Report of the attorney general for the year ending ..

HOUSE No. 72.

ANNUAL TtEPOTtT

ATTORNEY GENERAL

FEBRUARY, 185 1.

Feb. 1851.] HOUSE— No. 72.

&omnumtotalt9 of M&&®Ml)nmtt®-

To the Hon. Nathaniel P. Banks, Jr.,

Speaker of the House of Representatives : —

Sir, — In compliance with the requisitions of the Statute, estab-
lishing the office of Attorney General, the accompanying "ab-
stracts and tabular statements" of the reports of the several
District Attorneys and the Attorney of the Commonwealth for
the county of Suffolk, for the year 1850, are herewith respect-
fully submitted to the Legislature.

There is also a brief statement of the cases, which, during
the year, have been conducted or argued by me in the several
judicial districts of the Commonwealth. While these constitute
the most prominent and conspicuous class of the duties apper-
taining to the office of the Attorney General, requiring his at-
tendance before the Supreme Judicial Court, in all the counties
in which cases are pending before that tribunal, to which the
Commonwealth is a party, and imposing upon him weighty re-
sponsibilities and labors, there is another class of duties and re-
sponsibilities devolved upon him, of perhaps equal importance
to the extended and diversified interests of the Commonwealth,
which do not meet the public eye, and which can be measured
and appreciated only by those, with whom in the discharge of
those duties he is brought into official communication.

Since my last annual report, I have had occasion to consult
with and advise the Governor of the Commonwealth, Commit-
tees of the Executive Council, the Adjutant General, the Treas-
urer and Receiver General, the Auditor, the several prosecuting
officers of the Commonwealth, the Commissioners of Public
Lands, the Inspectors of the State Prison, the Trustees of the
State Reform School, the Inspector General of Beef and Pork,
and the Superintendents of Alien Passengers, upon various

4 ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT. [Feb.

questions arising out of their respective official duties, many of
them of difficulty, and of importance to the interest of the Com-
monwealth.

In addition to the parol advice given in personal conferences
and consultations with these officers, I have prepared and com-
municated during the year, forty- two written opinions upon
questions submitted to me for my official advice. Of these,
twenty-one have been upon applications to the Executive for
Executive requisitions upon the Governors of other states, for
the surrender of fugitives from the justice of this Common-
wealth,— and executive requisitions from other states, for the
extradition of alleged fugitives from justice in this State.

Both these classes of applications have become so frequent,
that unless great care is taken, to see that all the constitutional
pre-requisites to granting them, exist in each particular case, that
which the framers of the constitution evidently regarded as the
exercise of a high Executive prerogative, will come to be con-
sidered as much a thing of course, as the issuing of a justice's
warrant upon a complaint for a petty larceny or a simple as-
sault and battery. I have, therefore, endeavored to confine
them to cases in which it was clear that the exigency existed,
in which they were demanded by a due regard to the vindica-
tion of public justice. Of the twenty-one cases in which I
have advised the Executive, in eight of them my advice has
been in favor of, and in thirteen, against, the granting of the
requisitions or warrants applied for in the particular instances.

Under the resolve creating the Board of Commissioners on
Boston Harbor, I have attended before the commissioners at sev-
eral meetings of the board, and conferred with them respecting
the rights and interests of the Commonwealth, in the subject
matter of their investigations. In the views entertained by
them, so far as they have been disclosed to me, I fully concur,
and I cannot doubt, from the distinguished ability, the large ex-
perience, and the eminent fidelity with which they have devoted
themselves to the laborious duties imposed on them by their
commission, the Legislature will repose great confidence in the
opinions and suggestions which they may submit to it in their
report, upon a subject of such great interest to the Common-
wealth.

There are one or two topics upon which T deem it to be my

1851.] HOUSE— No. 72. 5

duty to suggest the propriety of further legislation, in order to a
just and efficient administration of the criminal law.

By a decision of the Supreme Judicial Court, a few years
since, which has recently been affirmed by that tribunal, it is
held, that any error in the sentence of a convict, vitiates, and
renders null, all the previous proceedings in a criminal case; —
that upon a writ of error, the Supreme Court have no power to
correct the error in the sentence, either by awarding, itself, such
sentence as the law affixes to the offence, or by remitting the
case for that purpose to the court before which the party was
convicted; — that upon the error being judicially ascertained,
the only power the court has in the premises, is, to declare the
error, and discharge the prisoner ; — and thus, through a process,
professedly granted by the law, to enable the court to correct
the error alleged to exist, a criminal, legally convicted, on a valid
indictment, escapes all judicial punishment.

It is respectfully submitted, that this doctrine is not in har-
mony with the theoretical perfection of the common law: and
I think it can be successfully maintained, that it was not origi-
nally a feature of that system. The first case in which it
was held in England is comparatively recent, and arose out
of an error in sentencing a party to transportation, when the
law had affixed to the offence of which he was convicted the
punishment of death. The natural repugnance of the judges,
before whom a writ of error was brought, to correct the error
by proceeding to a capital sentence, led them, in favorem
viice, into a departure from the true principles of the common
law, by a discharge of the prisoner.

This precedent has been followed in England, and in some of
the states of this union, until the courts, by their adherence to
it, are liable to commit more and graver errors than they cor-
rect. An illustration of it, less striking than cases that have
actually occurred in practice, may be thus stated. A party has
been convicted in the court of Common Pleas, of the crime of
burglary, upon a valid indictment. All the proceedings have
been regular, and the verdict of a jury has established the fact
of his guilt. He is sentenced by. the court to imprisonment at
hard labor for a term of years in the State prison, but the sen-
tence omits to include an additional day of solitary confinement.
He sues out his writ of error, alleging that the sentence is erro-

6 ATTORNEY GENERALS REPORT. [Feb.

neons in not awarding him another day's imprisonment. This
fact is judicially ascertained by the Supreme Court, sitting as a
court for the correction of errors, and in consequence of the
omission of the one day's solitary confinement, the convicted
burglar is discharged from custody, he is protected from all ju-
dicial punishment for the offence of which he stands convict, as
well as from any future prosecution for it, and goes forth from
the prisoner's dock, to renew his depredations upon society,
stimulated and emboldened in villany, by what he has wit-
nessed of the impotence of the law.

Such a spectacle, as is thus exhibited, of the failure of the
law to vindicate itself, and to protect the honest and the well-
disposed, a spectacle which has been more than once witnessed
in our courts of justice, cannot fail to bring the administration
of our criminal jurisprudence into reproach and contempt.

