post, 
p. 189). R. V. Mellor, Dears. & B. 468 ; 27 L. J. (M. C.) 121 : see also B. v. 
Metcalf, 3 Cox, 220; Case of a Juryman, 12 East, 231 n. But where one T. 
had been summoned to serve on a jury and on his name being called one C, 
who was his bailiff but not qualified to act as a juror, answered and served 
on the jury, it was held, on appeal after conviction, that there had been a mis- 
trial. R. V. Wakefield [1918] 1 K. B. 216 ; 87 L. J. (K. B.) 319 ; 82 J. P. 136 ; 
IB Cr. App. B. 56, and R. v. Mellor, supra, was considered. 

It is a common law misdemeanor to personate a juryman and it is not 
necessary to prove that the defendant had any corrupt motive or anything to 
gain by his conduct, nor any particular intention to deceive, and it is not an 
answer that the defendant did not know he was doing wrong. B. v. Clark, 
82 J. P. 295. 

Qualification.] — By s. 1 of the Juries Act, 1825 (6 G. 4, o. 60), " every 
man, except as hereinafter excepted [see infra~\, between the ages of twenty-one 
years and sixty years, residing in any county in England, who shall have in his 
own name or in trust for him, within the same county, 101. by the year above 
reprizes, in lands or tenements, whether freehold, copyhold, or customary tenure, 
or of ancient demesne, or in rents issuing out of any such lands, or tenements, 
or in such lands, tenements, and rents taken together in fee simple, fee tail, or 
for the life of himself or some other person ; or who shall have within the same 
Bounty 20J. by the year above reprizes, in lands or tenements held by lease or 
leases for the absolute term of twenty-one years, or some longer term, or for 



180 TEIAL. 

any term of years determinable on any life or lives ; or ■who, being a householder, 
shall be rated or assessed to the poor rate or to the inhabited house duty in the 
county of Middlesex, on a value of not less than 301., or in any other county on a 
value of not less than 20L ; or who shall occupy a house containing not less than 
fifteen windows , shall be qualified and shall be liable to. serve on juries for the 
trial of all issues joined in any of the king's courts ot record at Westminster, and 
in the superior courts, both civil and criminal, of the three counties palatine, and 
in all courts of assize, nisi prius, oyer and terminer, and gaol delivery, such issues 
being respectively triable in the county in which every man so qualified respec- 
tively shall reside, and shall also be qualified and liable to serve on grand juries 
in courts of sessions of the peace, and on petty juries, for the trial of all issues 
joined in such courts of sessions of the peace, and' triable in the county, riding, 
or division, in which every man so qualified respectively shall reside," includiBg 
the new county of London, 51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 89. The qualifications, it 
Will be seen, do not apply to grand' jurors except for general or quarter sessions 
(as to the qualifications of grand jurors, see ante, p. 72), nor to common jurors 
in the city of London ; see 6 G. i, c. 50, s. 50, and 51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 88 (2). 
The qualifications for jurors summoned for a coroner's inquest are not regulated 
by the Act of 1825 (sei s. 52), but by s. 8 of the Coroners Act, 1887 : see In n 
Button [1892] 1 Q. B. 486 ; 61 L. J. Q. B. 190 : R. V. Waldo, 67 J. P. 103, and 
ante, p. 141. The Juries Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 77, ». 7) , enacts, that " the 
qualification of persons as jurors in 'Wales shall be the same as the qualification' 
of persons as jurors in England," and repeals the prior provision to the contrary. 

Ilromen jurors.] — By s. 1 of the Sex Dis qualification (Removal) Act, 1919 
(9 & 10 Geo. 5, c. 71) . . "a person shall not be exempted by sex or marriage 
from the liability to serve as a juror : provided that . . . (b) any judge, chairman 
of quarter sessions, recorder or other person before whom a case is or may be 
heard may, in his discretion, on an application made by or on behalf of' the 
parties (including in criminal cases the prosecution and the accused) or any of 
them, or at his own instance, make an order that the jury shall be composed ot 
men only or of women only as the case may require,, or may, on an application 
made by »■ woman to be exempted from service on a jury in respect of any case 
by reason of the nature of the evidence to be given or of the issues to be tried,, 
grant such exemption. 

" Eules of court may be made — (a) prescribing the manner in which jurors are 
to be summoned and to be selected frOm the panel ; and (b) exempting from atten- 
dance as jurors any women who are for medical reasons unfit to attend ; and (o) 
as to the procedure to be adopted on any application under this section; relating' 
to service on juries. 

" Rules so made may require or authorise an application under this section, or 
any order thereon, to be made in interlocutory proceedings, and shall have full 
effect 'notwdthetanding any existing rule of law or practice to the contrary. 

"As respects any criminal court in England the expression • rules of court' 
means rules made by the Eule Committee established under the Indiotrmnts Aet,- 
1«15." 



WOMEN JURORS. 181 

On the 15th .October, 1920, the Eule Committee sstablished under the Indict- 
ments Act, 1915, made the following rules : 

1. AH jury precepts, warrants, writs, lists and returns required to be issued 
nx made under the Juries Acts, or any of them, shall include all women qualified 
and liable to serve as jurors, and the jurors' books shall be made up accordingly. 

2. All persons qualified and liable to serve as jurors shall be summoned to 
serve on juries without distinction of sex, but otherwise as heretofore; provided 
that a husband and wife shall not both be summoned to serve on the same 
occasion. 

3. The number of women appearing on any panel of jurors shall be in the same 
■proportions, as near as may be, to the number of men appearing thereon as the 
total number of women is to the total number of men in the jurors' book or 
other list of jurors from which the panel is drawn. 

Provided that it shall be the duty of the under-sheriff or other person upon 
whom is cast the duty of summoning jurors to secure that, wherever possible, 
there shall not be less than fourteen women on the jury panel. 

Provided also that this rule shall not apply to grand juries. 

4. On every trial by jury, the jury shall be a jury selected from the panel 
by ballot in manner prescribed by s. 26 of the Junes Act, 1825 ; provided that 
this rule shall be without prejudice to the power of the court under s. 17 of the 
Juries Act, 1870, to order that a special jury be struck according to the practice 
then prevailing ; proviSed also that this rule shall not apply to grand juries. 

5. Upon every jury summons served upon a woman there shall appear a notice 
that she may apply to the summoning officer for exemption from attendance as a 
juror on account of pregnancy or other feminine condition or ailment provided 
that such application is received by the summoning officer within three days of 
the receipt of the jury summons by the applicant. 

6. The under-sheriff or other person upon whom is cast the duty of forming 
the jury panels may in his discretion exempt from attendance any woman who 
has been summoned to serve as juror, if he is satisfied by medical certificate cr 
otherwise that on account of pregnancy or some other feminine condition or 
ailment she is, or will be, unfit to serve. 

7. In any criminal case an application under s. 1 (b) of the Sex Disqualification 
(Removal) Act, 1919, that the jury shall be composed of men only or of women 
only shall be made in the Court in which such case is depending for trial, and 
except by leave of such court at the first sitting thereof. 

Provided always that the said court may in its discretion hear the application 
at such time as may appear convenient. 

8. Written notice of an intention to make an application under rule 7 shall 
be given not .later than at the first sitting of the court by or on behalf of the 
prosecutor to the clerk of assize, clerk' of the peace, or other proper officer of the 
court as the case may be, and similarly so far as possible, by or on behalf of an 
accused person to such proper officer of the court, and to the prosecutor and upon 
receipt of such last-mentioned notice it shall be the duty of the said officer of the 
court to communicate the effect thereof to the prosecutor when practicable. 

9. For the purposes of any criminal case depending for trial in the King's 



182 TRIAL. 

Bench DmBion of the High Court of Justice the words " the day fixed for the 
trial " shall be substituted for the words "the first sitting of the court" in 
rules 7 and 8. 

10. These rules may be cited as the Women Jurors (Criminal Cases) Eules, 
1920. 

Burgesses.] — Under the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. 
c. 50, s. 186, sub-s. 1), "' every burgess of a borough having a separate court of 
quarter sessions or a borough civil court shall, unless by law exempt, or dis- 
qualified, be qualified and liable to serve on grand juries in the borough, and 
on juries for the trial of issues joined in either of those courts." By 23 H. 8, 
c. 13, burgesses worth iOl. in personalty are qualified as jurors to try felonies. 

Aliens.]— By s. 8 of the Juries Act, 1870 (33 & 84 Vict. c. 77), " aliens 
having been domiciled in England or Wales for ten years or upwards, if in other 
respects duly qualified, shall be qualified and shall be liable to serve on juries 
or inquests in England and Wales as if they had been natural-born subjects 
of the King; but, save as aforesaid, no man not being a natural-born subject 
of the King shall be qualified to serve on juries or inquests in any court or on 
any occasion whatsoever." 

Disqualifications.] — By o. 10 of the same Act " no man who has been or 
shall be attainted {see ante, p. 163) of any treason or felony, or convicted of any 
crime that is infamous, unless he shall have obtained a free pardon, nor any 
man who is under outlawry, is or shall be qualified to serve on juries or 
inquests in any court or on any occasion whatsoever." Persons over sixty are 
exempt but not disqualified. Mulcahy v. R., L. E. 3 H. L. 306. 

