MISDEMEANOR-continued. surrogate to procure a marriage licence, only charges the MURDER. Page 459 1. Killing in an affray. Qu. Whether, under the circumstances, 58 3. If A. stands with an offensive weapon in the door-way of a 228 4. In murder it is not essential to award the day of execution. 230 5. A British subject is indictable under the 33 Hen. 8. c. 23., Rex 294 6. Killing an officer will be murder, though he has no war- 329 7. Indictment for murder. If the death proceeds from suffo- 345 8. Indictment for the murder of a bastard child, held that a MURDER continued. bastard was improperly described by his mother's name, Page 358 9. If a man encourage another to murder himself, and is pre- NAVY BILL. See ORDER, 3. OATH. Rex v. 523 A false oath before a surrogate to procure a marriage li- OFFENCES ABROAD. See ADMIRALTY. OFFENSIVE WEAPON. 459 A stick held to be an "offensive weapon" within the statute OFFICERS. 492 Killing an officer will be murder, though he has no warrant, and ORDER. 329 1. Indictment held to be bad on the ground that the instru- 106 2. The prisoner drew a bill, "Please to pay the bearer on de- ORDER-continued. ment, when uttered, the words and signature, "Payable at Messrs. Masterman & Co., White Hart Court, Wm. M'Inerheny." M'Inerheny kept cash at Masterman & Co.'s, who were bankers. The Judges held this was not an order for payment of money, there being no special averments in the indictment that this was intended for an order, or that Masterman & Co. were bankers. Rex v. Ravenscroft. Page 161 3. The prisoner drew a bill upon the Treasurer of the Navy, payable to blank or order, and signed it in the name of a navy surgeon. Held that to constitute an order for payment of money there must be some payee; a direction to pay to blank or order is not sufficient. Rex v. Richards. 193 Rex v. Randall. 195 4. A justice's order was forged, stating that a dead body had been cast on shore in the parish of A., that I. S. had made oath before the justice that he had laid out 3l. 5s. in the burying him, and requiring the treasurer to pay him the sum. Held, that this was a warrant or order for the payment of money within the 7 G. 2., though the order did not state that I. S. was a churchwarden &c. Rex v. Froud. 389 OVERSEER. 1. An overseer is not indictable for not relieving a pauper, unless there is an order for his relief, except in case of immediate emergency where there is not time to get an order. Rex v. Meredith and another. See also Rex v. Booth. Rex v. Warren. 46 47 notis. 48 notis. 2. An indictment for stealing goods may, under the 55 G. 3. c. 137., state them to be the goods of the overseers of the poor for the time being of the parish of A., for this will import that they belonged, at the time of the theft, to the persons who were the then overseers. Rex v. Went. OWNERSHIP. See INDICTMENT, 14. 31, 32. 43. 47. JOINT PROPERTY. PAID NOTE. 359 1. A bank clerk employed to post into the ledger and read from the cash-book, Bank-notes from 1007. in value up to a 1000l. and who in the course of that occupation had, with other clerks, access to a file, upon which paid notes of every description were filed; took from that file a paid bank note for 50%. Held, that the prisoner could be considered as en PAID NOTE-continued. trusted with the possession of this note, so as to bring him within the 15 G. 2. c. 13. s. 12. Rex v. Bakewell. Page 35 2. Stealing re-issuable notes after they have been paid, and before they have been re-issued, does not subject the party to an indictment on the 2 G. 2. c. 25. for stealing notes; but he may be indicted for stealing the paper with valuable stamps upon it. Rex v. Clark. 181 3. Secreting a letter containing country bank-notes paid in London and not reissued, holden to be within the statute 7 G. 3. c. 50. Rex v. Ranson. PARDON. 232 1. Held that a person who had been convicted of grand larceny, sentenced to transportation for seven years, confined in the hulks and discharged at the end of seven years, was a competent witness, such confinement operating as a statute pardon; and that having escaped twice during such confinement for a few hours each time, did not destroy the effect of it. Rex v. Badcock and others. 248 2. Indictment on the 15 G. 2. c. 31. for delivering instruments to a prisoner to facilitate his escape from gaol. Held that the delivering is within the act, though the prisoner has been pardoned of the offence of which he was convicted on condition of transportation. Rex v. Shaw and others. PAUPER. See OVERSEER, 1. PEER. 526 An Irish peer ought not to serve upon a grand jury unless he is a member of the House of Commons. PERJURY. 117 1. If, in the indictment, the oath is stated to have been at the assizes, before Justices assigned to take the said assizes, before A. B., one of the said Justices, the said Justices then and there having power, &c., it will be a fatal variance if the oath was administered when the Judge was sitting under the commission of Oyer and Terminer and Gaol delivery. Rex v. Lin coln. 421 2. A false oath before a surrogate to procure a marriage li- PERSON. See STEALING FROM THE PERSON. Rex v. 4.59 PERSON, DESCRIPTION OF. See INDICTMENT, 19. 26. 42. 45. If the charge against an accessary is, that the principal felony was committed by persons unknown, it is no objection that the same grand jury have found a bill imputing the principal felony to J. S. Rex v. Bush. PERSONATING. Page 372 1. The prisoner applied at Greenwich Hospital for prizemoney in the name of J. B. J. B. was dead, and was supposed to be so at the hospital, and the prisoner did not obtain the money; on indictment for personating, &c. held, that the 54 G. 3. c. 93. s. 89. applied, although the seaman was dead. Rex v. Martin. 324 2. The prisoner personated one Cuff who was dead, and whose prize-money had been paid to his mother. The Judges held, that that did not vary the prisoner's guilt; and that he was rightly convicted on the 54 G. 3. c. 93. s. 89. Rex v. Cramp. 327 3. Indictment on 57 G. 3. c. 127. s. 4., for personating the PIGS. 351 353 Pigs held to be cattle within the meaning of the 9 G. 1. c. 22. PIRACY. 77 Piratically stealing a ship's anchor and cable is a capital offence by the marine laws and triable under the 28 H. 8., the 39 G. 2. c. 37. not extending to this case. The stealing is equally an offence, though the master of the vessel concur in it, and though the object is to defraud the underwriters and not the owner. Rex v. Curling and others. 123 PLACE, DEScription of. See INDICTMENT, 46. |