In an early case in our reports, {Commonwealth v. Ellis,
11 Mass. R. 465,) it was said by the learned judge who pro-
nounced the opinion of the court, in conformity with the decis-
ions in New York and Pennsylvania upon this question, that
" the principle is well settled, that if the judgment was rendered
by a court, proceeding according to the course of the common
law, a writ of error lies; on which, in case of reversal, this
court is authorized to render the same judgment that the court
below ought to have rendered."

To restore this principle, so obviously an essential element in
any well-considered and effective system of criminal jurispru-
dence. I respectfully suggest the expediency of providing by
express enactment, that whenever a final judgment in any crim-
inal ease shall be reversed upon a writ of error, by the Supreme
Judicial Court, the court may render such judgment therein as
should have been rendered, or may remand the case for that
purpose to the court before which the conviction was had."

The practical operation of the act of 1850, chapter 272. "con-
cerning bail in criminal cases," is represented to me by the
prosecuting officers in Suffolk and Middlesex to be such, as to
require further legislative action on that subject. The right
given by lint act to the bail to surrender his principal after a
default, and exonerate himself from liability, with the right of
the principal immediately thereupon to enter into a new recog-
nizance, is now resorted to, as a means of indefinitely postpon-

1851.] HOUSE— No. 72. 7

ing the trial of an indictment. The modus operandi is said to
be this. A party charged, for example, with a violation of the
license law, enters into a recognizance with surety, to appear at
the next ensuing term of the court for trial. He fails to appear
when the indictment is in order for trial, and with his surety, is
defaulted upon the recognizance. At the close of the term, and
after the juries are dismissed, when he knows that a trial can-
not be had, he appears, is surrendered by his surety, and there-
upon immediately enters into a new recognizance for his ap-
pearance at the next term; the surety having been exonerated,
by the surrender, from all liability. At the next term he is again
defaulted, and goes again through the same process, and thus
effectually evades a trial. The evil would probably be remedied,
by leaving the right of the party to enter into a new recogni-
zance after having once been defaulted, subject to the discretion
of the court, before whom the cause is pending; — a discretion
which could not fail to be exercised in favor of a party, when-
ever a proper cause for its exercise was shown.

1 would also respectfully suggest, the expediency of extending
the provisions of the I lth, 12th, 13th, and 14th sections of the
126th chapter of the Revised (Statutes to other buildings than
those enumerated in those sections. It has been recently de-
cided, that a station-house of a railroad corporation, where large
sums of money are sometimes kept, which have been received
in the sale of tickets, is not an " office," within the meaning of
those sections of the statute. And yet it is obvious that these
buildings are quite as likely to be the scene and the objects of
burglarious attempts, as any of those which are under the pro-
tection of the law. I can see no objection to a provision of
law which shall make the breaking and entering of any build-
ing, with intent to commit a felony therein, a penal offence,
whether the intent is consummated by the commission of the
felony or not.

My attention having been particularly directed to these appa-
rent defects in the existing criminal jurisprudence of the Com-
monwealth, I have deemed it my duty to state them to the Leg-
islature, under that provision of the act defining my duties,
which requires me to make " such statements and observations,
as in my opinion, the criminal jurisprudence, and the proper
administration of the criminal law may warrant and require."

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT. [Feb.

It is a source of congratulation that the existing system of
our criminal jurisprudence is so well adapted to our condition,
and has proved itself to be so free from objectionable features or
prominent defects, as to furnish the occasion for so few sugges-
tions of this nature, as are herein indicated for the consideration
of the Legislature.

All which is respectfully submitted, by

JOHN H. CLIFFORD,

Attorney General.

ruary 15th, 1851.

i85i.] house—No. 72.

CASES

Conducted and argued by the Attorney General, from January
1, 1S50, to January 1, 1851.

County of Suffolk.

Commonwealth v. George Cox. Murder. Jury trial in S. J.
Court. Verdict, guilty of manslaughter. Sentence, 7 years
hard labor and 3 days solitary confinement State Prison.

Com. v. Thomas McNulty. Municipal Court. Information
— Second Comer to the State Prison Convicted. Sentence, 5
days additional.

Com. v. Benjamin Hood. Municipal Court. Information —
Second Comer to the State Prison. Convicted. Sentence, 5
days additional.

Com. v. John W. Webster. Municipal Court. Examination
before the Grand Jury, of complaint, for the murder of George
Parkman.

Indictment found and certified to S. J. Court.

Com. v. Charles Barnes. Municipal Court. Information —
Third Comer to the State Prison. Convicted. Sentence, 10
days additional.

Com. v. Albert White. Municipal Court. Information —
Third Comer to the State Prison. Convicted. Sentence, 10
days additional.

Com. v. William Smith. Municipal Court. Information —
Second Comer to the State Prison. Convicted. Sentence, 10
days additional.

Com. v. Michael Conners, Michael White, and John Hin-
chey. Municipal Court. Examination before the Grand Jury,
on complaint for murder. No bill found.

Com. v. John Lowell. Law argument, S. J. Court. Lar-
ceny. Exceptions from Municipal Court. Exceptions over-
ruled. Sentence, 18 months State Prison.

Com. v. John W. Webster. S. J. Court. Jury trial for mur-
der. Verdict, guilty. Sentence, death.

In the trial of this cause, I was assisted by George Bemis,
Esq., of the Suffolk Bar.

Com. v. John McDonald. Attempt to steal from the person.
2

10 ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT. [Feb.

Law argument, S. J. Court, on exceptions from Municipal
Court. Exceptions overruled — defendant and his sureties de-
faulted on recognizance.

Com. v. Certain Lottery Tickets. By information. Law ar-
gument, S. J. Court, on exceptions from Municipal Court — con-
tinued by the court for advisement.

Com. v. John C. Gale. Receiving Stolen Goods. Law ar-
gument, S. J. Court, on exceptions from Municipal Court— ex-
ceptions overruled. Prisoner sentenced, 18 months State Prison.

Com. v. John Betton. Arson. Law argument, S. J. Court,
on exceptions from Municipal Court — exceptions overruled.
Prisoner sentenced, 5 years State Prison.

John W. Webster v. The Commonwealth. Law argument
on application for writ of error. S. J. Court. Petition for writ
of error dismissed. In this case, I was assisted by George Be-
mis, Esq., of the SufTolk Bar.

Harrison Wingate v. The Commonwealth. Writ of error to
reverse a judgment of the Municipal Court. Law argument, S.
J. Court — writ of error dismissed. Judgment for the Common-
wealth.

Com. v. Peter Lynch. Municipal Court. Examination be-
fore the Grand Jury of complaint for murder. No bill found
for the capital offence. Drew an indictment for an aggravated
assault.

Com. v. The South Reading Branch Railroad.