Exemptions.] — The privilege of exemption from serving on juries depends 
mainly upon s. 9 of the Juries Act, 1870 (83 & 84 Vict. c. 77), which enacts 
that " The persons described in the schedule hereto shall be severally exempt 
(as therein specified) from being returned to serve, and from serving upon any 
juries or inquests whatsoever, and their names shall not be inserted in the lists 
of the persons qualified and liable to serve on the same, but, save as aforesaid, 
no man otherwise qualified to serve on such juries or inquests, shall be exempt 
from serving thereon, any enactment, prescription, charter, grant, or writ to 
the contrary notwithstanding." The exemptions extend to coroners' juries; 
In re Button [1892] 1 Q. B. 486; 61 L. J. Q. B. 190. A particular exemption 
given by the section to jurors of the city of Westminster was abolished by 
51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 89 (2), and such jurors are now liable to serve on any 
jury in the new counties of London and Middlesex, except at quarter sessions 
for Middlesex. Below is given the schedule (with the addition in italics of other 
exemptions added by the other statutes specified) : — "Persons exempt pbom 
SERVING ON jtTRiES . Peers ; members of parliament ; judges , clergymen ; Eoman 
Catholic priests; ministers of any congregation of Protestant Dissenters, and 
of Jews, whose place of meeting is duly registered, provided they follow nb 
■secular occupation except that of a schoolmaster ; . . barristers-at-law, certi- 



EXEMPTIONS. 183 

Seated convey ancers and special pleaders, if actually practising; members of the 
society of doctors at law, and advocates of the civil law, if actually practising; 
. . solicitora, ... if actually practising and having taken out their annual 
certificates and their managing clerks and notaries public in actual practice ; 
ofdoers of the courts of law and equity, and of the Admiralty and Ecclesiastical 
courts, including therein the courts of Probate and Divorce, and the clerks of 
the peace or their deputies, if actually exercising the duties of their respective 
offices ; coroners; gaolers and keepers of houses of correction, and all subordinate 
officers of the same ; keepers in public lunatic asylums ; members and licentiates 
of the Eoyal College of Physicians in London, if actually practising as physi- 
cians ; members of the Eoyal Colleges of Surgeons in London, Edinburgh and 
Dublin, if actually practising as surgeons; apothecaries certificated by the 
Court of Examiners of the Apothecaries Company, and all registered medical 
practitioners (a) and registered pharmaceutical chemists if actually practising 
as apothecaries, medical practitioners, or pharmaceutical chemists respectively 
{see also 21 & 22 Vict. c. 90, s. 35) ; and registered dentists if they so desire 
(41 & 42 Vict. c. 33, s. 30) ; officers of the navy, army, militia, and yeomanry, 
while on full pay ; all soldiers in his majesty's regular forces (44 & 45 Vict, 
c. 58, s. 147) ; and officers and men in the territorial forces of the Crown 
(7 Bdw. 7, c. 9, s. 23 (4)) ; the members of the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board ; 
and of the London Port authority (8 Bdw. 7, i;. 68, b. 39) ; the master, wardens, 
and brethren of the Corporation of Trinity House of Deptford Strond ; pilots 
licensed by the Trinity House of Deptford Strond, Kingston-upon-HuU, or 
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, and all masters of vessels in the buoy and light service 
employed by either of those corporations, and all pilots licensed under any Act 
of Parliament or charter for the regulation of pilots {see 57 & 58 Vict. c. 60, 
part X.); the household servants of his majesty, his heirs and successors; the 
Postmaster-General and any officers of the Post Office (8 Edw. 7, u. 48, s. 43), 
commissioners of customs, and officers, clerks, or other persons acting in the 
management, service [39 & 40 Vict. c. 86, s. 9], or collection of the customs, 
commissioners and collectors of inland revenue, and officers or persons appointed 
by the commissioners of inland revenue or employed by them or under their 
authority or direction in any way relating to the duties of inland revenue 
(63 & 54 Vict. c. 21, o. 8 : general or additional commissioners of income tax, 
as to the counties in which they dwell so long as they hold a certificate under 
5 <{ 6 Vict. c. 35 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 19, s. 40) ; sheriffs' officers ; ofBcers of the 
rural and metropolitan police {see also 2 & 3 Vict. c. 93, s. 10), magistrates 
of the metropolitan police courts, their clerks, ushers, doorkeepers, and 
messengers ; members of the London County Council as to juries within the 
administrative county of London [53 & 54 Vict. c. ccxlii. s. 26], members of the 
council of a county of a city or town corporate so far as relates to service on the 
trial of indictments removed into the adjoining county at large (38 G. 3, c. 52, 

(a) It has been held in Ireland that duly qualified veterinary surgeons are exempt as 
medical practitioners. See Re Allen [1904] 2 Ir. Rep. 565. Sed qucere whether they 
can be so held under the English Jury Acts. An attempt to get this point decided was 
unsuccessfully made in Hagmaier V, Willesden Overseers [1904] 2 K. B. 316,- 73 L. J. 
E. B. ess. 



184 TRIAL 

s. 11) ; members of the counoil of the muncipal corporation of any borough, 
and every justice of the peace assigned to keep the peace therein, and the town 
clerk and treasurer for the time being of every auch borough, so, far as relates 
to any jury summoned to serve in the county where such borough is situate; 
btirgesses of every borough in and for which a separate court of quarter 
sessions shall be holden so far as relates to any jury summoned for the trial 
of issues joined in any court of general or quarter sessions of the peace 
in the county wherein such borough is situate; justices of the peace so far 
as relates to any jury summoned to serve at any sessiohs of the peace for 
the jurisdiction of which he is a justice; of&cers of the Houses of Lords and 
Commons," and registrars of births, deaths, and marriages; 7 W. 4 and 
1 Vict. i;. 22, o. 18. "No person whose name shall be in the jury book as a 
juror shall be entitled to be excused from attendance on the ground of any 
disqualification or exemption other than illneae not claimed by him at or before 
.the revision of the list by the justices of the peace, and a notice to that effect 
shall be printed at the bottom of every jury list." 33 & 34 Yict. c. 77, s. 13. 
That section does not apply to customs of&ciak exempted by 39 & 40 Viet. c. 36, 
s. 9, supra. 

3wi^ lists.] — The mode of preparing jury lists, returning the names of 
persons qualified as jurors, making up the jury book, and summoning the jurieB 
in counties, is prescribed by the Juries Act, 1825 (6 G. 4, c. 50), ss. 8-10, 12, 14, 
20, 22, 25, as amended by the County Common Juries Act, 1910 (10 Bdw. 7, 
and 1 Geo. 5, c. 17), s. 1 ; the Juries Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Viot. c. 107), ss. 4-6, 
8-14, and the Juries Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. .,. 77), ss. 11, 13, 14, 15, 19, 20, as 
modified by the Local Government Act, 1888, and the London Government Act, 
1899 (62 & 63 Vict. c. 14). 

The clerk of the county council in every administrative county in England 
and Wales is required on or before the 20th July in every year to issue his 
precept, according to the form given in the schedule to 25 & 26 Vict. c. 107, to 
the [churchwardens and] overseers of the poor of the several parishes and town- 
ships within the administrative county for which he acts, requiring them to 
make out, before the 1st September then next ensuing, a true list of all men 
residing within their respective parishes and townships qualified and liable to 
serve on juries according to 6 G. 4, i;. 60, and also to perform and comply with 
all other the requisitions in the said precepts contained (25 & 26 Vict. c. 107, 
s. 4, as modified by 51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 83 (6) ). The [churchwardens and] 
overseers then make out their lists, and fix a copy on the principal door of every 
public place of religious worship within their parish or township dn the three 
first Sundays in September; 6 G. 4, c. 50, ss. 8, 9; 25 & 26 Vict. c. 107, s. 6; 
and at a special petty sessions, held in the last week in September (or at suoh 
adjournment thereof as is mentioned in 25 & 26 Vict. i;. 107, a. 8), these lists 
are produced, and the justices then strike out the names of any persons not 
qualified, or not able to serve by reason of any infirmity, and insert the names 
of any qualified persons omitted ; 6 G. 4, c. SO, s. 10. The justices cannot state 
a special case as to priority of law arising, on the review of the lists : Hagmaier 
V. Willesden Overseers [1904] 1 K. B. 816 ; 73 L. J. K. B. 638. The lists 



SUMMONING JURORS. 185 

duly corrected and allowed by the justices present at such petty sessions are 
transmitted by their clerk to the clerk of the county council. 25 & 26 Viot. 
c. 107, 0. 9; 61 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 83 (6). The lists are then copied into The 
Jurors' Book by the clerk of the county council, which book is delivered by him 
to the sheriff, to be used from the 1st of January, for one year. 6 G. 4, i;. 50, 
s. 12; 25 & 26 Vict. c. 107, s. 10; 51 & 62 Vict. c. 41, s. 83 (6). 

In the county of London the duty of making out the lists devolves on the 
town clerk of each metropolitan borough in substitution for the overseers, etc., 
of the parishes comprised therein. 62 & 63 Vict. c. 14, ss. 11 (1), 25. In rural 
parishes the churchwardens are no longer concerned with jury lists. 66 & 57 
Vict. c. 73, s. 5 (2). 

Summoning jurors.] — 6 G. 4, i^. 50, provides (s. 20) that "the court of King's 
Bench, and all courts of oyer and terminer or gaol delivery, [and] the courts 
of sessions of the peace in England . . and Wales, shall respectively have 
and exercise the same power and authority as they have heretofore had and 
exercised, in issuing any writ or precept, or in making any award or order, 
orally or otherwise, for the return of a jury for the trial of any issue before any 
of such courts respectively, or for the amending or enlarging the panel of jurors 
returned for the trial of any such issue; and the return to every such writ, 
precept, award or order, shall be made in the manner heretofore used and 
accustomed in such courts respectively, save and except that the jurors shall be 
returned from the body of the county, and not from any hundred, or any 
particular venue within the county, and shall be qualified according to this 
Act." (a). 

Writs of venire facias juratores and distringas juratores and habeas corpora 
juratorum are abolished (see Short and Mellor Or. Pr. (2nd ed.) 112), and the 
juries summoned under the present procedure are as effectual for all purposes as 
those summoned under the old writs (15 & 16 Vict. c. 76, ». 116). 

High Court.] — The summoning of jurors for trial at the Eoyal Courts of 
Justice is regulated by a rule of January 15, 1903, made under s. 89 (3) of the 
Local Government Act, 1888 : — 

" The sheriffs of the county of London and of the county of Middlesex respec- 
tively shall execute and obey all precepts and process which the judges or proper 
officers of the High Court of Justice shall award, issue, and direct unto them 
respectively, and shall whenever required and commanded summon and return 
from the said county of London and the said county of Middlesex a competent 
number of persons qualified . according to law to inquire of, present, and try all 
offences, issues, and other matters cognizable by the justices of the High Court 
of Justice within the boundaries of the county of the county of London and the 
county of Middlesex, and the persons returned from the said county of London 
and the said county of Middlesex whether taken wholly from the said county of 
London or from the said county of Middlesex or taken indiscriminately from 

(a) The court appears to have inherent authority to summon one or more grand 
juries. See Chit. Cr. L. 309, 310: R. v. McGuire [1898] 34 New Bruns. 430. 



186 TRIAL. 

the said county of London and the said county of Middlesex shall have authority 
to inquire of, present, hear, try and determine all such offences and other 
matters and all issues and all matters of fact arising out of such trials or relating 
thereto as if the said county of London and the said county of Middlesex -were 
one county;" and see Cr. Off. Bules, 1906, r. 147; Short and Mellor, Cr. Pr. 
(2nd ed.) 112. 

