and Saunders, 2 Burr. 984. And where three were indicted for burglary and stealing in a dwelling-house, and one pleaded guilty, and the others were convicted of the larceny in the dwelling-house only, the judges held that judgment should be entered against the three accordingly. R. v. Butterworth et al., R. & Ry. 520. Also the principal and accessory, or the principal and receiver, may be joined in the same indictment; or they may be indicted separately. But one cannot be found guilty of one part of the charge, and another of another part. R. v. Hempstead et al., R. & Ry. 344. Misjoinder of defendants must be objected to before verdict. R. v. Hayes, 2 Moody, & R. 156. Indictment for an Assault upon a Peace-officer or Revenue-officer, or upon any Person acting in his aid. Same as the form, supra, to the words] in the county aforesaid, in and upon one C. D. (the said C. D. then being a peace-officer, to wit, a constable of the said parish, and in the due execution of his duty as such constable then and there being) [or "he said C. D. then being a revenue-officer, to wit, an officer of her said Majesty's Excise, and in the due execution of his duty as such officer of excise then and there being;" or "the said C. D. then and there acting in aid of one E. F., a peace" or "revenue officer, to wit, a in the due Misdemeanor: imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for not more than two years, and if the court think fit, they may fine the offender, and require him to find suretics to keep the peace, 9 G. 4, c. 31, s. 25. Indictment for a Conspiracy. Middlesex, to wit: The jurors for our Lady the Queen upon their oath present, that A. B. late of the parish of in the county of Middlesex aforesaid, esquire, Sir C. D. late of the same place, knight, E. F. late of the same place, gentleman, G. H. late of the same place, gentleman, being evil disposed persons, and wickedly devising and intending to defraud one W. X., on the first day of August, in the eighth year of the reign of our sovereign Lady Victoria, by the grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Queen, defender of the faith, at the parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid, did amongst themselves unlawfully conspire, combine, confederate and agree together, falsely and fraudulently to cheat and defraud the said W. X. of a certain large sum of money, to wit, the sum of £-, under the false and fraudulent pretence that the said A. B., in consideration of such sum of money, would secure and had the means of securing unto the said W. X., his executors, administrators, and assigns, a certain annuity, to wit, an annuity of £- -, to be payable during the natural life of the said A. B.: And the jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do further present, that in pursuance of and according to the said conspiracy, combination, confederacy and agreement amongst themselves, so had as aforesaid, the said Sir C. D. afterwards, to wit, on the tenth day of August, in the year aforesaid, at the parish aforesaid, [here state the overt acts by cach of the conspirators, or by two or more of them jointly, or by one of them "in the presence and hearing and with the knowledge and consent" of the others; commencing the statement of each overt act thus: "And the jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do further present, that in further pursuance of," Sc. ut supra; and concluding the count thus:] "to the great damage of the said W. X., and against the peace of our Lady the Queen, her crown and dignity." See the precedent, 4 Went. 8, and see 6 Went. Index, title conspiracy. Add a general count, the same as the above, but omitting the overt acts. Also, if necessary, other counts, with overt acts, varying the statement of the conspiracy, with corresponding general counts without overt acts, may be added. Misdemeanor: fine or imprisonment, or both. Formerly what was termed the villainous judgment was passed upon defendants for conspiracy, whereby they could no longer serve upon a jury, or be credited as witnesses. 1 Hawk. c. 72, s. 9. But this has long ceased to be the practice, there being no instance of the villainous judgment since the reign of Edward 3. 4 Bl. Com. 136, 137. And it may well be doubted whether it could be given for any other conspiracy, than that alone for which the old writ of conspiracy would lie, and which is the only one noticed in the old text-books, namely, a conspiracy falsely to indict a man for an offence, of which he was afterwards acquitted. As to the general counts, above recommended, see R. v. Eccles, 1 Leach, 274. R. v. Gill & Henry, 2 B. & Ald. 204. R. v. Fowle & Elliott, 4 Car. & P. 592; and see R. v. Biers et al., 1 Ad. & E. 327. Where, however, the indictment charged the defendants with conspiring to propagate false reports that Bonaparte was killed, and that peace would soon be made between England and France, and by such reports to cause a rise in the prices of the Government funds and securities, with a wicked intention to injure "all the subjects of the King," who should on that day purchase such funds or securities,-it was objected that this was bad for uncertainty, in not stating the individuals by name who were intended to be injured: but the court held that there was nothing in the objection, Lord Ellenborough, C. J. saying, that the defendants, at the time of the conspiracy, could not, except by a spirit of prophecy, divine who would be purchasers of such stock on a subsequent day. R. v. De Berenger et al., 3 M. & S. 67; and see Peck et al. v. Reg. in error, 8 Law J., 22, m. The venue may be laid in any county, in which a distinct overt act of the conspiracy was committed. R. v. Brisac & Scott, 4 East, 164, 170. SECTION II. Criminal Information by the Queen's Coroner and Attorney. 1. In what cases. Informations are of two kinds: first, those which are partly at the suit of the Queen, partly at that of a subject; secondly, such as are at the suit of the Queen alone. And it is the latter only, which we shall here notice. Informations at the suit of the Queen alone, are also of two kinds: first, those which are filed in the court of Queen's Bench ex officio by the Queen's attorney-general, and which shall form the subject of the next section; secondly, those which are filed in the same court, by the Queen's coroner and attorney, formerly called the master of the crown-office, which shall form the subject of the present section. It may be defined to be an accusation or complaint exhibited in the court of Queen's Bench, against a person for some criminal offence, either immediately against the Queen, or against a private person, which, from its enormity or dangerous tendency, the public good requires to be restrained and punished. Bac. Abr. Information A. It differs from an indictment principally in this, that the latter is an accusation found by the oaths of a grand jury, the information is merely the allegation of the officer who exhibits it. In what cases generally.] A criminal information by the Queen's coroner and attorney, lies only for what are termed indictable misdemeanors; see Ex p. Chapman, 4 Ad. & El. 773; and not for felony, treason or misprision of treason. 