Same v. The Essex Railroad Company. Informations — al-
leging usurpations by these corporations upon the rights of the
Commonwealth, filed in the S. J. Court. Orders of notice is-
ued returnable before the court in the county of Essex, No-
vember term, 1S50.

Com. by Information, at the relation of John W. Emery and
als. v. The Proprietors of the Meeting-house in Federal street,
Boston. This information, for an alleged misapplication of a
charity, was filed in the S. J. Court, at the instance of the rela-
tors, and is conducted on their behalf, by their counsel, Hon.
Rufus Choate and J. C. Adams, Esq.

County of Middlesex.

Commonwealth v. Anthony O'Donnell. C. C. Pleas. Ex-
amination before the Grand Jury, of complaint for the murder

1851] HOUSE— No. 72. 11

of John Heveren. Bill found for murder, and certified to S. J.
Court.

Com. v. Daniel H. Pearson. Murder. Jury trial in S. J.
Court. Verdict, guilty. Sentence, death.

In this trial, I was assisted by Charles R. Train, Esq., Dis-
trict Attorney for the Northern District.

Com. v. Anthony O'Donnell. S. J. Court. Jury trial for
murder. Verdict, guilty of manslaughter. Sentence, 7 years
State Prison.

In this trial, I was assisted by C. R. Train, Esq., District At-
torney.

Com. v. James Gould. S. J. Court. Civil action; for dis-
turbing an easement in lands adjacent to the State Prison in
Charlestown. Continued.

Com. v. Worthy Parker. S. J. Court. Exceptions from C.
C. Pleas. Assault, &c. Exceptions waived, and defendant and
sureties defaulted on recognizance.

Com. v.Valentine Rollins. Malicious Tresj)ass. S. J. Court.
Exceptions from C. C. Pleas — exceptions sustained, and judg-
ment arrested.

Com. v. Albion B. Gee and al. Indictment for ". Selling up
a Public Amusement without License" in violation of the pro-
visions of the act of 1849, chap. 231. S. J. Court. Law argu-
ment on exceptions from C. C. Pleas — exceptions sustained,
and case remanded to C. C. Pleas for new trial.

Com. v. Samuel White. Breaking and entering an Office,
with intent to Steal. Law argument. S. J. Court, on exceptions
from C. C. Pleas — exceptions sustained ; verdict set aside, and
indictment nol pross'd.

Com. v. The Fitch burg Railroad Company. Nuisance. Ex-
ceptions from C. C. Pleas. S. J. Court. Continued nisi.

Com. v. Henry Rice and al. Adultery. S. J. Court. Ex-
ceptions from C C. Pleas. Continued nisi.

Com. v. Walter Batherick. Violation of License Law. S. J.
Court. Exceptions from C. C. Pleas. Continued nisi.

County of Berkshire.

Commonwealth v. Henry Shaw. Violation of License Law.
Law argument, S. J. Court. Exceptions from C. C. Pleas —
exceptions overruled, and remitted to C. C. Pleas for sentence.

12 ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT. [Feb.

Com. v. The Tenth Mass. Turnpike Corporation. Informa-
tion in the nature of a quo warranto. Law argument thereon,
S. J. Court. Continued by the court, for advisement.

Com. v. William Bullman. Rape. Jury trial in S J. Court.
Verdict, guilty. Sentence, death.

County of Hampden.

Commonwealth v. John Healy and als. Assault with intent
to Murder. Law argument, S. J. Court, on exceptions from
C. C. Pleas — exceptions overruled. Remitted to C. C. Pleas for
sentence.

County of Hampshire.

Commonwealth v. Milo A. Taylor. Uttering Counterfeit
Bank Bills. Law argument, S. J. Court, on exceptions from
C. C. Pleas, and motion in arrest of judgment. Exceptions
sustained — judgment arrested, and new trial ordered in C. C.
Pleas.

County of Franklin.

Commonwealth v. Calvin Shattuck. Assault. &c. S. J.
Court. Law argument, on exceptions from C. C. Pleas — ex-
ceptions overruled, and remitted to C. C. Pleas for sentence.

Com. v. Patience Bond and als. Forcible Detainer. Law
argument in S. J. Court, on exceptions from C. C. Pleas — ex-
ceptions overruled, and remitted to C. C. Pleas for sentence.

Com. v. Patience Bond and als. Assault, &c. S. J. Court.
Exceptions from C. C. Pleas, and motion in arrest of judgment.
Continued.

Patience Bond and als. Petitioners for new trial in C. C.
Pleas. S. J. Court. Exceptions to ruling of C. C. P., refusing
a new trial. Continued.

County of Worcester.

Commonwealth v. George Wetherbee. Nuisance. S. J. Court,
on exceptions from C. C. Pleas — exceptions waived. Remitted
to C. C. Pleas for sentence.

Com. v. Samuel A. Smith and als. Complaint for Breach of
the Peace, upon the 24th sec, 85th chap. Rev. Stat. S. J.

1851.] HOUSE— No. 72. 13

Court. Law argument, on exceptions from C. C. Pleas. Con-
tinued by the court, for advisement.

Com. v. Joseph Miller. Uttering Counterfeit Bank Bills.
S. J. Court, on exceptions from C. C. Pleas — exceptions waived;
remitted to C. C. Pleas for sentence.

Com. v. James Reardon. Adultery. Law argument, in S.
J. Court, on exceptions from C. C. Pleas — exceptions overruled.
Prisoner sentenced, 1 year House of Correction.

County of Essex.

Commonwealth v. Rachel Sharp. Murder. S. J. Court. In
this case, which was an indictment against the defendant for
the murder of her infant child by poisoning, the jury having
failed to agree on a verdict, and since the trial, Dr. Martin
Gay, one of the principal witnesses for the government, having
deceased, I permitted the prisoner to be discharged on her own
recognizance.

Com. v. Josiah Herrick. ) Complaints for Violation of License

Same v. same. S Law. Law argument, in S. J.

Court, on report of C. C. Pleas, upon motions in arrest of judg-
ment— motions in arrest overruled. Remitted to C. C. Pleas
for sentence.

Com. v. South Reading Branch Railroad. Information in
the nature of a quo warranto, filed in Suffolk county. Order
of notice made returnable before the S. J. Court in this county.
Entered, and continued nisi, for argument.

Com. v. Essex Railroad Company. Information — same as
last preceding.

These cases, which involve important questions respecting
the powers and duties of railroad corporations, under the char-
ters granted them by the Legislature, are still pending in the
Supreme Judicial Court.

Com. v. Edward Bickell and Elbridge Pike. Rape. Jury
trial, in S. J. Court, in which I was assisted by A. Huntington,
Esq., District Attorney for the Eastern District.