Assizes.] — Before the justices of assize go their circuits, (b) they issue their 
precept, signed and sealed, to the sheriff, to cause all persons bound to attend 
at the assizes to appear before them on an appointed day, and requiring him 
(among other things) to return a competent number of good and lawful men 
of the body of the county, qualified as jurors according to law : and the judges 
are empowered by the Jurors Act, 1825 (6 G. 4, u. 50), ». 22, as amended by 
the County Common Juries Act, 1910 (10 Edw. 7 and 1 Geo. 5, o. 17), s. 1, if 
they think fit, to direct the sheriff to " summon and empanel such number of 
jurors, . . as such judges shall think fit to direct, to serve indiscriminately 'm 
the criminal and civil side," dividing them into two sets, the first to serve ai 
the beginning of the assizes, for such time as the judge may direct, and the 
second to serve for the residue of such assizes. (For forms of judges' precepts 
to the sheriff, see 4 Chit. Cr. L. 171, 174). " The precept issued by the justices 
of assize to the sheriff to summon jurors for the assizes shall direct that the 
jurors be summoned for the trial of all issues, whether civil or criminal, which 
may come on for trial at the assizes." 15 & 16 Vict. c. 76, s. 105. It is the 
duty of the sheriff, upon the receipt of the precept for the return of jurors, to 
return the names of men contained in the jurors' book for the current year and 
no others. 6 G. 4, c. 50, e. 14. " No juror shall be liable to any penalty for 
non-attendance on any jury, unless the summons requiring him to attend be duly 
served six days at least before the day on which he is required to attend; but 
no longer period than such six days shall in any case be required between the 
service and such last mentioned day." 33 & 34 Vict. c. 77, s. 20. Jurors 
may be summoned by post, provided that when any summons shall be served 
by post, two additional days shall be allowed for the transmission of such 
summons by post, over and above the number of days required by law for the 
service of a summons, before the day on which the juror is required to attend. 
25 & 26 Vict. c. 107, s. 11. As to dispensing with attendance, see 8 Edw. 7, 
u. 41, s. 1. 

The sheriff must for Is. deliver a copy of the jury panel to any party requiring 
the same. 15 & 16 Vict. c. 76, s. 106. 

Quarter sessions.] — Eor county quarter sessions jurors are summoned by the 
sheriff in pursuance of the precept issued by the clerk of the peace. The mode 

<6) The circuits are regulated by a series of Orders in Council printed in Statutory 
Rules and Orders Revised (ed. 1904), vol 12, tit. Supreme Court E,, and the commission 
days are fixed by Orders in Council issued before each circuit and printed in the 
Statutory Rules and Orders of the year of issue. Certain of these orders contain direc- 
tions as to the precepts for summoning jurors. They are made under 3 & 4 W. 4, t. 71, 
and 38 & 39 Vict. c. 77, s. 23 ; and as to spring and winter assizes under 39 & 40 Vict. u. 57, 
40 & 41 Vict. c. 46, and 42 & 43 Vict. c. 1. 



SUMMONING JURORS. 187 

of aummons is the same as in the case of assize jurors. Jurors may be sum- 
moned in the same way for general sessions of the peace or for adjourned 
quarter sessions (1 & 2 Vict. c. 4). For borough quarter sessions jurors are 
summoned by the borough clerk of the peace in the manner directed by s. 186 
of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 50). As to dispensing 
with the attendance of jurors, see 8 Bdw. 7, c. 41, s. 1. 

Special jury.] — The qualification of special jurors is regulated by 33 & 34 Vict, 
c. 77, B. 6. A special jury cannot be given in treason or felony, 6 G. 4, 
c, 50, s. 30 : R. V. Mayne, 32 W. R. 93 : Gray v. B., 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 123. 
By s. 30 of- the Juries Act, 1825 (6 G. 4, c. 50), the High Court (King's 
Bench Division), may, upon the motion of any prosecutor, relator, plaintiff, 
or demandant, or of any defendant in any case whatsoever, whether civil 
or criminal, or on any penal statute, excepting only indictments for treason 
or felony, depending in the said court, order and appoint a special jury to be 
struck before the proper officer of each respective court, for the trial of any issue 
joined in any of the said cases, and triable by a. jury, in such manner as the 
said courts respectively have usually ordered the same, and every jury so struck 
shall be the jury returned for the trial of such issue. As to the old practice, 
see 1 Chit. Cr. L. 522. As to the cost of such jury, see 6 G. 4, c. 50, s. 34 
(post, p. 188) : R. V. Moate, 3 B. & Ad. 237 ; 1 L. J. (N. S.) K. B. 78. By the 
Common Law Procedure^ Act, 1852 (15 & 16 Vict. u. 76), b. 108, as modified by 
61 & 62 Vict. c. 6, s. 1 (1), the precept issued by the judges of assize for the 
sheriff to summon jurors for the assizes directs the sheriff to summon a sufficient 
number of special jurymen, to be mentioned therein, to try the special jury 
causes at the assizes ; and the persons summoned in pursuance of such precept 
shall be the jury for trying the special jury causes at the assizes, subject to such 
right of challenge as the parties are now by law entitled to; and a printed 
panel of the special jurors so summoned shall be made, kept, delivered and 
annexed to the nisi prius record, in like time and manner, and upon the same 
terms as hereinbefore provided with reference to the panel of common jurors ; 
and upon the trial the special jury shall be balloted for, and called in the order 
in which they shall be drawn from the box, in the same manner as common 
jurors .-• Provided that the court or a judge, in such case as they or he may 
think fit, may order that a special jury be struck according to the present 
practice, and such order shall be sufficient warrant for striking such special 
jury, and making a panel thereof for the trial of the particular cause. And see 
15 & 16 Vict. c. 76, ss. 112, 118, as to the course to be pursued in cases where 
a special jury is desired. 

As to special juries in London and Middlesex, see 33 & 34 Vict. c. 77, 
6s. 15-18 ; 51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 89. The nomination and reduction of the 
jurors in London and Middlesex is regulated by 15 & 16 Vict. c. 76, s. 110, and 
51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 89. The rule committee of the Supreme Court has, under 
the Special Juries Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 6, s. 1), power to make rules, as to 
special juries, and thereby to repeal or alter rules made under any previous 
Act as to special juries. This enactment is aimed at what remains of the 



188 TRIAL. 

Begulae Generales of Hilary Term, 1853 (see Statutory Bules and Orders 
Bevised (ed. 1904), vol. 12, tit. Supreme Court E., p. 417). 

By the Or. Off. Bules, 1906, r. 147, in the King's Bench Division, "Either 
the prosecutor or the defendant may, except in case of felony, obtain a special 
jury upon giving the like notice as is required in civil cases, and the court or a 
judge may, at the instance of either party, order that a special jury be struck 
as provided for by the Juries Act, 1870 (see s. 17), or any subsequent Juries 
Act. And when the jury has been reduced either party may draw up an order 
at the Crown Office directing the sheriff to summon that particular jury at 
such time and place as may be required." As to the mode of striking and 
reducing such a jury, see Short and Mellor Cr. Br. (2nd ed.) IIS. The jury 
thus reduced may be challenged for cause. Barrett v. Long, 8 St. Tr. (N. S.) 
1076; 3 H. L. C. 395. As to the Irish Practice, see R. v. Parnell, 14 Cox, 
SOS; and Huband, Grand Jury, etc., in Ireland. "The person or party who 
shall apply for a special jury shall pay the fees for striking such jury, and all 
the expenses occasioned by the trial of the cause by the same, and shall not 
have any further or other allowance for the same upon taxation of costs, than 
such person or party would be entitled to in case the cause had been tried by » 
common jury, unless the judge before whom the case is tried shall immediately 
after the verdict certify under his hand, upon the back of the record, that the 
same was a cause proper to be tried by a special jury." 6 Gr. 4, o. 50, s. 34. 
This enactment applies to criminal cases: R. v. Pemhridge, 3 Q. B. 901; 
12 L. J. (Q. B.) 47; and R. v. Rowlands, 2 Den. 864,.871 (n.). 

If sufficient special jurors are not in attendance, a tales for deficiency or 
default of jurors may be awarded, by warrant of the attorney-general for a 
tales de circumstantibus. See Att.-Gen. v. Parsons, 2 M. & W. 23 : R. v. 
Dolby, 2 B. & C. 104 ; 2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 939 ; 1 C. & K. 238 ; 1 L. J. K. B. 241 : 
R. V. Edmonds, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 785, post, p. 19*7). For the form of this 
warrant and the mode of obtaining it, see Short and Mellor Cr. Pr. (2nd ed.) 
115, 545. If an order is made for a special jury, and the parties proceed to trial 
before a common jury, it would seem that the verdict cannot be afterwards 
impeached. B. v. Perry, 5 T. R. 453. 

Jury de medietate lingua.]— S. 5 of the Naturalization Act, 1870 (33 & 
34 Vict. c. 14), took away the right which aliens previously had to be jjried by 
a jury de medietate lingua, when indicted of any felony or misdemeanor, but 
not when indicted of high treason. See Arch. Gr. PI. 143 (16th ed.) : R. v. 
Manning, 1 Den. 467 ; 19 L. J. (N. S.) M. C. 1 : Levinger v. R., L. R. 3 P. C. 
282,; 39 L. J. P. C. 49. Under that Act (s. 5) an alien is now " triable in the 
same manner as if he were a natural-bom subject." 

Panel.] — On a trial for high treason the accused has a right to a copy of the 
jury panel. 7 & 8 W. 3, c. 3, s. 7 ; 7 Anne, u. 21, s. 14. But he has no such 
right in cases of felony or misdemeanor. R. v. Dowling, 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 381; 
3 Cox, 509 : R. v. Nicholson, 8 Dowl. 422 : R. v, Mitehel, 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 
S99; 3 Cox, 1. 

Challenge of grand jutots.']— Vide ante, p. 72. 



CHALLENGE OF JURORS. 189 

Challenge of petty jurors.] — When a sufficient number of persons charged 
with felony have pleaded, and put themselves upon the country, the clerk of the 
court addresses the prisoners thus : " Prisoners, these good men that you 
shall now hear called are the jurors who are to pass between our sovereign lord 
the King and you upon your respective trials [or who are to try you] ; lor in a 
capital case, upon your life and death;] if therefore you or any of you will 
challenge [or object to] them or any of them, you must challenge them as they 
come to the book to be sworn, and before they are sworn, and you shall be 
Heard." The officer then proceeds to call twelve jurors from the panel, calling 
each juror by name and address. When a full jury has appeared {R. v. 
Edmonds, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 785, 916; 4 B. & Aid. 471), and before any juror is 
sworn {R. v. Frost, 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 85, 122; 9 C. & P. 129, 137 : B. v. Key, 
2 Den. 347; 3 C. & K. 371; 21 L. J. (M. C.) 35 : R. v. Giorgetti, 4 F. & F. 
546), the proper time comes for the exercise of the right of challenge or 
exception to the jurors returned to pass upon the trial (a). The party intending 
to challenge the array may pray a tales to complete the number, and then 
object to the panel. Bull (N. P.) 307 : R. v. Dolby, 1 C. & K. 238; 1 L. J. 
K. B. 241. If the defendant was not allowed his full right of challenge the 
proceedings might be quashed on writ of error, and a venire de novo awarded. 
Gray v. B., 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 117; 11 CI. & F. 427. In England appeal is 
substituted for writ of error. See post, pp. 300 et seq. 