2 Hawk. c. 26, s. 3. Formerly this mode of proceeding was very much abused, particularly in the reign of Henry the Seventh, and subsequently up to the reign of William the Third; any person might apply to the King's coroner and attorney, then usually called the clerk of the crown, and subsequently the master of the crown-office, to file an information for a misdemeanor, however trifling, and however unfounded in fact, and it was filed accordingly; and after the defendant had been put to great expense in appearing and pleading, &c. it was found that there was no ground whatever for the accusation, and that this particular mode of proceeding had been adopted merely for the purpose of extorting money from the defendant. The abuse was such, that in the reign of William the Third, the legislature thought fit to apply a remedy; and by stat. 4 & 5 W.& M. c. 18, s. 1, after reciting that divers malicious and contentious persons had, more of late than in times past, procured to be exhibited and prosecuted informations in their Majesty's court of King's Bench at Westminster, against persons in all the counties of England, for trespasses, batteries and other misdemeanors; and after the parties so informed against had appeared to such informations and pleaded to issue, the informers had very seldom proceeded any further, whereby the persons so informed against had been put to great charges in their defence; and although at the trials of such informations verdicts had been given for them, or a noli prosequi entered against them, they had no remedy for obtaining costs against such informers: it is enacted "that the clerk of the crown in the said court of King's Bench for the time being, shall not, without express order to be given by the said court in open court, exhibit, receive or file any information for any of the causes aforesaid, or issue out any process thereupon, before he shall have taken or shall have delivered to him a recognizance from the person or persons procuring such information to be exhibited," in the penalty of 201., conditioned to prosecute such information with effect, and to abide such orders as the court shall direct. The cases therefore to be found in the books of reports, in which informations have been filed previously to this statute, and which are referred to in 2 Hawk. c. 26, s. 1 & 9, cannot in general be deemed authorities at the present day; for after the passing of the above statute, when it became necessary to obtain the leave of the court of King's Bench, before such an information could be filed, that court, in furtherance of the statute, and as a remedy for the evil thereby intended to be remedied, have taken care ever since to grant rules for criminal informations only for " gross and notorious misdemeanors, riots, batteries, libels, and other immoralities of an atrocious kind, not peculiarly intended to disturb the government (for those are left to the care of the attorney-general), but which on account of their magnitude or pernicious example, deserve the most public animadversion." 4 Bl. Com. 309. Having made these few general observations, we shall now proceed to notice, more specifically, the cases in which the court will grant or refuse permission to file such a criminal information. Against magistrates.] Oppression and tyrannical partiality of judges, justices and other magistrates, in the administration and under the colour of their offices, is an offence against public justice of deep malignity; and so much the deeper, as there are many opportunities of putting it in practice, and the power and wealth of the offenders may often deter the injured from a legal prosecution. 4 Bl. Com. 141. In the case of the superior judges, the prosecution in such a case is by impeachment in parliament. But in the case of justices of the peace and other inferior judges, the court of Queen's Bench, upon application, will in general give leave to file a criminal information against them. We shall therefore examine, rather minutely, those cases in which the court will allow a criminal information to be filed against justices of the peace, premising that they will allow informations to be filed in the like cases against the judges of all inferior courts, and other magistrates. The court will in general grant a criminal information against justices, for any gross act of oppression committed by them, in the exercise or pretended exercise of their duties as justices, from any vindictive or corrupt motive. As against justices at sessions, this is a very rare proceeding, although in strictness it may be adopted. Upon a rule to quash a certiorari, upon the ground that it was not delivered to the court of Quarter Sessions until after judgment, Lord Kenyon, C. J. took occasion to say: "If any fraud or misconduct had been imputed to the magistrates, in proceeding notwithstanding the issuing of the certiorari, that might have been a ground for a criminal proceeding against them; and I believe there are instances in which a criminal information has been granted against magistrates acting in sessions." R. v. Inhabitants of Seton, 7 T. R. 373. There is no doubt but that a criminal information may be granted against justices acting in sessions; but it must be a strong, very strong, case indeed, coupled with flagrant proofs of their having acted from corrupt motives, that would induce the court of Queen's Bench to grant such an information. See R. v. JJ. of Seaford, 1 W. Bl. 432. Staundford, P. C. 173. As against justices out of sessions, however, the court will grant a criminal information, in all cases where they act oppressively, from any vindictive or corrupt motive; and instances frequently occur of such informations being granted. Where, immediately previous to a general election for members of parliament, two justices for a borough, in which the right |