At the close of the second day of the trial of this case, I be-
came satisfied that the evidence would not warrant a conviction
of the prisoners, and thereupon, with the concurrence and appro-
bation of the court, I permitted them to take a verdict of ac-
quittal by consent of the government.

14 ATTORNEY GENERALS REPORT. [Feb.

County of Bristol.

Commonwealth v. Wooster Carpenter. Nuisance. S. J.
Court, on exceptions from C. C. Pleas — exceptions overruled,
and continued for judgment on the verdict.

Benjamin F. Dexter v. The Commonwealth in Error. Writ
of error, to reverse the judgment of a justice of the peace, sen-
tencing the plaintiff in error to the State Reform School, during
his minority, or, in the alternative, to the House of Correction,
for the same term. Error admitted — sentence adjudged erro-
neous, and prisoner discharged.

JOHN H. CLIFFORD,

Attorney General.
February 15th, 1851.

1851.]

HOUSE— No. 72.

15

Table I.
SUFFOLK COUNTY.

OFFENCES.

3

c

|

IF

be

■3
e

V
PL,

m

o

2

K |
o •-

COSTS.

O

c
o

5-
<

"o
S5

xn

O
2

3°

Against the person fe-
loniously,

18*

10

2

1

3

1

$762 44

Against the person not

feloniously, .

235

143

24

9

9

31

8

11

4,988 30

Against property with
violence,

107

77

13

4

10

3

2,074 85

Against property with-
out violence, .

364

216

47

12

15

42

20

12

6,742 44

Other offences, .

911

502

56

44

58

135

5?

59

8,273 83

Total,

1635*

948

142

65

87

221

89

82

#22,841 86

Table of Offences.

Adultery,

8

1

1

1

5

144 80

Assault, .

8

5

2

111 74

Assault and Battery, .

162

96

20

6

5

20

7

8

3,468 09

Assault on Officer, .

13

10

1

1

246 85

Assault on Watchman,

35

23

2

2

6

1

703 35

Assault with dangerous

weapon,

3

2

1

96 22

Assault, felonious,

5

3

1

1

169 20

Assault, felonious, and

Highway Robbery, .

1

1

29 12

Assault, felonious, with
intent to Kill,

1

1

32 63

Assault, felonious, and

Larceny,

6

5

1

150 91

Arson,

1

1

12 41

' One sent to Supreme Court.

16

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Feb.

Table I. — Continued.

OFFENCES.

□

3

s

eu

a
_o

a
o
O

cr

■51

2

Ph

"5
Z

br.

a

■a

<!
o

tf 1

0 •-

COSTS.

Bail,

75

45

26

4

#406 15

Burglary,

2

1

1

69 05

Cheating,

22

4

1

2

4

3

7

1

250 09

Common Drunkard, .

5

2

1

1

1

71 40

Common Night-walker,

2

2

37 88

Conspiracy to Cheat, .

4

1

2

1

52 06

Counterfeit Money, ha-
ving and uttering, .

11

6

3

1

1

240 36

Cruelty to Animals, .

7

3

2

1

1

106 05

Disturbing Meeting, .

1

1

8 11

Disturbing School,

3

3

63 29

Embezzlement, .

4

1

1

72 41

Escape, .

8

8

93 59

Forgery and Uttering,

3

1

2

82 44

Fifth Comer, .

1

1

9 98

Harbor, Intrusion into,

9

9

443 03

Highway Robbery,

2

2

126 56

Highway Robbery and
Larceny,

2

2

73 48

House-breaking and
Laceny,

21

18

2

342 09

Illegal Voting, .

1

1

Keeping House of Ill-
fame, .

45

15

3

2

8

1

5

11

647 69

Keeping Noisy House,

28

16

1

6

1

2

1

1

336 64

Keeping Gambling do.,

10

2

2

1

1

4

76 08

Keeping Gambling do.,
License and Sunday
Law,

3

2

]

11 07

1851.]

HOUSE— No. 72.

17

Table 1. — Continued.

OFFENCES.

a
o

V

o

£

o

'>

s
o
O

'5
<

o

c
a

Ph

m

t5

<

o
2

i 6
OS §

It

Q "

COSTS.

Larceny, .

280

183

35

6

5

33

9

9

$5,282 23

License Law, .

321

162

17

15

11

80

20

16

2,342 87

License and Sunday
Law,

202

124

4

2

16

20

22

14

1,603 02

License and Sunday
Law & Noisy House,

60

36

1

6

14

3

559 55

License and Sunday
Law and Brothel, .

5

2

2

1

15 43

License Law and Noisy
House, .

33

21

5

2

4

1

257 96

License Law, Noisy
House and Brothel,

3

2

27 87

Letting Furniture for
Brothel,

1

13 12

Letting House for do.,

3

2

1

29 43

Letting House for Gam-
ing, &.C.,

Lunatic, .

1
14

14

I

1

5 09
230 09

Malicious Mischief, .

3

1

1

1

14 07

Manslaughter, .

2

1

50 99

Murder, .

*3

2

329 59

Noisy House & Brothel,

6

4

1

1 .

100 51

Nuisance,

1

1

12 04

Open Lewdness and
Exposure,

5

2

2

85 49

Obtaining Goods by
False Pretences, .

5

2

1

1

1

39 07

Obtaining Money by
False Pretences,

1

1

18 11

Perjury, .

5

2

2

1

16 97

"One case to Supreme J. Court.

18 ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

Table I. — Continued.

[Feb.

OFFENCES.

3

4)

O

£

c
o

e
o

o

2
'5

<

y
o

"o
Z

'S
a

m

o
Z

-6

V

<

o
Z

K 1
= S

? St

J_ c

a, o
Q

COSTS.

Receiv'g Stolen Goods,

25

14

5

1

2

2

1

$541 53

Receiving Stolen Mon-
ey, . .

2

1

1

33 46

Riot,

3

1

1

1

73 20

Riot and Assault,

5

1

1

1

1

1

76 52

Runaway Apprentice,

3

2

1

53 02

Rescue, .

5

4

1

41 94

Second Comer, .

19

19

194 08

Shop-breaking and Lar-
ceny, .

81

56

10

3

9

3

1,601 36

Selling Uns'rvey'd Lum-
ber,

1

1

1 38

Selling Unwholesome
Provisions,

1

1

51 81

Sunday Law and Noisy
House, .

4

3

1

33 59

Third Comer, .

2

2

10 22

Uttering Forged Check,

1

1

13 57

Uttering Forged Order,

2

1

1

33 99

Uttering Forged Note,

2

1

1

29 99

Violation of City Ordi-
nance, .

6

5

1

50 52

Vessel -breaking & Lar-
ceny, .

2

2

49 94

Writing Threatening
Letters,

5

3

2

• •

133 48

1635

948

142

65 |

87

221

89 82

#22,841 86

1851.]