Challenges are of two kinds : 1. To the array, when exception is taken to the 
whole number impanelled, and 2. To the polls, when individual jurymen are 
excepted against. They are also divided into challenges peremptory, made to 
the polls without reason assigned, and challenges for cause, which may be to 
the array or the polls for some definite reason assigned and proved. Both are 
comparatively rare in England, and the leading modern oases on the subject 
have occurred in Ireland. See Huband, Grand Jury in Ireland, 611. 

Peremptory challenge.] — Jurors impanelled to try collateral issues may not 
be challenged peremptorily. R. v. Radcliffe, 1 W. Bl. 3. At common law, 
the crown might, it seems, have challenged peremptorily any number of jurors, 
without alleging any other reason than " guod non boni sunt pro rege." 2 Hawk, 
e. 43, as. 2, 3; 2 Eolle Abr. 645; Co. Litt. 156 b; Bac. Abr. Juries (E.) 10. 
But this power was taken away by 33 Edw. 1, c. 4 (ordvnacio de inquisitionibus) , 
Btic. Abr. Juries (E.) 11 (a). Under the present law in all inquests to be 

(a) Probably a challenge to the array should be made before any juror is sworn. In 
the case of a challenge as to the polls it is submitted that it is time enough to 
challenge before the swearing of the juror objected to begins. R. V. Brandreth, 
32 SU Tr. 755, 777, Abbott, C.J. It has been held in two Colonial cases that a challenge 
to an individual juror for cause is not too late if made before the juror has done any 
act showing assent to take the oath, even if he is touching the book. R. v. Freeman, 
9 Queensland t. J. 281, Griffith, C.J. : R. v. Longland, 6 Id. 66. In R. V. Longlani the 
jtoor with the book in his hand said that he was opposed to capital punishment, and a 
challenge for cause was allowed to be made. 

(b) The English and Irish authorities on this subject are fully stated in Huband, 
Grand Jury in Ireland, 632 — 644. As to challenge by the Crown in New Zealand^ see 
r: v. BovTke [1900] 19 N. Z. L. R. 335. 



190 TRIAL. 

taken before the High Court (King's Bench Division), and all courts of oyer 
and terminer, or gaol delivery, and courts of sessions of the peace in England 
and Wales {see 6 G. 4, c. 50, s. 20), "■ wherein the King is a party, howsoever 
it be, notwithstanding it be alleged by them that sue for the King, that the 
jurors of those inquests, or some of them, be not indifferent for the King, yet 
euch inquests shall not remain untaken for that cause ; but if they that sue for 
the King will challenge any of those jurors, they shall assign of their challenge 
a cause certain, and the truth of the same challenge shall be inquired of 
according to the custom of the court; and it shall be proceeded to the taking 
of the same inquisitions as it shall be found, if the challenges be true or not, 
after the discretion of the court." 6 Gr. 4, u. 50, e. 29. The crown, however, 
is entitled to ask that a juror should " stand by," i.e., to postpone consideration 
of the cause of challenge until the panel has been " gone through " and it appears 
that there will not be jurors enough to try the defendant, if the peremptory 
challenges are allowed to prevail. B. v. Parry, 7 C. & P. 836 : B. v. Geach, 
9 C. & P. 499; and this was done in B. v. Casement [1917] 1 K. B. 98; and, 
see 2 Hale, 271; 2 Hawk. c. 43, s. 3; Staundf. 162. By " going through" or 
' ' perusing ' ' the panel is meant ascertaining according to the usual practice cf 
the court, and what may reasonably be expected, that there are no more jurors 
in the panel whose attendance can be procured, and that unless the crown be 
put to show its cause of challenge, " the inquest would remain untaken." 
Mansell v. J?., 8 St. Tr. (N. S.) 831; 8 E. & B. 64; Dears. & B. 375; 27 L. J. 
(M. C.) 4. In that case the panel contained fifty-four names : eighteen, when 
called, were peremptorily challenged by the prisoner; fifteen were, on the prayer 
of the counsel for the crown, the prisoner's counsel objecting, and praying that 
cause of challenge should be shown, ordered to " stand by " ; and nine were 
elected and tried to be sworn. This left twelve other persons only on the 
panel, and those twelve were at that time absent, deliberating upon their verdict 
in another case. The name of W. J. (the first person who upon the prayer of 
the counsel for the crown had been ordered to stand by) was then again' called, 
and the counsel for the crown again prayed that he might be ordered to stand 
by, upon which the counsel for the prisoner prayed that cause of challenge 
should be shown forthwith. At that moment, and before any judgment was 
given, the twelve persons who sat as a jury in the other case came into court 
and gave their verdict; and the counsel for the crown then prayed that W. J. 
should be ordered to stand by until those twelve persons had been called ; but 
the counsel for the prisoner demanded that W. J. should be sworn, unless cause 
of challenge to him were shown. The court ordered that W. J. should stand 
by; and three persons, the number required to complete. the jury, were taken 
from the said twelve jurors, and elected and tried to be sworn (sic), although 
the prisoner's counsel objected that such persons ought to be called in their 
proper order with other persons in the panel, and that J. J., the person whose 
name stood in the panel immediately after that of W. J., ought to be next 
called. Upon a writ of error, the record stating all these facts, it was held 
that, under the circumstances, the panel was not gone through, so as to put the 
crown to assign cause of challenge, until the twelve persons who came into 
court before the complete formation of the jury had been called; that W. 3. 



CHALLENGE OF JURORS. 191 

was properly ordered to stand by the second time ; and that the three persons 
required to complete the jury were properly called and taken from the said 
twelve, without again calling the whole panel through in its order. Id. 

The defendant is bound to show all his causes of objection before the prose- 
cutor can be called upon to show the grounds of his challenges. 2 Hawk. c. 43, 
s. 3; Bao. Abr. Juries (B.) 10; 14 Bl. Com. 353 (o). 

Peremptory challenges are allowed to the defence in all cases of treason and 
felony, but not in cases of misdemeanor. Co. Litt. 56; 4 Bl. Com. 352; 
3 Co. Inst. 27 ; Com. Dig. Challenge (C.) : Gray v. R., 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 117, 134; 
11 CI. & F. 427; and see Levinger t. B., L. E. 3 P. C. 282; 39 L. J. 
P. C. 49. The number of peremptory challenges allowed in cases of high treason 
is thirty-five (7 & 8 W. 3, t. 3, s. 2), except where the treason charged is the 
compassing of 'the King's death, and an overt act alleged in the indictment is the 
assassination of the King, or any direct attempt against his life, or against his 
person, whereby his life may be endangered, or his person may suffer bodily 
harm (39 & 40 G. 3, u. 93); or attempts against the person of the King; 5 & 

6 Vict. c. 51, ss. 1, 2. In the last-mentioned cases of high treason, and in 
murder and all other felonies, the number is twenty. 6 G. 4, c. 50, s. 29; and 
see 2 Hawk. c. 43, ss. 7, 8; 2 Hale, 268; Bac. Abr. Challenge, 70, 74, 75, 217; 
Fost. 106; Co. Litt. 156; Bac. Abr. Juries (E.) 9, 10. " If any person indicted 
for any treason, felony, or piracy, shall challenge peremptorily a greater 
number of the men returned to be of the jury than such person is entitled by 
law so to challenge in any of the said cases, every peremptory challenge beyond 
the number allowed by law in any of the said cases shall be entirely void, and 
the trial of such person shall proceed as if no such challenge had been made." 

7 & 8 G. 4, c. 28, s. 3. And when he has exhausted his challenges he cannot 
withdraw one objection in order to challenge a fresh juror. R. v. Parry, 
7 C. & P. 836. In Ireland only twenty peremptory challenges are allowed even 
in high treason. 9 G. 4, c. 54, s. 9 : Smith O'Brien v. R., 2 H. L. C. 465; 
7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1, 43, 359. In misprision of treason, it seems to be doubtful 
whether peremptory challenge is allowed. See 2 Hawk. c. 43, s. 6 ; 3 Co. Inst. 
27 a. In cases of misdemeanor, though no right of peremptory challenge exists 
in England, it is usual for the officer, on application to him, to abstain from 
calling any reasonable number of names objected to either by the prosecutor 
or by the defendant , taking care that enough are left to form a jury ; 
and this practice has often been sanctioned by the Court. See Dick, Q. S. 485, 
486 (6th ed.) : R. v. McGowan, 11 Ir. C. L. Bep. 207, cit. ; 3 Ir. Jur. (N. S.) 
403 : R. V. Blakeman, 3 C. & K. 97. As to Ireland, see 39 & 40 Vict. c. 78, 
8. 10; Huband, Grand Jury in Ireland, 649, 652. 

Where several defendants are tried by the same inquest for treason or felony, 
each has a right to the full number of his challenges ; and if they refuse to join 
in their challenges, the crown has the right of trying each, or any number uf 
them less than the whole, separately from the others, so as to prevent the 
delay which might arise from the whole panel being exhausted by the challenges. 

(a) Hereon see R. V. [Bourke [1900] 19 K. Z. L. E. 335 : R. v. Wardell, 9 Queensland 
L. J. 49. 



192 TRIAL. 

Post. 106 ; Co. I/itt. 156 ; 2 Hale, 268 : R. v. Chamock, 3 Salk. 81. But in R. 
V. Fisher, 3 Cox, 68, Piatt, B., refused an application that principal and acces- 
sory should be allowed to sever their challenges. 

Challenge for cause.] — Challenges for cause may be made either by the 
prosecutor or by the defendant (2 Hale, 271; 2 Co. Inst. 431), whether the 
indictment is for treason, felony, or misdemeanor. See B. v. Lovett, 3 St. Tr. 
(N. S.) 1177, 1179. They are either to the arratj or to the polls, i.e., to 
individual jurymen. 

