e words

1 Vict. c.

85, s. 4, and thos

s substituted for "the par

under any of the Acts, the C

f the 9 Geo. 4, c. 31, s. 5 labour, may be awarded for a it is clear that the const offender to be imprisoned, or ises in this Act ought to kept to hard labour, in the con

t

Will. 4 & 1 Vict. c. 85, s. e 9 Geo. 4, c. 31, s. 12, a "are substituted in the f offending or any of his at ing used in the former mprehending every person.

Helt // CB (RS).

correction.

Note. This provision similar provisions contain 4, c. 29; 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c.

Whenever solitary confinem for any indictable offence unde Court may direct the offender confinement for any portion imprisonment, or of his imp labour, not exceeding one mo and not exceeding three mont

Note. This clause rep existing law as fixed by Vict. c. 90, s. 5.

adie misuemeanor punismavit unuti any vi tit

the Court may, if it shall think fit, in addition in lieu of any of the punishments by that Act orised, fine the offender, and require him to into his own recognisances, and to find sureboth or either, for keeping the peace and being od behaviour; and in case of any felony punishunder any of the Acts, the Court may, if it think fit, require the offender to enter into his recognisances, and to find sureties, both or r, for keeping the peace, in addition to any shment by that Act authorised: Provided that erson shall be imprisoned under this clause for inding sureties for any period exceeding one

on

to rec ma

to

Th

CO

the

ve

ha

ΠΟ

mi

lea In

pe

re

Note. This is a new enactment.

A fine is at common law one of the punishments for a misdemeanor, and by this clause the Court may, in addition to, or in lieu of, any of the punishments assigned to any misdemeanor by these acts, fine the offender. It may be as well to observe that a fine ought not to be imposed on a married woman, because in presumption of law she has no property where

fu

h

nswer no reply has been given, and no doubt r the best possible reason, viz., that it aditted of none.

2. Mr. Saunders said, "it is difficult to underand why the infliction of a fine should be flexibly associated with the entering into reognisances to keep the peace," and vice versa. s the clause was originally framed, the Court ight either impose a fine on the offender, or equire him to find sureties; but the Select Committee of the Commons altered the clause a that respect. Nor is there the slightest diffiulty occasioned by the alteration. The fine ay be as low, and the recognisances for as short time, and in as small an amount as the Court inks fit; and, consequently, the Court may in my case, if it think fit, impose a nominal fine on e offender, and require him to find sureties in large amount; or the Court may, if it think t, impose a heavy fine on the offender, and take is own recognisances alone in a small sum and or a short term. So that the alteration made y the Select Committee of the Commons can ause no practical difficulty whatever. To this nswer Mr. Saunders replied, that the objection

УУД mei

ques

pris

to g

he

suff

jud I

crea

com

it. den law

and

def

are

an

to

Co

S

b

f

former Act had "with intent to maim, disfigure, or disable such person; or to do some other grievous bodily harm to such person;" but in the present clause "any" is substituted for "such."

So also the words " any other' are so used as to Any other. include every other person or thing, except the person or thing previously mentioned. Thus in s. 20, of the Offences against the Person Act, post, p. 53, we have whosoever shall wound " any other person;" and in s. 19 of the same Act, post, p. 52, we have "gunpowder or any other explosive substance;" and as in the former instance " any other person" includes every other person, except the person inflicting the wound; so in the latter "any other explosive substance" includes every explosive substance except gunpowder.

The word "may "has frequently been used as May. equivalent to "it shall be lawful," or the longer expression, "it shall be lawful, and is hereby authorised."

دو

The word 66 shall has also often been used in an Shall. imperative sense, as in s. 2 of the Offences against the Person Act, post, p. 29; and that section affords an example of the use of both "may" and "shall" in these Acts in the manner just explained.

former Act.

The expression "against this or any former Act Against of Parliament," frequently used with reference to this or any previous convictions, was adopted to include any previous conviction of a like offence under any former enactment.

If any question should arise in which any comparison may be instituted between different sections of any one or several of these Acts, it must be carefully borne in mind in what manner these Acts were framed. None of them was re-written; on the contrary, each contains enactments taken from different Acts passed at different times and with different views, and frequently varying from each other in phraseology, and, for the reasons stated in the Introduction, these enactments, for the most part, stand in these Acts with little or no variation in their phraseology, and, consequently, their differences in that respect will be found generally to remain in these Acts. It follows, therefore, from