HOUSE— No. 72.

19

Table II. Eastern District.
Essex County constitutes this District.
COUNTY OF ESSEX.

OFFENCES.

c

2

a
.2

c
o
O

<

y

o

"o
Z

c

'■6
a

02

o

<

z

i w
5 '2
3°

COSTS.

Against the person, fe-
loniously,

Against the person, not
feloniously, .

Against property, with
violence,

Against property, with-
out violence, .

Other offences, .

5

51

31

75
276

19

13

30
109

2

9

1

8
10

7

7
25

2

11

14

20
115

1

5

3

10
17

#357 78

1,405 45

890 98

2,162 32

4,438 88

Total,

438

171

30

39

162

36

$9,255 41

Table of Offences.

Adultery,

Attempt to Commit Of-
fence, .

Assault, .

Assault and Battery, .

Assault, Felonious,

Assault on Officer, .

Assuming to be Officer,

Bigamy, .

Card Playing, .

Cheating,

Common Drunkard, .

Conspiracy,

3

1
" 5
40

11
3

8

1

1

2
17

1

1

1
3

7
3

1

1
5

1

2

6

1

5

1
4

1

5
1

1

2
1

73 48

35 36
67 78

660 79
76 43
21 04
39 03
73 53
31 32

218 52
67 51

300 29

20

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Feb.

Table II. — Continued.

OFFENCES.

1
•a

s

C

a
o
O

5

'5

cr

><

35
0

£

"0
z

c
1

so

0

O

z

i 6
« a

0 .S
— St.

Q

COSTS.

Contempt,

10

3

5

2

#76 20

Counterfeit Money, hav-
ing, &c,

3

1

2

165 80

Disorderly House,

1

1

•

56 68

Disorderly Person,

1

1

14 90

Disturbing the Peace,

1

1

21 92

Disturbing Public Meet-
ing,

1

1

67 70

Disturbing School,

2

2

33 88

Escape, .

1

1

11 35

Forgery, .

2

1

1

124 14

Gaming, .

5

1

2

2

108 73

Highway,

3

3

39 79

House-breaking,

3

3

41 41

Inciting Dog,

1

1

19 98

Labor on Lord's Day,

1

1

40 89

Larceny, .

48

29

4

6

1

8

1,127 81

License Law, .

195

83

1

21

86

4

2,560 47

Lewdness,

1

1

16 89

Lewd Cohabitation, .

10

4

1

3

2

268 51

Lottery Law,

2

1

1

65 43

Malicious Burning,

7

2

1

2

2

302 73

Malicious Mischief, .

1

'

1

25 51

Nuisance,

8

1

2

5

100 15

Obstructing Course of
Justice,

i

1

8 73

Perjury, .

3

1

2

32 12

1851.]

HOUSE— No. 72.

21

Table II. — Continued.

OFFENCES.

a
o

o

1

a
c
O

'5

T3
O

(5

bio

a

4)

Ph

55

o
2

£

•<

o

4) 0)
PS |

g.s

si Si

COSTS.

Procuring Abortion, .

Railroad Law, .

Rape,

Receiv'g Stolen Goods,

Riot,

School Law,

Shop-breaking, .

Surety of Peace,

Vagabond,

3

1
4
11

7

2

21

1

1

4

8
1

2
2

1

1
1
2

11
1
2

12
1

1
1

$624 05

14 13

281 35

526 05

165 11

47 69

546 84

24 31

29 08

438

71

30

39 i 162

36

#9,255 41

22

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Feb.

NORTHERN DISTRICT.

This District comprises the County of Middlesex.
Table III. Northern District.

OFFENCES.

Against the person, fe-
loniously,

Against the person, not
feloniously, .

Against property, with
violence,

Against property, with-
out violence, .

Other offences, .

Total,

10
55

■II

75
L56

:uo

6 .
28 2

188 17

1
4
2
9

11

56

Table of Offences.

Adultery,

Arson,

Assault, Aggravated, .

Assault and Battery, .

Assault, Felonious, .

Assault on Officer,

Burglary,

Cheating,

Common Drunkard, .

Contempt,

Counterfeit Money, .

Destroy'g Town Pound

1851.]

HOUSE— No. 72.
Table III. — Continued.

23

OFFENCES.

s
o

.2
6

c
<

Nol.Pros'd. [

bio
s
-3

S

PL,

w

o

<
o

tf 1
— So

COSTS.

Disorderly House,

2

1

1

#33 82

Disturbing Peace,

2

2

45 62

Disturbing School,

1

1

12 32

Drunkenness, .

11

5

]

L 4

155 17

Embezzlement, .

1

]

L

38 96

Escape, .

5

2

2

.

L

46 05

False Pretences,

6

]

L 1

75 40

Forcible Entry,

1

1

6 18

Forgery, .

11

8

1

261 48

Fornication,

4

1

'

L

48 36

Gaming, .

6

5

182 13

Gross Carelessness, .

2

1

46 54

Larceny, .

49

34

J .

10

1,558 34

License Law,

49

26

]

L 4

5

1,184 59

Lottery, .

2

1

1

66 88

Libel,

1

1

10 28

Malicious Mischief, .

5

1

1

3

157 59

Malicious Trespass, .

2

1

1

69 54

Manslaughter, .

2

2

652 05

Murder, .

3

3

77 44

Nuisance,

7

2

111 62

Polygamy,

1

18 87

Receiv'g Stolen Goods,

2

1

16 88

Riot,

1

1

12 73

Robbery, .

2

2

204 70

Selling Unwholesome
Provisions,

1

]

I

9 15

24

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Feb.

Table III. — Continued.

OFFENCES.

| J

° o

£ | u

2

<

T3
O
£

z

be

«
o
Z

1

o

0

Z

i 4)

as p

- N

— Sd

0) °

Q

COSTS.

Stubborn Child,

Subornation of Perjury,

Threatening &. Threat-
ening Letter, .

Uttering Bill in simil-
itude of Bank Bill, .

Violation of By-law, .

Violation of " Lord's
day," .

1

6

1
1

3

2
2

1
1

1

2

1
1

1

#5 91

19 36

164 22

20 41

33 39

340

188 17

24

41

56

8 ! 6

#8,910 65

1851.

HOUSE— No. 72.

SOUTHERN DISTRICT.

This District comprises the Counties of Bristol, Plymouth,
Nantucket, Barnstable, and Dukes County.

Table IV. Southern District.

BRISTOL COUNTY.

<^— — 8H—H— iMiiininrfmntf.Wfi in i ii «m=i»'Hrri J-> ifMmiaiBMffl^B— — — —

OFFENCES.