1. To the array. The challenge to the array is either a principal challenge", . 
or for favour. The right applies whether the array is the panel originally 
summoned or the array of a tales; B. v. Dolby, 1 C. & K. 238. "The only 
ground upon which the challenge to the array is allowed by the English law is 
the unindifferency or default of the sheriff." O'Gonnell v. R., 5 St. Tr. (N. S.) 
1, 799. The causes of a principal challenge to the array are — where the sheriff 
is the actual prosecutor or party aggrieved . B. v. Sheppard, 1 Leach, 101 ; 
R. V. Edmonds, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 785; 4 B. & Aid. 471; or where, at the time 
of the return, he was of actual affinity to either party, or if he returns any jurors 
at the request of the prosecutor or defendant, or any person whom he believes 
to be more favourable to the one side than to the other; and see B. v. Adams 
[1832] Huband, Grand Jury in Ireland, p. 614; or if the defendant have an 
action depending against the sheriff ; Co. Litt. 166 a ; or if the sheriff, or the 
bailiff who made the return, is under the distress of the prosecutor or the 
defendant ; or if he has any pecuniary interest in the event ; or if he is counsel, 
attorney, servant, or arbitrator, in the same cause; Id. ; Bac. Abr., Juries (B.); 
Huband, p. 618; or a subscriber to a society which is the prosecutor. R. v. 
Dolby, 2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 939; 2 B. & C. 104; 1 C. & K. 238. It is no ground of 
challenge for unindifferency on the part of the sheriff, that the officer had. 
omitted to summon one of the twenty-fonr special jurymen returned on the 
panel. R. v. Edmonds, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 785, 916 ; 4 B. & Aid. 471. It is a 
legal ground of challenge to the array that the sheriff has selected the jurorS ^ 
on the ground of religion; B. v. O'Doherty, 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 831; but not 
that he has returned a large proportion of the panel of a different religion trotti 
the defendant. Smith O'Brien v. R. [1849] 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 31. The religion 
of the jurors must be strictly proved, and the mere fact of a disproportion is 
not sufficient to prove unindifferency. R. v. Mitchel, 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 599 : R. 
V. O'Doherty, supra: R. v. Duffy, 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 795, 871 : Smith O'Brien 
V. R., 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1, 20, 24, 31, There can be no challenge tothe array 
on the ground of unindifferency in the master of the crown office, he being the 
officer of the court expressly appointed to nominate the jury ; in such case the 
only remedy is to apply to the court to appoint some other officer to nominate 
the jury. R. v. Edmonds, supra. It is no ground of challenge to the array that 
the justices have omitted the duties prescribed by the Jniy Acts in making out 
the list of names for the special or common jury book, and that the sheriff has 
summoned the jury from a jury book so improperly made. O'Gonnell v. R., 
5 St, Tr. (N. S.) 69, IS : R. v. Barfce, 10 Cox,. 519. 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 91(JmJi 
Jury Act), s. 9 (rep.), which in this respect corresponded with s. 12 of the 



CHALLENGE FOR CAUSE. 195 

English Juries Act, 1825 (6 G. 4, c. 50), directed a jwors' book to be made 
up in each year for use in the year following, and declared that such book 
should be in use from the 1st of January for and during one year. In 
November, 1865, at a sitting of a special commission, a panel was returned 
from the then existing jury book ; the jurors were not then called, but the 
sitting was duly adjourned to 19th January, 1866, at which time the trial took 
place, when the jurors named in the return of 1865 were called. It was held 
that this was not a ground of challenge to the array : Mulcahy v. iJ., L. E. 3 
H. L. 306 ; and also that the fact of one of the jurors who had been duly 
returned in November, 1865, not being on the list for 1866, was no ground of 
challenge to him. Id. 

The default of the sheriff may also be a, ground of principal challenge to the 
array; as where, the array being returned by the bailiff of a liberty, the sheriff 
returns it as from himself. If, however, the sheriff returns a panel from the 
liberty, it will be good, though he may be liable to the lord of the franchise 
in' an action. Co. Litt. 156 a. ; Bac. Abr. Juries (E.) 1. Since 1825 (6 G-. i, 
u. 60, B. 13), the jury has been taken from the body of the county : and this 
has put an end to the ancient right of challenging the array ' ' for want of 
himdredors," i.e., if four persons were not returned from the hundred in which 
the offence was alleged to have been committed; 2 Hale, 272; Huband, Grand 
Jury in Ireland, 632. 

There may also be a challenge to the array for favour, in cases where the 
ground of partiality is less apparent and direct : as where one of the parties 
is tenant to the sheriff; or the sheriff and one of the parties are united in the 
same office ; or where a relationship, exists between the children of one of the 
parties an! of the sheriff or officer; or where the sheriff has an action of debt 
depending against one of the parties. C!o. Litt. 156 a ; Bac. Abr. Juries (B.) 1; 
3 Dyer, 367 a, pi. 40. 

A principal challenge to the array being founded upon some manifest partiality 
or error, if the cause is truly alleged, the court, it is said, will at once quash the 
array, and direct a new panel to be summoned. Where cause exists for a 
challenge to the array, on the ground of relationship or otherwise, the party 
liable to the objection may himself suggest it to the court, in order to prevent 
the delay which the challenge would occasion, and pray that the coroners or 
elisors, as the case may be, may be ordered to summon the jury. See 1 St. Tr. 
(N. S.) 913. If the other party admits the fact, and agrees to the prayer, the 
order will at once be made; if he refuses, denying the existence of the cause of 
challenge, he cannot afterwards avail himself of it. Co. Litt. 157 b ; 3 Dyer, 
367 a, pi. 40; Baynham's case, 5 Co. Eep. 36 b. 

A challenge to the array ought to be in writing, so that it may be put upon 
the record, and the other party may demur or counter-plead to it. See R. v. 
Edmonds, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 785; 4 B. & Aid. 471 : Maysr, etc., of Carmarthen 
v. Evans, 10 M. & W. 274. The form of it is as follows :— 

" And now at this day come as well the said J. N., who for our said lord the 

King prosecutes in this behalf, as the said J. S., in his own proper person, and 

the jury thereupon empanelled likewise come; and thereupon the said J. S. 

challenges the array of the said panel, because he says that the said panel was 

A.O.P. 13 



194 TRIAL. 

arrayed and returned by A. B., esquire, now and at the time of the making of 

the array aforesaid sheriff of the said county of , which said sheriff is a 

•kinsman of the said J. N., to wit [setting out the mode of relationship]; and 
this he is ready to verify, whereupon he prays judgment, and that the said panel 
may be quashed." And see Huband, Grand Jury in Ireland, 623, 689. 

The ground of objection must be specifically stated in the challenge : for a 
challenge merely stating that the sheriff " has not chosen the panel indifferently 
and impartially, as he ought to have done, and that the panel is not an 
indifferent panel," is demurrable as being too general . R. v. Hughes, 1 C. & K. 
235. The opposite party may either plead to the challenge, traversing the 
cause of challenge alleged, or demur to it for insufficiency. In the latter case, 
the party challenging joins in demurrer, and the matter is determined by the 
court. The demurrer and joinder may be in the following form : — 

" And the said J. N. says, that the said challenge of the said J. S. to the 
array of the panel aforesaid is not sufficient in law to quash the array of th", 
panel aforesaid, and that there is no necessity for him the said J. N., nor is 
he obliged by the law of the land to answer to the said challenge in manner and 
form as it is above alleged; wherefore he prays judgment, and that the array 
of the said panel may be affirmed," etc. 

" And the said J. S. says, that he hath above alleged sufficient matter in Ioib,,, 
in the said challenge by him above made to the array of the panel aforesaid, to 
quash the array of the said panel, which he the said J. S. is ready to verify; 
which said matter the said 3. N. does not deny, nor in any manner answer 
thereto: wherefore the said J. S., as before, prays judgment, and that the array 
of the said panel may be quashed," etc. 

If the challenge is overruled, the judgment should be entered on the original 
record. B. v. Edmonds, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 785; 4 B. & Aid. 471. The challenge 
might be removed as part of the record, where it was a principal cause cf 
challenge. 3 Woodeson, s. 347 : see O'Connell y. B., 5 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1. 

If the party pleads to the challenge (in the case, at least, of a challenge for 
favour, and also, it would seem, in the case of a principal challenge, unless the 
fact is admitted or apparent) two triers are appointed by the court, who are 
sworn, and charged to try whether the array is an impartial or a favourable one. 
See Smith O'Brien v. B., 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1 ; 2 H. L. C. 469. These triers are 
generally two of the jurymen returned. The court may, however, in its discre- 
tion, refer the trial to two coroners, or to two solicitors, or to any other two 
indifferent persons. 2 Hale, 275 ; 4 Bl. Com. 353 ; 2 EoUe Eep. 363. If the 
triers find against the challenge, the trial proceeds as if no such challenge had 
been made. The improper disallowance of a challenge was ground, not tor a 
new trial, but for a venire de novo. B. v. Edmonds, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 785; 
4 B. & Aid. 471. If the triers find in favour of the challenge, a, new venire is 
awarded to the coroners, or, if they are interested, to elisors. See 1 Co. Inst. 
158; Huband, Grand Jury in Ireland 480, 1084. In R. v. Dolby, 2 B. & C. 
104; 2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 939, the defendant, who was indicted for a seditious 
libel, challenged the array on the ground that the prosecution was instituted by 
an association called the Constitutional. Association, and that one of the sherifls 



CHALLENGE FOE, CAUSE. 195 

who returned the jury was one of the association. The counsel for the prosecu- 
tion thereupon took issue ; the chief justice then appointed two triers to try the 
issue, who were accordingly sworn; the counsel for the defendant first addressed 
these triers, and called a witness, who proved that the sheriff named was one of 
the subscribers to the association. The counsel for the prosecution then 
addressed the triers, and called a witness to prove that the sheriff had ceased 
to be a subscriber to or member of the association before the return of the jury 
process, but failed in proving it for want of the letter by which the sheriff had 
withdrawn himself from it. The triers were then addressed by the counsel 
for the defendant in reply. The chief justice summed up. The triers found m 
favour of the challenge, and the case was adjourned. 

