not to apply to any objection which before they were enacted, might be taken at the trial, or raised on demurrer; but merely to objections made in stay or reversal of judgment. In practice, therefore, it would not be safe to act on them in framing indictments; the requisites of which must be considered as before, though the above sections may be useful in preventing objections made after verdict, viz. in arrest of judgment. Objections to an indictment, which would thus be cured after verdict by 7 G. IV. c. 64, s. 20, 21, must be raised by demurrer before trial; and it will be too late to urge them afterwards, though before verdict (q); but a writ of error will lie to reverse a judgment on an indictment as insufficient, though the words of the statute on which it is founded are followed as by s. 21 directed (r). Words merely tautologous will be rejected if the indictment is in other respects good in itself (s); and an indictment which is bad, from its sense being obstructed by particular words, may be made good by rejecting them as insensible and useless (t). Recitals.]-The indictment will be good, though after the words "in manner and form following," "that is to say," or is to say," an instrument be not recited verbatim (u). as follow, that Until" will be construed either inclusive or exclusive of the day to which it is applied, according to the context and subject matter (v). Allegation of Intent.]-Where an act is in itself unlawful, allegation of evil intent is matter of form not necessary to be proved by extrinsic evidence. But if an evil intent accompanying a particular act is necessary to constitute that act a crime, the intent must be laid in the indictment, and proved; but it is sufficient to allege it in the prefatory part (w). Chief Points relating to Indictments in general.]-The chief points common to all indictments are, 1. The commencement; (q) Alderson, B. (and Parke, B.) Reg. v. Law, 2 M. & Rob. 197. Indictment for breaking a house and stealing money therein contrary to the form of the statute. Objection at close of prosecutor's case, that it should have concluded" against the form of the statutes," was disposed of as above, Alderson, B., adding, that, if it had been taken on demurrer, he should have re commended the grand jury to add the 8. (r) Ante, p. 177; Reg. v. Martin et ux., 8 Ad. & E. 481; 3 Nev. & Per. 472. (8) R. v. Morris, 1 Leach, C. C. 109. (t) R. v. Redmond, 1 Leach, 477. (u) R. v. May, 1 Leach, C. C. 193; R. v. Hart, id. 145; 2 East, P. C. 978; Doug. 193; Cowp. 229. (v) R. v. Stevens, 5 East, 544. (w) R. v. Phillips, 6 East, 464. 2. The description of the party accused; 3. The statement of the time when the offence was committed; 4. The statement of the place where the offence was committed; 5. The description of the person against whom or whose property the offence was committed; 6. The statement of the offence itself; 7. The statement of the means by which the offence was committed; 8. The conclusion. 1. The Commencement.-An indictment commences thus :-"Berkshire (to wit).-The jurors for (x) our Lady the Queen upon their oath (or if any grand juror be a quaker or moravian (y), or having been a quaker or moravian, has ceased to belong to either of those religious denominations, but still entertains conscientious objections to taking an oath (z), or is a separatist (a), here add, “and affirmation" (b);) present that"-The venue, that is, the county, borough and county of a corporate city or town, or other borough or place where the indictment is found, and for which the sessions are holden, and over which the court has jurisdiction, as considered in the last chapter, is expressed in the margin. The omission of the words, to wit, though unusual, seems immaterial (c). It is proper also to allege in the body of the indictment that the offence was committed at a named parish, vill, or other place in the county, borough, &c. in which the indictment is preferred, so as to make it appear that it was within the jurisdiction of the court: and if the indictment state any such parish, &c. without naming the county in the margin, or expressly referring to it by the words "in the county aforesaid," the indictment (a) In Reg. v. Turner, 2 M. & Rob. 214, it was held by Parke, B., that an indictment beginning, "The jurors of our lady the Queen," is not bad on arrest of judgment, for they may be rejected as surplusage. The usual expression, "the jurors for our lady the Queen present, &c." does not mean that a particular class of jurors so present, but only that the jurors present for the Queen; and it is sufficient if