_o
a

o

s
_o

■>

c
o
O

'5
w

<

o

£

"o

s

m

o

0

S3

COSTS.

Against the person fe-
loniously,

Against the person not
feloniously, .

Against property with
violence,

Against property with-
out violence, .

Other offences, .

1

24

13

41
175

10
7

26

88

1
2

1

6

6

2

3
41

16

1
4
2

11
17

3

7

$425 77

369 89

827 77
1,981 70

Total,

254

131

10

52

16

35

10

#3,605 13

Table of Offences.

Adultery,

Affray, .

Arson,

Assault, .

Assault, Aggravated, .

Assault on Officer, .

Auction Law, .

Breaking the Peace, .

Burglary,

Contempt,

12
1
3

11
4
8
1
2
2
4

3
1
1

3
2
5

2
4

4

4
1

2

5

2
1

3

1

2

1

139 28
20 40
46 55
179 79
165 79
80 19

22 25

58 06
32 GO

26

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Feb.

Table IV. — Continued.

OFFENCES.

B

s

V

g

I

s

6

'5
<

y

o

£

"o

bin

s
'■5

£

o

2

-6
1

o
Z

c *

Q

COSTS.

Cruelty to Horse,

1

l

#17 00

Drunkenness, .

10

6

2

2

175 64

Disturbing School,

2

1

1

44 33

Disturbing Worship, .

1

1

34 47

Escape, .

1

1

2 95

Exposure of Person, .

1

1

•

False Pretences,

1

1

•

Fornication,

2

2

24 66

Larceny, .

40

26

3

10

827 77

License Law, .

75

38

3

20

10

1

3

812 62

Malicious Mischief, .

2

1

1

50 02

Murder, .

1

1

Nuisance,

40

19

9

6

6

490 28

Rescue, .

1

1

20 08

Scire Facias,

15

12

1

2

61 80

Shop-breaking and Lar-
ceny, .

8

4

2

2

265 28

Sunday Law, .

2

2

21 45

Violation of Gaming
Law, .

1

1

11 87

Violation of Peddling

Law,

2

2

254

131

10

52

16

35

10

#3,605 13

1851.]

HOUSE— No. 72.

27

Table V. Southern District. — Continued.
PLYMOUTH COUNTY.

OFFENCES.

ft

fe-

not

with

Against the person,
loniously,

Against the person,
feloniously, .

Against property,
violence,

Against property, with-
out violence, .

Other offences, .

Total,

25

12

12

#156 14

334 44

40 53
516 64

#1,047 75

Table of Offences.

Arson,

Assault, .

Assault, Aggravated, .

Assault on Officer,

License Law, .

Larceny, .

Not keeping High Sch'l

Nuisance,

Perjury, .

Selling Obscene Book,

Shop-breaking, .

Violation of Peddling
Law,

25

12

12

59 07
76 55
20 52
458 35
40 53
14 13
16 70

334 44

27 46

$1,047 75

28

ATTORNEY GENERALS REPORT.

[Feb.

Table VI. Southern District. — Continued.
BARNSTABLE AND NANTUCKET.

OFFENCES.

.2

a
■a

s

a

■p
o

he

EL,

~6

<

i 6
_ «

COSTS.

£

§

a"
u

<

~o
2

m

c

2

Q

Against the person, fe-
loniously,

Against the person, not
feloniously, .

1

1

Against property, with
violence,

2

2

.

Against property, with-
out violence, .

1

1

Other offences, .

12

1

1

9

1

#26 21

Total,

10

1

1

9

5

$26 21

Table of Offences.

BARNSTABLE.

Arson,

1

1

♦

Larceny, .

1

Nuisance,

1

1

•

•

Riot,

1

•

1

•

Shop-breaking, .

1

1

•

NANTUCKET.

Assault on Officer, .

1

1

Common Drunkard, .

1

1

14 82

Malicious Mischief, .

1

1

11 39

Rescue, .

8

8

16

1

1

9

5

$26 21

1851.]

HOUSE— No. 72.

29

Table VI. Recapitulation. Whole No. in the Southern
District.

OFFENCES.

3

2

s

£
o

3

T

<

8

a,

"3

Z

'■5

a

p-

M
o
Z

*6
£

<
o
Z

Si

c S
o .2

SI o
Q

COSTS.

Against the person, fe-
loniously,

1

1

Against the person, not
feloniously, .

34

12

3

6

10

3

$581 91

Against property, with
violence,

29

14

2

5

1

7

704 33

Against property, with-
out violence, .

45

27

2

3

13

868 30

Other offences, .

220

104

10

51

26

21

8

2,524 55

Total,

329

157

17

G5

27

52

11

$4,679 09

30

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Feb.

MIDDLE DISTRICT.

This District comprises the Counties of Worcester and Nor-
folk.

Table VIII. Middle District.

COUNTY OF WORCESTER.

OFFENCES.

c

3

o

£

g

e
6

'5
cr

<

£

"5

a
'■£

a

V

Cl,
03

S

0

O

<

o

— b£

Q

COSTS.

Against the person, fe-
loniously,

Against the person, not
feloniously, .

Against property, with
violence,

Against property, with-
out violence, .

Other offences, .

3

44

9

29
292

23

8

9

98

12

5
17

1

2
75

5

3
61

3
3

1

10
41

$50 21

1,178 98

219 56

878 34
4,192 97

Total,

377

138

34

78

69

58

$6,520 06

Table of Offences.

Abduction,

Adultery,

Arson,

Assault and Battery, .

Assault on Officer,

Assault, with intent to
Ravish,

Burglary,

Cheating,

Common Drunkard, .

1
6
2
41
3

1
1
6
5

2

2
22

1

2

1
12

1

1

1
2

4
1

1

1
3

2

1

1
1
4

27 69
289 40

17 25

1,122 25

56 70

5 24

28 78
117 92
129 16

1851.]

HOUSE— No. 72.

31

Table VIII. — Continued.

OFFENCES.

3

o

S

y

o

£

a

"3
<

i

—

>
3
=, COSTS.

o

a
o
O

<

"o
2

02

o
Z

S5

-

Contempt of Court,

18

11

4

3

$129 59

Counterf 't Money, pass-
ing,

1

1

219 71

Disorderly House,

1

1

20 55

Disturbing Peace,

3

3

•

Disturbing Religious
Meeting,

1

1

18 43

Disturbing School,

3

1

2

84 82

Employing Children,
without Instruction,

2

2

19 24

Exhibition, Unlawful, .

1

1

29 07

Gaming, .

14

4

3

5

2

120 62

Larceny, .

21

8

1

2

5

483 27

Lascivious Cohabitat'n,

2

2

43 74

License Law,

175

71

35

34

26

2,983 13

Lottery, .