2. To the polls.} — Even where a challenge to the array is determined against 
the party making it, he may afterwards still have his challenges to the polls, 
i.e., he may object separately to each juryman as he is about to be sworn. The 
challenge must be made when the juror comes to the book to be sworn, and 
before the officer begins to administer the oath ; and it comes too late afterwards, 
although made before the juror has taken the oath : R. v. Brandeth, 32 St. Tr. 
755, 777 : B. v. Giorgetti, 4 P. & F. 646 ; and see ante, p. 189. These challenges 
are generally made by parol, although, in strictness, if any question is raised 
upon the validity of such a challenge, it must.be entered in due form on the 
record. The defendant, in treason or felony, may for cause shown object to all 
or any of the jurors called, after exhausting his peremptory challenges of thirty- 
five or twenty. Challenges to the polls for cause are, like those to the array, 
either principal or to the favour. The principal causes of challenge are : — 
1. Propter honoris respectum; where a peer or lord of parliament is sworn on a 
jury for the trial of a commoner. Co. Litt. 156 b; 2 Hawk. c. 43, s. 11; 
Bac. Abr. Juries (E.) 6; 3 Bl. Com. 361. 2. Propter defectum, i.e., on account 
of some personal objection, as alienage {R. v. Sutton, 8 B. & C. 417 ; 6 L. J. 
(0. S.) M. C. 162)., infancy (R. v. Tremearne, 5 B. & C. 254; 4 L. J. K. B. 
167), or want of the requisite qualification (as to which see ante, p. 179). ' Where 
a disqualified juror is on the panel, and no challenge is made, the presence of 
the juror does not invalidate the trial. R. v. Sutton, supra. A juror may 
challenge himself, by stating that he is not qualified, and he may be examined 
upon oath. R. v. Cooi;, 13 St. Tr. 311, 316, 317. 3. Propter affectum, i.e., on 
the ground of some presumed or actual partiality in the juror : as if he be of 
afShity to either party, or in his employment, or is interested in the event, etc. ; 
IQ short, any such presumed partiality as would be a good ground for a principal 
challenge to the array in the case of the sheriff will be also a cause of principal 
challenge to an individual juror. See R. v. Martin, 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 925 : 
is. V. Swain, 2 M. & Bob. 112; 2 Lew. 116. So where an actual partiality is 
shown to exist, or if the juror has expressed a desire as to the result of the trial, 
or an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants, or personal ill will. 
In R. V. O'Goigly, 26 St. Tr. 1191, 1231 (a trial for treason), a juryman was 
set aside on the trial because, on looking on the prisoners, he had uttered the 
words " damned rascals." A person who has acted as a grand juror on the 
finding of a bill of indictment may also be challenged for cause if returned to 
serve on the petty jury, either on the trial of that indictment or any other 



196 TRIAL. 

indictment for the same offence. 25 Edw. 3, stat. 5, c. 3 ; Y. B. 14 & 15 Edw. 3 
(ed. Pike), p. xxvi. : R. v. Perceval, 1 Sid. 243 : B. v. Cook, 13 St. Tr. 311, 334 ; 
R. V. Sullivan, 8 A. & E. 831 ; 8 L. J. (M. C.) 3. But a person who has sat 
upoe a former petty jury, which convicted other defendants on the same indict- 
ment, is not therefore subject to challenge. See Co. Lit. 157 a; Bac. Abr. 
Juries (E.) 5; 3 Bl. Com. 363. And in R. v. Sawdon, 2 Lew. 117, it was held 
not to be a good ground of challenge tha^ the juror who had sat on previous trials 
during the same assize had in no case returned a verdict for the crown. 
4. Propter delictum, i.e., on the ground of infamy, which meant at common 
law conviction or attainder of treason, felony, perjury, conspiracy, or any other 
infamous offence, which had to be proved by the record of the conviction. Even 
a pardon would not remove this objection. 2 Hale, 278 ; Bac. Abr. Juries (E.) 2 : 
Brown v. Crashaw, 2 Bulstr. 154. Under 33 & 34 Vict. c. 77, s. 10 (ante, 
p. 182), the disqualification attaches to jurors who are under outlawry, or 
attainted of treason or felony, or convicted of any infamous crime, unless a free 
pardon has been obtained. 

Challenges to the polls for favour ar6 where, although the juror is not bo 
manifestly partial as to render him liable to a principal challenge, there are, 
nevertheless, reasonable grounds for suspicion that he will act under some 
prejudice or undue influence ; as where he has been entertained . in the house of 
the party, or has been arbitrator in the same matter; or where the juror and 
the party are fellow-servants, or any other cause exists, such as would constitute 
in the case of the sheriff a ground of challenge to favour to the whole panel. 
Co. Litt. 157 b ; Bac. Abr., Juries (E.) 5. 

Trial of challenges. (a)] — In the case of a principal challenge to the polls, 
if the partiality is made apparent to the satisfaction of the court, the challenge 
is at once allowed, and the juror set a/side. But in the case of a challenge to 
the favour, it is left to the discretion of two triers who are sworn and charged 
to try wTiether the juror challenged stands indifferent between the parties^ See 
Huband, Grand Jury in Ireland, 688. The form of oath to a trier, to try 
whether a. juror stands indifferent or not, is as follows : — 

" I swear bj/ Almighty God that I will well and truly try. whether A. B., one 
of the jurors, stands indifferent between our sovereign lord the King and the 
prisoner at the bar, and a true verdict give according to the evidence." {See 
R. V. 0'Coigley,_ 26 St. Tr. 1191). 

No challenge of triers is admissible. The form of oath to be administered to 
a witness sworn to give evidence before the trial is as follows : — 

" / swear by Almighty God that the evidence which I shall give to the court 
and triers upon this inquest shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing hut 
the truth." (See R. v. Dolby, 1 C. & K. 238 : R. v. Hughes, 2 Cr. & D. 
(C. C. Ir.) 396). 

If the challenge is to the first juror called, the court may select any two 
indifferent persons as triers ; it they find against the challenge, the juror will be 

(o) As to challenges in Canada, see Mathurin [1903] 12 Quebec L. E. (K. B.) 491. 



TRIAL OF CHALLENGES. 197 

sworn, and be jointed with the triers in determining the next challenge ; but as 
soon as two jurors have been found indifferent, and have been sworn, every 
subsequent challenge will be referred to their decisiqu. B. v. Edmonds, 
1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 792 u., 922 : and see 2 Hale, 275 ; Co. Litt. 158 a ; Bac. Abr., 
Juries (E.) 12. 

The burden of proof of a challenge for cause is on the person who makes it 
(R. V. Savage, 1 Mood. 51) ; and he is not entitled to question a juror before 
challenging him. R. v. Dowling, 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 381 : R. v. Stewart, 1 Cox, 
174. When the challenge has been made, the trial proceeds by witnesses called 
to support or defeat the challenge ; the juror objected to may also be examined 
on the voire dire, as to his qualification, or the leaning of his affection. R. v. 
Dowling, supra. But he cannot be interrogated as to matters which tend 
to his own discredit, as whether he has been convicted of felony, etc., nor, as it 
seems, whether he has expressed a hostile opinion as to the guilt of the 
defendant. R. Y. Cook, 13 St. Tr. 311, 334 : R. v. Edmonds, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 
785; 4 B. & Aid. 471 : R. v. Martin, 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 925; and see 2 Hawk, 
c. 43, s. 28. In R. v. Cuffey, 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 467, a trial at the Central 
Criminal Court, in 1848, for treason-felony, the latter question was asked of 
some of the jurors who had been challenged for 'favour,, the attorney-general 
not objecting on the part of the crown. 

The form of oath on the voire dire is as follows : — 

"^7 swear by Almighty God that I will true answer malce to all such questions 
as the court shall demand of me." 

If the panel is so far exhausted by challenges that a full jury is not left, a 
fresh panel will be returned ; and thereupon the defendant may challenge 
peremptorily any of those who were sworn before, if they are again returned; 
but he cannot challenge them for cause, except for some matter which has 
arisen since the original hearing. 2 Hale, 274. 

Whether or not a criminal court has the power to award a tales, in case of 
deficiency or default of jurors, without a warrant from the attorney-general, 
is not a settled point. Hawkins (Book 2, c. 43, s. 18) says : " But it seems thati 
BHch a tales caimot be prayed for by the King upon an indictment or criminal 
information, without a warrant from the attorney-general, or an express assign- 
ment from the court before which the inquest is taken "; see 1 Lev. 223; but 
Blackstone says (4 Comm. 355), " If by reason of challenges, or default of 
jurors a sufficient number cannot be had of the original panel, a tales may be 
awarded as in civil causes, till the number of twelve is sworn." In R. v. 
Edmonds, 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 785, which was tried at Warwick, tales men were 
allowed (without any warrant from the attorney-general) to supply deficiencies 
in the panel of a special jury struck in the crown office. Blackstone 's opinion 
is supported as to high treason by R. v. Stapleton [1680] Sir T. Eaym. 367 ; 
4 Co. Inst. 161 : R. v. Dolby, 2 B. & C. 104 ; 2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 989. 

The judge, however, may, where the panel is exhausted and no tales has 
been prayed, order the sheriff to return a panel instanter without further precept ; 
and the justices of the peace in sessions may issue a special precept command- 
ing the sheriff to return a sufficient number of jurors immediately, and thereupon 



198 TRIAL. 

may proceed with the trial at the then aeasiona. 2 Hale, 28, 261, 265; see 
6 G. 4, c. 60, a. 20 : B. v. Cropper, 2 Mood. 18. 

The uaual, and in general the proper course, where the panel is exhauated Ly 
challenges of the prisoner and the crown, or of either, before a full jury 
remains is to call over the whole panel again in the same order as before, but 
omitting those peremptorily challenged by the prisoner; and then, as each juror 
again appears, whichever party challenges must show cause. If no sufficient 
cause of challenge is shown, the jurors are then sworn. R. v. Geach, 9 C. & P. 
499. See ante, p. 189. And no cause of challenge to the jury, whether to the 
array or to the polls, can be taken, either in arrest of judgment, or otherwise, 
after the jury are sworn. B. v. Sheppard, 1 Leach, 101 : B. v. Sutton, 8 B. & 
C. 417 ; 6 L. J. (M. C.) 102. No challenge can be made, nor need the jury 
be re-sworn, when the defendant is given in charge to them on an allegation 
of a. previous conviction, under 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 28, s. 11, or 6 & 7 W. 4, c. HI, 
or on a charge of being a habitual drunkard under 61 & 62 Vict. c. 60, s. 1, 
sub-a. 2 : iJ. V. Key, 2 Den. 347; 21 L. J. (M. C.) 35, or a habitual criminal 
within 8 Edw. 7, c. 59. By the Larceny Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 96), s. 116, 
which now regulatea most of such cases, see ante, p. 172, and the Ineiriates 
Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 60), and the Prevention of Crime Act, 1908 (8 Edw. 
7, c. 59, s. 10 (4) ), where the prisoner is given in charge to the jury on an 
allegation of n, previous conviction, or of being a habitual drunkard or habitual* 
criminal, it ia not necessary to swear the jury again (and therefore no challenge 
can be taken). See R. v. Timier [1910] 1 K. B. 846, 357; 79 L. J. (K. B.) 
176. The same rule appears to apply to the Coinage Offences Act, 1861 (24 & 
25 Vict. c. 99), s. 37, which contains a like provision. 

