joined in the same indictment, Harris and Minion's case ......135

12 It is not necessary in an indictment on 15 Geo. II. c. 28. charging the offence of repeated utterings within ten days to shew that in the original indictment the offender was adjudged A COMMON UTTERER, Michel's case ............938

13 For the fact of the prisoner being a common utterer of base money is a necessary conclusion of law, and therefore need not be averred in an indictment on 15 Geo. II. c. 28. for repeated utterings, &c. Smith's case......... .......858

case

14 The charge in an indictment on 15 Geo. II. c. 28. s. 3. for uttering false money twice or oftener within ten days, must, to warrant the year's imprisonment inflicted by the third section of the Act, be contained in one count, E. Tandy's .833 15 Therefore where the first count charged, that A. on the 15th April was tried and convicted of uttering a sixpence, and that he was thereupon ordered and adjudged to be imprisoned one year; and the second count charged him with having uttered a half-crown on the 23d August, the indictment was held bad, Smith's case............856 16 A conviction on 15 Geo. II. c. 28. for two utterings on the same day, will warrant the year's imprisonment, though the indictment charge the first uttering on 14th February, and "that on the said 14th Febru

66

offender to be a common utterer of false money, Smith's case ......1001 18 This statute, though the words are general, "false and counterfeit money," does not extend to copper coin, Cirwan's case...834, notis. 19 To convict a prisoner on the 8 & 9 Will. III. c. 26. it must appear that the counterfeit money found in his custody was passable, and that the prisoner was possessed of all the implements and ingredients necessary to make such counterfeit money, Harris and Minion's ......135

case ......

20 The process of extracting latent silver from the body to the surface of base metal, by the power of aqua fortis, is a colouring within the words "shall colour with any "materials producing the colour of "silver," the 8 & 9 Will. III. c. 26. s. 4. Lavey and Parker's case, 153 21 As where the prisoner was apprehended in the very act of steeping round blanks of brass and silver in aqua fortis, which, when taken out, exhibited the appearance of lead, with the impression of a shilling on some of them, and which, by rubbing them, would perfectly resemble the silver coin, but in their then state would not pass current, yet the offence was held to be complete, for that these pieces were coloured with materials which produced the colour of silver, which is the very act prohibited by the statute, and that it was not necessary that the pieces so coloured should be current, Rex v. William Case, 154, notis.

22 Having knowingly in possession a puncheon for the purpose of coining, is within the meaning of the 8 & 9 Will. III. c. 26. Rowland Ridg...189 ley's case 23 Counterfeit monies are not to be considered as paid and put off, within the meaning of 8 & 9 Will.

III. c. 26. until the purchaser has paid the price agreed on, although the seller had actually counted out to him the quantity bargained for, for the offence is not completed until the base monies have been taken possession of by the purchaser, Wooldridge's case......307 24 To make a round blank like the smooth shillings in circulation, the original impression on which has been effaced by time, is counterfeiting to the likeness and similitude of the good, legal, and current coin of the realm called a shilling, Samuel Wilson's case ............285 25 And therefore a counterfeit shilling produced in evidence, although it is quite smooth, and no impression of any sort discernible on it, will support an indictment for counterfeiting to the similitude of the legal coin; for it is not necessary that there should be an impression of the counterfeit; if it resemble the common worn coin it is sufficient, J. and P. Welch's case,

364

26 An indictment for putting off counterfeit milled money is supported by evidence that the prisoner put off counterfeit money, though such money was not edged, Bunning's case .........621

27 An indictment on the 15 Geo. II. c. 23. for uttering bad money by the common trick called ringing the changes, is good, although it do not state that it was uttered in payment as and for good money; for the words of the statute are in the disjunctive, "utter OR tender in payment." Franks's case......644 28 By 51 Geo. III. c. 127. and 52 Geo. III. c. 50. to pay or receive any of the gold coin for more than its true lawful value is a high misdemeanor............1072, notis.

COMMITMENT.

1 A commitment for "treasonable

2

3

"practices" is too uncertain and vague; for commitments for high treason ought to contain the greatest certainty, otherwise the prisoner is entitled to be bailed, Rex v. Sayre........ ...162, cited.

So a commitment for stealing a variety of things, without saying that the prisoner feloniously stole them, would be bad from its uncertainty, although it is well known, from the very import of the word stealing, that it is felony...........162 But on an application to be bailed, it is not necessary that the fact imputed to the prisoner by the warrant should be therein expressly charged to have been done feloniously, it is sufficient if the facts stated appear to be in law a felony, Rer v. Judd................484 4 But a warrant of commitment need only to contain convenient cer. tainty; and therefore it is not necessary to allege that the charge was made upon oath, Platt's case, 167

5 A commitment for high treason at Savannah, in the colony of Georgia, in North America, is sufficient to shew that it was committed without the realm of England, according to 35 Henry VIII. c. 2. for it cannot be intended that there is any place within the realm known by that description, Rex v. Platt, 167

6

A commitment under 19 Geo. II. c. 34. for rescuing smuggled goods, need not state that the prisoner was armed; "that he, with others "armed, &c." is sufficient; for though the statute says, " that if

any person or persons, to the "number of three or more, armed "with fire-arms, or other offen"sive weapons, &c." it is not necessary that every person present should be individually armed, Franklyn's case ......255