1

1

9 15

Manslaughter, .

1

1

17 28

Malicious Mischief, .

4

2

2

17 32

Nuisance,

26

2

6

15

3

193 18

Perjury, .

1

23 40

Receiv'g Stolen Goods,

1

57 44

Riotous Assembly,

1

1

.

Sending Threatening
Letter, .

1

1

Scire Facias,

27

3

24

82 20

Shop-breaking, .

6

6

173 53

377

138

34

78

69 | 58

•

#6,520 06

32

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Feb.

Table IX. Middle District. — Continued.
NORFOLK COUNTY.

OFFENCES.

o

c
c

">

c

0

O

w
<

£

"o
Z

X

<

c
Z

i 6
c -2

COSTS.

Against the person, fe-
loniously,

1

i

$22 95

Against the person, not
feloniously, .

14

11

1

1

i

327 27

Against property, with
violence,

21

18

1

1

i

597 42

Against property, with-
out violence, .

26

17

1

t 4

. ': l

559 90

Other offences, .

84
146

36

82

9
11

12
14

It

1!

» 12
) 19

962 32

Total,

1

2,469 86

Table of Offences.

...

Adultery,

3

1

2

1

46 29

Assault and Battery, .

13

10

317 48

Assault on Officer,

1

1

9 79

Assault, with intent to

Ravish,

1

22 95

Barn Burning, .

2

2

252 22

Cheating,

2

1

30 36

Common Drunkard, .

1

1

•

27 31

Contempt of Court,

2

2

•

9 07

Cruelty to Horse,

1

23 01

Fornication,

3

3

32 24

House-Breaking,

2

2

J •

76 05

Indecent Exposure, .

1

.

! i

13 58

Larceny, .

21

14

1

l 2

1

367 97

License Law, .

52

27

9

8

,

> 3

721 57

1851.]

HOUSE— No. 72.

33

Table IX. — Continued.

OFFENCES.

a

4)

a

">
3
O

Acquittals. !
Nol. Pros'd. 1

o5

<

(2 1

a a
o .2

O °

Q

COSTS.

Lottery, .

Malicious Trespass, .

Nuisance,

Receiv'g Stolen Goods,

School Law, Violation
of, . . .

Scire Facias,

Sending Threatening
Letter, .

Shop-breaking, .

Sodomy, .

1

2
13

1

1

5

1

16

1

1

1

2
14

1
3

8
1

1
1

i

i

4

1

$22 00
17 08
55 50

144 49

24 95

9 81
246 14

146 82

11 1 14

19

19

1

$2,469 86

Table X. Recapitulation. Whole No. in Middle District.

OFFENCES.

Against the person, fe-
loniously,

Against the person, not
feloniously, .

Against property, with
violence,

Against property, with-
out violence, .

Other offences, .

Total,

58

30

55
376

523

34

26

26
134

220

L3

#73 16

1,506 22

816 98

1,438 24

5,155 32

$8,989 92

34

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Feb.

WESTERN DISTRICT.

This District comprises tiie Counties of Hampshire, Hamp-
den, Franklin, and Berkshire.

'Fable XI. Western District.
HAMPSHIRE COUNTY.

OFFENCES.

n

_c

3

o

£

c
o

3
O

'a

<

£

bio

55

o

-6
2

o

2

i 6
Q °

COSTS.

Against the person, fe-
loniously,

1

1

$21 68

Against the person, not
feloniously, .

8

6

1

1

218 72

Against property, with
violence,

5

2

2

1

168 77

Against property, with-
out violence, .

39

24

3

4

6

1

1

872 47

Other offences, .

45

18

6

11

8

2

747 17

Total,

98

51

10

18

15

1

3

#2,028 81

Table of Offences.

Adultery,

1

1

12 53

Arson,

2

1

1

108 82

Assault, .

6

4

1

1

152 63

Assault and Battery, .

2

2

66 09

Assault, Felonious,

1

1

21 68

Burglary,

2

1

1

48 62

Carrying Spirits into
Prison,

1

1

8 12

Common Drunkard, .

1

1

13 50

Conspiracy,

3

2

1

349 05

1851.]

IIOUS R— No. 72.

35

Table XI. — Continued.

OFFENCES.

o
o

c
o

a

6

5

<

o

bio

s
o

32

M
o
25

^3
<

o

i

c
o

o

0

cognizance.

o

H

Contempt of Court,

5

3

2

#12 22

Disorderly House,

1

28 14

Embezzlement, .

1

1

12 81

Escape, .

2

2

18 82

False Pretences,

2

1

12 38

Forgery, .

2

1

51 39

Fornication,

1

1

13 54

Habeas Corpus,

1

18 80

House-breaking',

1

1

11 33

Larceny, .

20

15

3

1

377 82

License Law, .

23

2

10

3

]

L 147 44

Nuisance,

3

2

1

82 77

Passing Counterf 't Mo-
ney,

3

3

•

3 45

Passing do. Bills,

9

3

3

3

'

232 42

Perjury, .

1

.

i

28 91

Receiv'g Stolen Goods,

2

2

182 20

Riot,

1

1

11 96

Sunday Law,

1

1

1 37

98

51

10

Is"

15

1

S

#2,028 81

3G

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Feb.

Table XII. — Western District — Continued.
HAMPDEN COUNTY.

1 i

1 1

OFFENCES. | I

! p

_3

o

U

Acquittals.
Nol. Pios'd. I

c
o
Ph

!

£

■Si

O

i5

« 1

— So
C- °
o u

c

COSTS.

Against the person, fe-
loniously,

Against the person, not
feloniously, .

Against property, with
violence,

Against property, with-
out violence, .

Other offences, .

3
34

7

35

88

1

12
3

15

16

7

2
2

4
G

1

7

3

8
35

i
i

i

7
8

•

3

3
21

$97 62

713 88

195 22

801 73
1,382 10

Total,

1G7

47

11

10

54

18

27

$3,190 55

Table of Offences.

Adultery,

Assault, .

Assault and Battery, .

Assault, Felonious,

Assault on Officer,

Burglary,

Bad Road,

Capias.

Common Drunkard, .

Disturbing Public Wor-
ship,

Embezzlement, .

False Pretences,

11

1

30

2

2
2

3

5

2
G

5
1
9

1
2
2

I

1
2

o
6

4

2

7
1

2

2
2

1
1

1
1
4

1

3

3G8 38
80 85

575 14
82 01
21 28

151 06

13 54

2 45

52 12

203 51

51 77

145 48

1851.]

HOUSE— No. 72.

37

Table XII. — Continued,

OFFENCES.