The court, even without challenge taken, may and ought to excuse a juror 
on the panel when called, if he is obviously unfit to perform his duty, from 
physical or mental infirmity, or semble, from expressed unindifferency. Mansell 
v. B., 8 St.-Tr. (N. S.) 831; 8E. &B. 54; Dears. & B. 375; 27 L. J. (M. C.) 4. 

Oath of jurors.] — In cases of felony every juror, as he or she comes to the 
book to be aworn, unless challenged, shall take the oath (or make aolemn 
affirmation) in the following form : — " I swear hy Almighty God [or I do 
solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm} that I will well and truly 
try and true deliverance make between our sovereign lord the King and t}\e 
prisoners at the bar whom I shall have in charge, and a true verdict give 
according to the evidence." 

In cases of misdemeanour only, the oath (or affirmation) is as follows : — " I 
swear by Almighty God [or I do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and 
affirm} that I will well and truly try the several issues joined between out 
sovereign lord the King and the prisoners at the bar, and u, true verdict give 
according to the evidence." 

Giving the prisoner in charge to the jury.] — When a full jury have been 
sworn [or have made solemn affirmation in cases where they are entitled to do 
so, under 51 & 52 Vict. c. 46, s. 2, or any other Act, see post. Evidence, p. 479], 
in oases of treason and felony, the crier (at the assizes) makes proclamation in 



PROCEEDINGS AT TRIAL. 199 

the following form ; — " // any one can inform my lords the King's justices, or 
the King's attorney-general, or the King's Serjeant, or this inquest to be taken 
between our sovereign lord the King and the prisoners at the bar, of any treason, 
murder, felony, or misdemeanor, committed or done by them, ■or any of them, 
let him come forth, and he shall he heard; for the prisoners stand at the bar 
upon their deliverance." Cro. Cir. Com. 6 (10th ed.). The clerk of the court 
then calls the prisoner to the bar and says : — " Members of the jury, the 
prisoner stands indicted for that he, on the " [stating the substance of the 
offences charged in the indictment]. " To this indictment he has pleaded not 
guilty and it is your charge to say, having heard the evidence, whether he be 
guilty or not." As to the mode of giving the prisoner in charge to the jury 
where he is indicted for any offence committed after a previous conviction, see 
ante, p. 172; or as a habitual criminal, post, tit. Habitual Criminal; or for tin 
offence again the Coinage Offences Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. u. 99), committed 
after a previous conviction for an offence against any Act relating to the coin, 
see a. 37 of that Act : and where he is indicted for a crime as defined by 34 & 35 
Vict. u. 112, after previous conviction for a crime, see s. 9 of that Act {ante, 
p. 172). 



Sect. 3. 

PROCEEDINGS AT TBIAL. 

Publicity of trial.] — At common law a trial on indictment or criminal 
information must be held in a public court with open doors. In 
dealing with certain classes of criminal trials the presiding judges not 
infrequently order women and young persons to leave the court, and there 
is undoubted power to exclude or eject persons who disturb the proceedings. All 
proceedings under the Punishment of Incest Act, 1908, must be held in camerd, 
(8 Edw. 7, u. 45, s. 5) ; and by s. 114 of the Children Act, 1908 (8 Bdw. 7, c. 67), 
in addition to, and without prejudice to, any powers which a court may possess 
to hear proceedings in camera, the court may, where a person who in the 
opinion of the court is under sixteen is called as a witness in any proceedings 
in lelation to an offence against, or any conduct contrary to decency or morality, 
direct the exclusion from the court of all persons other than members or officers 
of the court or parties to the case, their counsel or solicitors, or persons otherwise 
directly concerned in the case and other than bond, fide representatives of a. 
newspaper or press agency ; and by s. 115 children under fourteen other than 
infants in arms are prohibited from being present in court during the trial of 
other persons except for so long as their presence is required as witnesses or 
otherwise for the purposes of justice. 

Official shorthand note.] — By ». 16 of the Criminal Appeal Act, 1907 
(7 Edw. 7, c. 23), shorthand notes are to be taken of the proceedings at the 
trial of any person on indictment, coroner's inquisition, or criminal information, 



200 TRIAL. 

who if convicted is entitled or may be authorised to appeal under that Act. This 
provision is directory, and absence of a shorthand vpriter does not invaUdate 
the proceedings. R. v. Rutter, 73 J. P. 12; 25 T. L. B. 73 : R. v. Elliott, 
25 T. L. E. 572; 2 Grim. App. E. 171. The provision does not extend to the 
trial of peers for treason or felony (s. 20 (2) ), nor to the trial of indictments at 
common law in relation to the non-repair or obstruction of a highway, public 
bridge, or navigable river (s. 20 (3)). 

Trial of foreigner.] — Where a foreigner, who is ignorant of the English 
language, is being tried and is not defended by counsel, the evidence given at 
the trial must be translated to him, and compliance with this rule cannot be 
waived by the prisoner. If he is defended by counsel, the evidence must be 
translated to him unless he or his counsel express a wish to dispense with the 
translation and the judge thinks fit to permit the omission, but the judge 
should not permit it unless he is of opinion that the accused substantially 
understands the nature of the evidence which is going to be given against him. 
R. V. Lee Kun [1916] 1 K. B. 337; 85 L. J. (K. B.) 515; 114 L. T. 421; 
25 Cox, C. C. 304; 80 J. P. 166; 32 T. D. E. 225; 11 Cr. App. E. 298. 

Separate trials.] — When persons jointly indicted plead not guilty the court 
has power to order them to be separately tried where the interests of justice * 
seem to require that course to be taken. See Kel. (J.) 8, 9 (treason); B. v. 
Aheame, 3 Ir. C. L. Eep. 381; 6 Cox, 7 (cotupiracy) : R v. BradloMgh, 15 Cox, 
217. Separate trials are sometimes ordered where evidence admissible against 
one of the accused would not be admissible against the others, or where the 
separate trial would enable the accused to call for the defence persons jointly 
indicted with him, or where it is desired to call an accomplice on behalf of the 
crown, or where persons jointly indicted for felony refuse to join in their 
challenges (a) (ante, p. 191). Prisoners jointly charged with a crime, and also 
charged severally with being habitual criminals, should be tried separately on 
the habitual criminal charge. R. v. Taylor, 5 Cr. App. E. 168, explaining 
R. V. Blake, 4 Cr. App. E. 275. 

Case for the prosecution.] — In a criminal prosecution on indictment the 
prosecutor has no right to address the jury or state the case for the prosecution. 
R. V. Brice, 2 B. & Aid. 606 ; 1 Chit. Eep. (K. B.) 352 ; R. v. Gurney, 11 Cox, 
414. He must be represented by counsel, or by a. solicitor in those courts of 
quarter sessions at which solicitors have a right of audience. It is usual for 
counsel to make an opening statement : see Re Morgwn, 6 Cox., 116, Talfourd, 
J. When the prisoner is given in charge to the jury, the counsel for the 
prosecution, or, if there is more than one, the senior counsel, opens the case 
to the jury, stating the leading facts upon which the prosecution rely. In 
doing so he ought to state all that it is proposed to prove, as well declarations 
of the prisoners as facts, so that the jury may see if there is any discrepancy 
between the opening statements of counsel, and the evidence afterwards 

(a) See R. v. Millewaki [1908] Queensland State Rep. 27. 



SUMMING UP EVIDENCE. 201 

atlduoed in support of them; per Parke, B., R. v. Edward, 1 M. & Eob. 257 : 
R V. Hartel, 7 C. & P. 773 : R. v. Davis, Id. 786; unless such declarations 
should amount to a confession, when it would be improper for counsel to open 
them to the jury. R. v. Swatkins, 4 C. & P. 548, Bosanquet, J., and Patteson, 
J. : R. V. Dams, 7 C. & P. 785, Parke, B. . R. v. Orrell, Id. 774, Bolland, B. . 
R. V. Creau, 8 Cox, 509 (Jr.). The reason for this rule is, that the circum- 
stances under which the confession was made may render it inadmissible in 
evidence. The general effect only of any confession eaid to have been made 
by !i, prisoner ought, therefore, to be mentioned in the opening address of the 
prosecuting counsel. When any additional evidence, not mentioned in the 
opening speech of counsel, is discovered in the course of a trial, counsel is not 
allowed to state it in a second address to the jury : R. v. Oourvoisier , 9 C. & P. 
362. In opening a case for murder, the counsel for the prosecution may put 
hypothetically the case of an attack upon the character of any particular wit- 
ness for the crown, and say that should any such attack be made he shall be 
prepared to meet it. Per Tindal, C.J., and Parke, B., R. M. Gourvoisier, 
9 C. & P. 362. It was also ruled by the same learned judges that counsel may 
read to the jury the observations of a judge in a former case, as to the 
nature and effect of circumstantial evidence, provided that he adopts them 
as his own opinions, and makes them part of his address to the jury. And in 
R. V.' Dowling, 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 381, 390; 3 Cox, 509, the attorney-general 
having, in his opening address to the jury, made reference to disturbances in 
Ireland, Erie, J., held, on objection made, that such reference was not irregular, 
it being laid down in books of evidence that allusion might be made in courts 
of justice to notorious matters, even of contemporaneous history. And see R. 
v. Duffy, 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 795, 917. 

After counsel's opening statement, witnesses are called for the prosecution, 
who make oath (or affirmation) as follows : — " I swear hy Almighty God [or I 
do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm'] that the evidence I shall 
give to the court and jury sworn between our sovereign lord the King and the 
prisoners at the bar shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 
truth." 

Afi to the order of proof, the mode of examining, witnesses, and the evidence 
necessary to support the case for the prosecution, see post. Evidence, p. 349. 