it appears that the matters in the bill are presented by the jurors (i. e. the jurors spoken of in the single caption which there is to all the indictments found at the assize), and that those matters are the proper subject of indictment by those jurors. See 1 Ch. Cr. L. p. 327. In ancient times the caption concluded, "It is presented that A. B., &c. did so (y) 3 & 4 W. IV. c. 49, s. 1; and case of Josiah Key, Esq. Cor. Alderson, B., 9 C. & P. 78. (z) 1 & 2 V. c. 77. (a) 3 & 4 W. IV. c. 82, s. 1. (b) Semble, that an indictment stated to have been found" on the oath or affirmation of A. B., &c. then and there sworn or charged as jurors," &c. without saying who were sworn, and who affirmed, and that the latter were entitled to serve on their affirmation, is bad, and no judgment could be given, R. v. Dann, 1 Mood. C. C. 424 (per Gaselee, J., after consideration. 1835). (c) 2 Hale, 166. 66 is bad (d). Indeed, it seems doubtful whether the words "in the county aforesaid," when annexed to the statement of an offence in the body of an indictment, will refer to the county in the margin, even where no other county appears; for the county in the margin is only that in which the indictment is found, and not, as in civil actions, that where the cause of action is laid, and which therefore aids the want of venue in a declaration (e); but there are authorities to show that where only one county is named (and that the correct one), the words 'county aforesaid" in the body, will have sufficient reference to the county in the margin (f). Again, where two counties are mentioned in an indictment, one in the margin, as Gloucestershire, and then another, as Middlesex, in the body (though only in the addition of a party or recital of a statute), and afterwards the offence is stated to have been committed at a place "in the county aforesaid," without showing which county is intended, the rule of reference to the last antecedent, Middlesex, will prevail, and the indictment (at least if for an offence in which local description in Gloucestershire is material, e. g. in housebreaking, forcible entry, &c.), will be insufficient for want of certainty which county is intended to be referred to; nor will the county in the margin aid, as in civil actions (g). In one case, an indictment was held bad as it contained in the body of it no reference to any county. It begun, "London to wit," in the margin; and after describing the prisoner as "late of London," charged the offence as committed in the "parish of St. Mary-le-Bow," without averring the parish to be in London. It was held bad in itself; and as not showing the court to have jurisdiction over the offence, it was held not to be aided by 7 G. IV. c. 64, s. 20 (h). But a mere ambiguity, as “parish aforesaid,” instead of" parish last aforesaid"-two parishes having been previously mentioned, seems only a subject of demurrer (i). The names of the jurors who find the bill, do not appear in the indictment itself; but when it is removed by certiorari, they appear in the caption (j). The (d) 2 Hale, 166; 3 P. Wms. 496; Cro. El. 101, 137, 606, 751; 1 Sid. 345; 1 Bulst. 205; 2 Hawk. c. 25, s. 34, p. 128. (e) Per Cur. Lord Raym. 888, 1304; 1 Saund. 308, n. 1. (f) 2 Hale, 180; 3 P. W. 496; Com. D. Indictment (G 2); 2 Hawk. c. 25, s. 34. (g) Elnor's ca. Cro. El. 184; 2 Hale, 180; 2 East's R. 66, and cases in three last preceding notes. Other instances of necessity for this local description, post, p. 188. (h) R. v. Minter Hart, 6 C. & P. 106, per Littledale & Bosanquet, Js. ; but qu. for London is county in itself, and the offence was not one requiring a local description; see p. 184 and 187, post. (i) Walford v. Anthony and others, 8 Bing. 75. (j) See 6 Ad. & E. 240, R. v. Marsh, so stated to the court by the officers of Q. B. See post, Ch. I. sub fin. and Ch. XIII. presentment must be in the present tense; for if "did present" be inserted for "do present," the indictment will be invalid (k). 