5
a

1

5

O

'3

o
"o

c

'-5
5

Oh

m

o

2:

T3

-S
iC

i j5
OS fe

£- c

Q °

COSTS.

Fornication,

3

3

#56 58

Gambling- House,

1

13 47

House of Ill-fame,

1

33 97

Illegal Marrying,

1

1

49 89

Keeping Bowling Alley,

2

2

86

Kidnapping,

1

1

36 61

Lascivious Cohabitat'n,

1

21 74

Larceny, .

24

12

O

8

1

1

539 56

License Law, .

11

2

3

5

1

90 99

Libel,

1

1

24 21

Malicious Mischief, .

6

2

2

1

103 62

Murder, .

1

1

15 61

Nuisance,

10

8

2

92 02

Not stated,

1

1

36 31

Perjury, .

3

2

1

56 83

Passing Counterf 't Bills,

o

2

43 47

Scire Facias,

22

(3

16

85 22

Selling Lottery Tickets,

1

21 45

Selling Obscene Pic-

ture,

27 42

Shop-breaking, ■

3

1

44 16

Sunday Law, .

1

8 07

Trespass,

1

40 30

1(17

47

11

10

54

]

8

27

$3,1!)0 55

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Feb,

Table XIII. Western District. — Continued.
FRANKLIN COUNTY.

OFFENCES.

c
o

3
2

s
_o

'>

s
o

o

'5

<

t

£ 0

: o '
2 fc >

3

5 ~

COSTS.

Against the person, fe-
loniously,

Against the person, not
feloniously, .

15

7

7

1

$157 37

Against property, with
violence,

2

1

1

53 27

Against property, with-
out violence, .

16

9

3

I 2

t

390 37

Other offences, .

57

34

8

7 8

469 32

Total,

90

50

1

18

3 12

$1,070 33

Table of Offences.

Adultery,

1

1

20 99

Arson,

1

1

34 17

Assault, .

13

6

7

-

121 03

Assault and Battery, .

1

1

13 74

Assault on Officer,

1

1

39 13

Bad Road,

2

1

1

6 62

Disturbing Religious

Worship,

1

1

37 65

Embezzlement, .

1

1

34 60

False Pretences,

1

1

22 60

Forcible Entry,

1

1

19 10

Forgery, .

1

]

I

.

1851.]

HOUSE— No. 72.
Table XIII. — Continued.

39

OFFENCES.

a
o

£

s
_o

'>
o
U

°3
<

o

"o
Z

too

V

Oh

M
o
Z

<
o
Z

;_ c

D COSTS.

Keeping Bowling Alley,

Lareeny, .

License Law, .

Malicious Mischief, .

Malicious Trespass, .

Motion for New Trial,

Nuisance,

Passing Counterf t Coin,

Scire Facias,

Threatening,

2

9

42

3

1
2
2
1
1
3

1

6

30

2

c

]

I

L

*

1

2

1
2

1

5
1

1

#230 02
265 86
68 50
35 86
52 64
19 99
21 39

6 44

90

50

1

18

8

12

1

#1,070 33

40

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Feb.

Table XIV. Western District.— Continued.
BERKSHIRE COUNTY.

OFFENCES.

a
o

£

c

o

u

'5
<

2
£

Z

bio

£

o

~6

<

ill

- =1 COSTS.

Is]

Against the person, fe-
loniously,

Against the person, not
feloniously, .

Against property, with
violence,

Against property, with-
out violence, .

Other offences, .

2
15
9

15

103

1

3

8

7
56

3

2

8

6
5

1

2

2

26

1
1

3
3

1

5

$1,063 09
211 84
312 76

295 40

1,050 97

Total,

144

75

13

11

31

8

6

$2,934 06

Table of Offences.

Adultery,

Assault, .

Assault, Aggravated, .

Assault and Battery, .

Assault, Felonious,

Burglary,

Burning Barn, .

Capias,

Disturbing Public Wor-
ship,

Drunkenness, .

Embezzlement, .

False Pretences,

5
11

3
1
1
3
1
5

1
1

1

1
1
2

3

3
1

2

2

1

2

(

1
2

1
1

1
1

1

1
1

117 68
153 39

58 45

37 48
104 99
131 53

20 14

17 76

21 75
5 60

22 49

1851.]

HOUSE— No. 72.

41

Table XIV. — Continued.

OFFENCES.

s
o

a>
o

>
a
o
O

5

'3

<

2

55

S3
O

PL,

DQ

o
55

-Si

o

Q "

COSTS.

House-Breaking,

Larceny, .

License Law, .

Lewd Cohabitation, .

Malicious Mischief, .

Nuisance,

Passing Counterf 't Mo
ney, .

Profaneness,

Quo Warranto, .

Rape,

Riot,

Scire Facias,

Shop-breaking, .

3
10
69
2
2
2

3
1
1
1
2
12
2

3

4

39

1

3

1

1
1
9
2

i
]

>

3

1

1

2

18
1
1
2

1
1

1
1

l

I

$27 74

198 76

527 41

56 47

14 14

19 57

68 55
21 87
41 16
1,025 61
117 81
75 21
48 50

144

75

13

11

31

8

6

#2,934 06

\l

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT. [Feb. 1851.

Table^ XV. Recapitulation. Whole No. in the Western
District.

■ m Mxaaoni

OFFENCES.

1

o

o

£

c
o

c

6

a"
<

o

"3
55

ti

R
02

S

o

-6
a;

o

•<

0

2,

i si
« p

§|
— fci

Q °

COSTS.

Against the person fe-
loniously,

6

3

a

J

$1,182 39

Against the person not
feloniously, .

72

28

10

18

10

3

3

1,301 81

Against property with
violence,

23

13

1

2

4

3

730 02

Against property with-
out violence, .

105

55

4

8

16

16

2

4

2,359 97

Other offences, .

293

124

10

25

79

27

5

23

3,649 56

Total,

499

223

25

53

111

50

'

30

#9,223 75

Table XVI.

Showing the whole amount of the Criminal Business in the
Commonwealth.

OFFENCES.

q
o

<u

0

£

_o

6

'5
<

o

£
si

b'c

a

a
o
PL,

£
S

T3

<
t

p

COSTS.

Against the person, fe-
loniously,

#44

19

4

6

13

1

$3,324 44

Against the person, not
feloniously, .

505

264

61

46

39

66 10

19

11,023 75

Against property, with
violence,

264

1(58

so

10

26

37 3

6,570 74

Against property, with-
out violence, .

719

400

73

34

66

L06 22

18

15,683 32

Other offences, .

2232

1056

118

248

379

270, 68

93

27,298 43

Total,

*3764

1907

276

338

516

492 104

130

$03,900 68

'One sent to Supreme Court.