Summing up the evidence on behalf of the prosecution.] — Since 1865 the 
counsel for the prosecution has been entitled, in certain cases, at the close of 
the examination of his witnesses, to sum up his evidence. This right was 
first given, and the circumstances under which it may be exercised are defined, 
by s. 2 of Denman's Act (28 & 29 Vict. c. 18), the first clause of which enacts 
Uiat : — "If any prisoner or prisoners, defendant or defendants, shall be 
defended by counsel, but not otherwise, it shall be the duty of the presiding 
judge, at the close of the case for the prosecution, to ask the counsel for each 
prisoner or defendant so defended by counsel, whether he or they intend to 
adduce evidence, and in the event of none of them thereupon announcing his 
intention to adduce evidence, the counsel for the prosecution shall be allowed 
to address the jury a second time in support of his case, for the purpose of 



202 TRIAL. 

Bumming up the evidence against such prisoner or prisoners, or defendant or 
defendants." The right of the prosecution to sum up the evidence is not taken 
away, nor is any right to reply given by the calling of the prisoner as sole 
witness on his own behalf under the Criminal Evidence Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict, 
u. 36, s. 3). The effect of that Act is to postpone the summing up by the 
prosecution until after the prisoner's evidence has been given : R. v. Sherrijf, 
20 Cox, 334. In that summing up counsel for the prosecution may comment 
on the prisoner's evidence : B. v. Gordner '[1899] 1 Q. B. 150; 68 L. J. (Q. B.) 
42 (C. C. E.). 

In exercising this right of summing up evidence, it is not lawful for counsel 
for the prosecution to comment on the failure of the prisoner, or of the husband 
or wife of the prisoner, to give evidence ; 61 & 62 Vict. c. 36, b. 1 (b) {post, 
p. 206), and see B. v. Dickman, 74 J. P. 449; 26 T. L. B. 640; 5 Cr. App. E. 
135 ; nor is it proper to comment on the absence of other witnesses for the 
defence, unless it might be fairly expected that witnesses would be called; 
or to urge, on a trial for rape, as an argument for conviction, that otherwise the 
character of the prosecutrix would be blasted. B. v. Budland, 4 E- & P. 495 : 
B. V. Puddick, Id. 497. Prosecuting counsel should regard themselves rather as 
ministers of justice assisting in its administration than as advocates. lb., per 
Compton, J., at p. 499, approved in B. v. Banks [1916] 2 K. B. 621; 12 Cr. 
App. E. 74. Nor is it the duty of counsel for the prosecution to sum up in every 
case in which the prisoner's counsel does not call witnesses, or only calls the 
defendant. His right ought only to be exercised in exceptional cases, such 
as where erroneous statements have been made and ought to be corrected, or 
when the evidence diifers from the instructions. B. v. Holchester, 10 Cox, 
226, Blackburn, J. : B. v. Berens, 4 P. & P. 842, 843, and n. See also B. v. 
Webb, Id. 862. 

The Defence.] — ^As to the right to be defended by counsel and to the provision 
of legal aid for poor prisoners, see ante, pp. 174 et seq. When a prisoner is 
not defended by counsel the judge should inform him of his right to cross- 
examine witnesses, to address the jury, and to give evidence on his own behalf 
or to make an unsworn statement, but omission to give this information does 
not invalidate the conviction. See B. v. Saunders, 63 J. P. 24; 68 L. J. 
(Q. B.) 296 : B. v. Warren, 73 J. P. 359; 25 T. L. E. 633. The following 
form is suggested for giving the prisoner this information : — " You have heard 
the evidence against you. Now is the time for you to make your_ defence. Ton 
may go into the witness box, and give evidence on oath, and be cross-examined 
like any other witness, or you may make a statement to the jury from where 
you stand." Where a prisoner is undefended, he cross-examines the witnesses 
for the prosecution if he thinks fit, or the judge does so on his behalf. On a 
trial for misdemeanor in the Court of King's Bench in 1824, where the defendant 
reserved to himself the right to address the jury, and to examine and cross- 
examine witnesses, he was allowed to do so, and his counsel was allowed to 
argue any points of law that arose in the course of the trial, and to suggest 
questions to him for the cross-examination of the witnesses; B. v. Parkins, 
Ey. & M. 166; 1 C. & P. 548. But the defendant cannot have counsel to 



THE DEFENCE. 203 

examine and cross-examine the witnesses, and reserve to himself the right of 
addressing the jury. B. v. White, 3 Camp. 98; and see B. v. Bedhead Yorke, 
25 St. Tr. 1003, 1021. "Where the accused is defended by counsel, who intends 
to call witnesses in support of the defence, counsel haa the right to open his 
case to the jury before calling his evidence. B. v. Hill, 7 Cr. App. R. 1. As 
to the order in which witnesses must be called, see post, p. 46. As to counsel's 
discretion in conducting the defence, see B. v. Denoel, 114 L. T. 1215; 
32 T. L. E. 473 ; 12 Cr. App. R. 49. 

Where two prisoners are jointly indicted, and are defended by different 
counsel, there has been some difference of opinion as to the order in which 
counsel should cross-examine and address the jury. In B. v. Esdaile, 1 P. & 
P. 213, 237, Lord Campbell directed counsel to cross-examine and address the 
jury in the order of seniority at the bar. But the general, and it is submitted 
the established rule, is that in the absence of agreement between counsel the 
court will call on them to cross-examine and address the jury in the order in 
which the names stand on the indictment; B. v. Barber, 1 C. & K. 434 : B. v. 
Meadows [1856] 2 Jur. (N. S.) 716, and n.. Brie, J. : and see Fletcher (P. 0.) 
V. Crosbie, 2 M. & Bob. 417, Eolfe, B. ; B. v. Bichards, 1 Cox, 62. 

Statement to jury by defendant when defended by counsel.] — The Criminal 
Evidence Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 36), which enables every person charged 
with an offence to be a witness for the defence at every stage of the proceedings, 
provides (s. 1 (h) ) that " Nothing in this Act shall affect . . . any right of 
the person charged to make a statement without being sworn." This provision 
entitles, the prisoner if he chooses to make an unsworn statement instead of 
giving evidence on his own behalf. B. v. Pope, 18 T. L. E. 717. It was at 
one time held that the effect of s. 1 of the Trials for Felony Act, 1836 
(6 & 7 W. 4, c. 114), which first enabled counsel appearing on behalf of persons 
charged with felony to address the jury on their behalf, was to take away from 
the prisoner, except under some very special circumstances, any right to make 
any statement, on his own account : B. v. Bider, 8 C. & P. 539 : B. v. Malings, 
Id. 243 : B. v. Manzano, 2 F. & P. 64 : B. v. Stephens, 11 Cox, 669. But for 
many years prior to the coming into operation of the Criminal Evidence Act, 
1898, it was the practice of the judges to allow a prisoner defended by counsel 
to address the jury as well as his counsel. There was, however, considerable 
divergence of opinion as to whether the prisoner should address the jury before 
or after his counsel. Where the prisoners, who were indicted for robbery with 
violence, were defended by counsel, but called no witnesses, Hawkins, J., after 
consultation with Lush, J., allowed the prisoners to give their own account of 
the matter to the jury, after their counsel had addressed the jury • B. v. Hull 
and Smith, Yorkshire Winter Assizes at Leeds, 3rd Feb., 1880. Where a 
prisoner, who was indicted for murder, was defended by counsel, but called no 
witnesses, Bowen, J., allowed the prisoner to read a statement of his account of 
the matter to the jury, before his counsel addressed them : B. v. Blades, 
Yorkshire Summer Assizes at Leeds, 2nd Aug., 1880. Under similar circum- 
stances, Stephen, J., allowed a prisoner to make a statement to the jury before 
his counsel addressed them, at the same time warning the prisoner that his 



204 TRIAL. 

making such statement would give the counsel for the prosecution a right to 
reply : R. v. Doherty, 16 Cox, 306. This ruling was followed by Phillimore, J., 
in B. V. Pope, 18 T. L. E. 717, so far as relates to the making of the statement by 
the prisoner before his counsel's address. In R. v. MiUhouse, 15 Cox, 622, 
Lord Coleridge, C.J., stated that by the resolution of the majority of the judges, 
in which he did not agree, but by which he was bound, it was undoubtedly 
competent for a prisoner defended by counsel to make a statement of facts to the 
jury, and that the proper time for his doing so was after his counsel had 
addressed the jury. His Lordship, however, held that the resolution did not 
extend to cases where it was proposed to call witnesses for the prisoner. See 
the cases collected in Warburton's Leading Cases in the Criminal Law (5th ed.), 
521 et seq., and 2 Euss. Cr. (7th ed.) 1998 et seq. In R. v. Shimmin, 15 Cox, 
122, Cave, J., stated that the rule which the judges intended to follow was that 
a prisoner defended by counsel should make his statement at the conclusion of 
his counsel's speech, with this proviso, that what he stated from the dock 
should be subject to the right of reply on the part of the prosecution as being in 
the nature of new matter laid before the jury. And see R. v. Everett, 
97 C. C. C. Sess. Pap. 335, Hawkins, J. : R. v. Doherty, supra. In R. v. 
Sherriff, 20 Cox, 334, Darling, J., held that a prisoner's unsworn statemelit 
must be made before the counsel for the prosecution sums up the case and before 
his own counsel addresses the court. 

Address ot prisoner's connsel.] — " In the opinion of the judges it is contrary 
to the administration and practice of the criminal law as hitherto allowed, that 
counsel for prisoners should state to the jury as alleged existing facts matters 
which they have been told in their instructions, on the authority of the prisoner, 
but which they do not propose to prove in evidence." Eesolution of the Judges, 
26th Nov., 1881 : R. v. Shimmin, 15 Cox, 122. This resolution settled the 
practice as to a matter upon which there had previously been a conflict of 
authority. See R. v. Butcher, 2 M. & Bob. 228; R. v. Beard, 8 C. & P. 142 : 
R. V. Weston, 14 Cox, 346. 

Where two prisoners are indicted together, and one of them only is defended 
by counsel, it seems to be in the discretion of the judge whether he will allow 
the prisoner who is undefended to make his statement to the jury before or 
after the address of counsel. Where A., B., and C. were jointly indicted, and 
separately defended, and at the close of the case for the prosecution C. was 
acquitted, and was then called as a witness for A., and his evidence tended to 
criminate B., it was held that B.'s counsel had a right to cross-examine C, 
and to reply. R. v. Burdett. Dears. 431; 24 L. J. (M. C.) 63; 6 Cox, 458: 
R. V. Woods, 6 Cox, 224 : R. v. Copley, 4 F. & F. 1097. The same rule 
applies where one defendant is called as a witness and inculpates a co-defendant. 
R. V. Hodmen and Ingham [1902] 1 K. B. 882; 71 L. J. (K. B.) 581; 
18 Cox, 206. 

The counsel for the prisoner, or the prisoner himself, is entitled, at the close 
of the examination of his witnesses, to sum up his evidence. This right was 
first given by Denman's Act (28 & 29 Vict. c. 18), b. 2, in the following terms ;— 
" Upon every trial for felony, or misdemeanor, whether the p