2. The Description of the Party accused :-Thus, "A. B. late of the parish of in the county of labourer." The christian and surname of the defendant, if known, should be stated with correctness; except in an indictment against the inhabitants of a county or parish, who may be so described without naming any of them (7). But if the name of a prisoner is unknown, and he refuses to disclose it, an indictment may be sustained against him as a person whose name is to the jurors unknown, but who is personally brought before the said jurors by, the keeper of the prison of -"(m). A man cannot be indicted with an alias dictus of the christian name, as John, otherwise Robert, though to an alias of the surname there is no objection (n). An indictment was quashed before plea, because an addition was placed, not after the first name, but after the alias dictus (o). If he has more than one christian name given him in baptism, as John Thomas, they are considered in law as forming one name, and must be set out correctly in their order (p). The proper name of a bastard is that he has gained by reputation, and not his mother's name, unless so gained (q). In indictments against the greater nobility-that is, says Lord Coke, dukes, marquisses, earls, viscounts, and barons, being dukes, &c. of particular counties or places, the estate and degree is named first, and afterwards the town or county-thus, Edward Duke of Buckingham, late of N. in the county of G. omitting the family surname of the accused: but if stated, it does not vitiate (r), and so it is when one is named of a city which is a county of itself, I. S. pannarius de London in com. civitatis London. But in case of the lesser nobility, as bannerets, baronets, and knights, and all under them, the town and county are named before the addition, thus; "A. B. of- in the county ofknight." Garter, principal king at arms, and clarencieux, being titles (*) Andrews, R. 162, 163. (1) Hawk. B. 2, c. 25, s. 68; see post, 190. (m) R. v. R. & Ry. 489. (n) 1 Ld. Raym. 562, surnames being originally acquired by assumption. See cases collected, 5 B. & Ald. 552; Williams v. Bryant, 5 M. & W. 447. See also per Lord Stowell, Wakefield v. Wakefield, 1 Hagg. Cons. R. 400; Barlow v. Bateman, 3 Peere Williams, 65. (0) R. v. Semple, 1 Leach, 420; but this defect is cured by plea, R. v. Han nam, ib. n. See Cro. Jac. 482, 610. (p) Jones v. Macquillin, 5 T. R. 195; 3 East, 111; Willes, 554; Evans v. King; Pouget v. Tomkins, 1 Phill. R. 503; Stanhope v. Baldwin, 1 Addams, R. 93. (q) R. v. Clark, R. & Ry. 358. (r) 19 St. Tri. 1777. See as to description of a peer being the party injured, if a peer, R. v. Brinklett, or the prosecutor, if a peer or peeress, post, p. 190, 191. conferred by the crown, are not additions, but parts of the name which should follow it (s). Foreign dignities give no man here higher title than that of esquire, unless the possessor be lord or knight here, in which case he should be described accordingly (t). A variance in stating marquis for earl, or knight for baronet, is fatal, for the dignity is not merely an addition, but being the very appellation by which the party is commonly known, becomes on that account actually part of his name (u). Proper Additions of accused Parties.]-To prevent the inconvenience of troubling one person for another, it is enacted by the statute of additions (v), that in all indictments on which process of outlawry lies, additions shall be made to the defendants' names, of their state or degree, or mystery, and of the towns or hamlets, or places, and the counties of the which they were or are conversant. Under this statute, if an accused has several titles, he must be described by the most honourable; and if he have none by birth, office, creation, or reputation, and is described by any such; or if a gentlewoman be named merely spinster, or a yeoman is named gentleman, the indictment will be defective (w). But a trader may be sued either by his degree or rank in society, independent of his trade, or by the name of his vocation (x). ог Gentleman, and esquire, are good additions for the estate and degree of a man, gentlewoman for that of a woman, clerk for a clergyman, or graduate at Oxford or Cambridge; yeoman is a good addition for the estate and degree of a person having freehold land of 40s. a year (y); and labourer for that of a man; but neither yeoman labourer are good additions for that of a woman; and widow, singlewoman, wife of ——, and spinster, are good additions of the estate and degree of a woman; but burgess, and citizen, and servant, are all of them too general, and therefore not good additions of the estate or degree either of a man or woman (2). Wife was amended to widow, in a case where the prisoner, charged with murdering her husband, was described as A., the wife of J. O., late of, &c., labourer (a). (8) Holt v. Ward, 2 Stra. 850; Dethick's ca. Cro. El. 542; Roll. Abr. tit. Graunts (D. pl. 16). Bond to a herald by his name of office in his patent (e. g. Chester), is good, though no other name is mentioned. (t) 2 Inst. 655, 667,669. (u) 2 Hawk. c. 25, s. 71, 72. Sir Henry Ferrar's case, Sir W. Jones. S. C. Cro. Car. 371, cited 1 Mood. C. C. 288. But "Lord" will suffice to designate a |