7 The 9 Geo. I. c. 22. makes it fe

lony to set fire to "any cock, mow,

or

stack of corn, straw, hay, or "wood;" a commitment, therefore, for setting fire to a parcel of unthreshed wheat is bad for its uncertainty; for the word parcel is not mentioned in the Act, and cannot be taken ex vi termini to describe either a cock, a mow, or a stack of corn, Rex v. Judd......484

8 So on 7 Geo. II. c. 21. which makes it felony to assault any person with an offensive weapon, or by menaces, or by any forcible or violent manner to demand money, goods, or chattels, with intent to steal them; a commitment "for "that with force and arms he made "6 an assault on A.B. with intent the "monies of the said A. B. to steal, "&c." without saying it was made with an offensive weapon, or that by menaces, or in a violent manner, he demanded the monies, &c. is bad; for though a commitment need not be drawn with the same precision as an indictment, yet the terms of the statute must be more exactly pursued; and this does not even charge him with a "felonious intent to rob," but merely with intent to steal, &c. Remnant's case, 583

5

the single and uncorroborated evidence of his own confession, A. Fisher's case................311, notis. 4 If a person indicted for larceny, by an extorted confession, discover the person to whom he sold the stolen goods, that person may give evidence as to that fact against the prisoner, Lockhart's case, 386 For though confessions obtained in consequence of promises or threats cannot be given in evidence; any facts, though resulting from such inadmissible confession, may be received, Warickshall's case......260 But the conversation or confession of a prisoner cannot be coupled with such facts to make out the charge against a prisoner; and therefore, unless they can be given in evidence distinctly, and without the aid of the confession, they shall be rejected, D. Mosey's case, 265, notis,

6

7 And in the case of Rex v. Harvey, Bodmin Summer Assizes, 1800, Lord Eldon said, facts resulting from extorted confessions should be rejected unless the fact itself would warrant the conviction, without any confession leading to it. 2 East. 638 8 Sed quære as to so much of the confession as relates strictly to the fact discovered by it, Butcher's case, 265, notis. Parol evidence cannot be received of the information given before a magistrate, either in felony or misdemeanor, unless proof be given that it was not reduced into writing, Fearshire's case............202 10 A voluntary confession of felony made by a prisoner on his examination before a magistrate, and reduced by the magistrate into writing, may be given in evidence on the trial, though the magistrate. has neglected, and the prisoner has

9

refused, to sign it, Lambe's case,

552

11 But a prisoner may retract what he has said on his examination, Bennett's case ............553, notis. 12 Minutes taken of an examination before a magistrate by the Solicitor for a prosecution, by the direction of the magistrate, in which the prisoner retracted part of what he had before confessed, and which examination was neither signed by the magistrate or the prisoner, has, on the authority of Lambe's case, been allowed to be read in evidence on the trial, Thomas's case......637 13 A confession made under the expectation of being admitted a witness for the Crown, is not a voluntary confession, Hall's case, 559 cited. 14 A confession can only affect the person out of whose mouth it comes; it is evidence against him; but not against others, Hevey's .235

case

CONSPIRACY.

1 If a man-servant marry a womanservant, in the name of the master, with an intent thereby to raise a specious title to his estate and effects, it is an indictable conspiracy, Robinson and Taylor's case,

37 2 If A. B. and C. conspire that B. shall accept a fictitious bill of exchange, in order that A. should, by such acceptance, and by the name of C. being indorsed thereon, as payee, negotiate the same as and for a good bill of exchange, and attempt to negotiate it in pursuance of such conspiracy, they may be indicted for the fraud, Hevey's case, 232

3 An indictment for a conspiracy by indirect means, to impoverish a man

7 Persons in possession of any articles may sell them at what prices they please; but if they confederate and agree not to sell them un ler certain prices, this is conspiracy........ .......276

8 So a combination of journeymen, not to work under certain prices, is an indictable offence. ............277 9 But if three persons, as the drawer, acceptor, and payee, draw a bill in their own names, purporting to be a bill drawn on the firm of a banking-house that has no existence, and negotiate it as a good bill, it is no forgery, and qu. if conspiracy, Hevey's case .232 10 A person who has been convicted

1

........

of conspiracy, cannot afterwards be a witness; and he may be examined as to the fact of conviction on a voir dire, Priddle's case, 442

2 A prisoner, on being acquitted, is not entitled to a copy of his indict

ment from the Judge, although the prosecution bears the strongest mark of being unfounded and malicious; but every prisoner acquitted has a right to a copy of the record, and after demand of it, the officer who ought to make it out, may be punished for refusing it, Brangram's case..................27

3 But by an order in writing, made by five Judges, 16 Car. II. and confirmed in May Session 1739, at the Old Bailey, a copy of indictment shall not be granted without a special order made in open Court for that purpose..............................28, notis. 4 And the Court, in exercising its discretion, refused to grant a copy of the indictment where the acquittal was in consequence of the incompetency of a witness, Quick's ..........................28, notis.

case..

2 A policy of insurance from fire by a corporation must be under the corporation seal, and so must every indorsement thereon, Gillson's case, 1007

3 A corporation must prosecute in their corporate name, Pepper and Patrick's case ......253

4 Therefore, as the 17 Geo. III. c. 17. had incorporated the churchwardens of Enfield by the name of "The Churchwardens of the Parish "Church of Enfield, in the County "of Middlesex," an indictment. for stealing their property, stating it to belong to J. Brown and George Cook, is bad, though it afterwards adds, "the said J. B. and G. C. being then the Churchwardens " of the Parish Church of Enfield "in the County of Middlesex" ibid. 253