Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

Wagstaff's case. Threatening letter.

Waite's case. Forgery. Competency of witness.

Wakeling's case. False pretence.

Walsh's case. Larceny. Fraud.

Wardle's case. Highway robbery. Indictment.

Warren's case. Overseer. Poor.

Watts's case. Forgery. Evidence.
Watson's case. Returning from transportation.
Webb's case. Forgery. Uttering.
Welland's case. Larceny of animals.
Went's case. Property in whom to be laid.
Westwood's case. Burglary. Dwelling-house.
Wetherell's case. Discharging prisoners.
Whiley's case. Forgery. Assumed name.
White's case. Principals.

White's case. Confession.

Wick's case. Forgery. Uttering.

Wilcox's case. Forgery at common law. Indictment.
Wilford's case. Burglary. Indictment.
Wilkinson's case. Larceny of one's own goods.

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Young's case. Forgery. Assumed name.

notis, 280

[blocks in formation]

THE prisoner was tried before LORD ELDON, at the Admiralty A prisoner was sessions, December, 1799, on an indictment for wilfully and ma

liciously shooting at Henry Truscott.

It appeared in evidence, that on the 27th of June, 1799, the prisoner was the captain of a vessel called the Langley, a letter of marque; that about 130 leagues from Falmouth, on that day, he discovered in the morning, and fell in with another vessel called the Admiral Nelson, sailing at that time without colours hoisted, on board of which vessel Henry Truscott, the person charged in the indictment to have been shot at, was a mariner.

This vessel was certainly so conducting herself, at that time, as to give the prisoner, the captain of the letter of marque, reasonable ground to think that she was an enemy; but before he boarded her, and during the time he was on board of her, cumstances passed, which could hardly fail to satisfy him she was an English vessel.

indicted for maliciously shooting; the offence was

within a few weeks after the

39 G.5. c.37.

(a) passed, and before notice

of it could

have reached where the the place

offence was committed.

On case,

THE JUDGES

thought he could not have been tried if

cir

the 39 G. 3.

that

c. 37. had not passed, and as he could not

have known of that act, they thought it right he should have a pardon.

(a) The preamble of which act recites, Whereas, by an act passed in the twenty-eighth year of King Henry the Eighth, it is enacted, That treasons, felonies, robberies, murthers, and confederacies committed on the high seas, shall be enquired of, tried, and determined in such shires and places in the realm as shall be limited by the King's commission to be directed for the saine, in like form and condition as if any such offence or offences had been com

B

1800.

BAILEY'S Case.

He staid on board some time, furnished the vessel with provisions, took into his custody a letter to be delivered in England, written by a gentleman on board of her, and conducted himself during a conversation of considerable continuance in the cabin as satisfied that the vessel was English.

In the course of that conversation, he and the captain of the Admiral Nelson were left alone, and a quarrel took place between them. As the latter was not produced upon the trial, as a witness, the origin and cause of the quarrel could not be ascertained; but it appeared that the captain of the Admiral Nelson had found fault with the prisoner for very gross language which he had, in fact, used when he hailed the ship in the chase.

The captain of the letter of marque, and the captain of the Admiral Nelson, came up from the cabin where they had been quarrelling; the former, in a very violent passion, insisting that the latter should produce the ship's papers; he said he was willing to do so if the prisoner would produce his commission; the prisoner, according to one witness, promised so to do, but did not produce it.

The prisoner left the Admiral Nelson, abusing the captain, and offering to fight him; using very threatening language, stating that he would make him pay for it; and when he got on board his own vessel three guns were fired at the Admiral Nelson, one of which, loaded with grape-shot, wounded Henry Truscott severely in the arm.

mitted or done in or upon the land; and whereas it is expedient to declare that other offences committed on the seas may be enquired of, tried, and determined in like manner, be it enacted, That all and every offence and offences which, after the passing of this act, shall be committed upon the high seas out of the body of any county of this realm, shall be offences of the same nature respectively, and be liable to the same punishments respectively as if they had been committed upon the shore, and shall be enquired of, heard, tried, and determined and adjudged in the same manner as treasons, felonies, murthers, and confederacies are directed to be by the same act.

By the second section it is further enacted, That when any person or persons shall be tried for the crime of murther or manslaughter committed upon the sea by virtue of any commission directed under the said act, and shall be found guilty of manslaughter only, such person or persons shall be entitled to receive the benefit of clergy in like manner, and shall be subject to the same punishment, as if he or they had committed such manslaughter in or upon the land.

The captain of the Admiral Nelson, upon the firing, sent his papers on board the prisoner's vessel.

It was insisted by the prisoner's cOUNSEL that he had a right to fire upon the Admiral Nelson, because the captain did not produce her papers.

On the other hand, it was insisted, that the prisoner ought first to have produced his commission, to show his right to demand the production of papers; and it appeared on the evidence of one witness that he said he would, but did not produce his commission.

LORD ELDON intended to have saved this point; but it appeared to him that it would not arise in the case, unless the jury should be of opinion that the prisoner really fired upon the Admiral Nelson because the papers were not produced, and not for any other reason, founded either in malice or any other motive; he, therefore, distinctly put it as a question to the jury for their consideration, Whether the prisoner did fire upon the Admiral Nelson, because the captain of that vessel did not produce his papers? intending to reserve the question of law, if their finding upon the fact made it fit so to do. The jury said they were satisfied that he did not fire upon the vessel for that reason; and they seemed to be of opinion that the prisoner had otherwise perfectly satisfied himself, without the papers, that the Admiral Nelson was an English vessel, and that he fired in consequence of the quarrel which had taken place between him and the Admiral Nelson's captain.

It was then insisted that he did not shoot at Henry Truscott, the person named in the indictment, but at the ship.

LORD ELDON told the jury that he was of opinion, if they thought the guns were fired at the vessel, and those on board her generally, that the guns might be considered as shot at each individual on board her, and, therefore, at Henry Truscott, the person named in the indictment.

It was then insisted that the prisoner could not be found guilty of the offence with which he was charged, because the act of the 39 G. 3. c. 37., upon which (together with the statute relating to maliciously shooting (a)) the prisoner was indicted at this Ad

(a) 9 G.1. c. 22. (Black Act.)

1800.

BAILEY'S Case

« AnteriorContinuar »