Page images
PDF
EPUB

following provision (d): "That if any person shall steal, or shall, for any fraudulent purpose, take from its place or deposit for the time being, or from any person having the lawful custody thereof, or shall unlawfully and maliciously obliterate, injure, or destroy, any record, writ, return, panel, process, interrogatory, deposition, affidavit, rule, order, or warrant of attorney, or any original document whatsoever, of or belonging to any court of record, or relating to any matter, civil or criminal, begun, depending, or terminated in any such court, or any bill, answer, interrogatory, deposition, affidavit, order, or decree, or any original document whatsoever, of or belonging to any court of equity, or relating to any cause or matter begun, depending, or terminated in any such court, every such offender shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and, being convicted thereof, shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be transported beyond the seas for the term of seven years, or to suffer such other punishment, by fine or imprisonment, or by both, as the court shall award; and it shall not, in any indictment for such offence, be necessary to allege that the article in respect of which the offence is committed is the property of any person, or that the same is of any value."

Indictment for Stealing a Nisi Prius Record.

That A. B. late of, &c. on, &c. at, &c. a certain record of nisi prius of the court of our lady the Queen, before the Queen herself, in a certain cause then depending in the said court, wherein one C. D. was plaintiff, and the said A. B. was defendant, then and there found and being, unlawfully did steal, take, and carry away; against the form of the statute, &c. and against the peace, &c.

Indictment for defacing a Record of an Indictment for Perjury. That A. B. late of, &c. on, &c. at, &c. unlawfully and maliciously did obliterate and injure a certain nisi prius record of the issue joined between our sovereign lady the Queen and the said A. B. on an indictment for perjury then depending in the court of our lady the Queen, before the Queen herself, and being a record of the said court, with intent then and there to cause and procure him the said A. B. to be acquitted upon the trial of the said issue; against the form of the statute, &c. and against the peace, &c. [Add a count specifying in what the injury consisted.]

SECTION XXIV.

RIOTS, ROUTS, AND UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLIES.

Offences.]-Hawkins says a riot seems to be a tumultuous disturbance of the peace, by three persons or more, assembling together

(d) Section 21.

of their own authority, with an intent mutually to assist one another against any one who shall oppose them in the execution of some enterprise of a private nature; and afterwards actually executing the same in a violent and turbulent manner, to the terror of the people, whether the act intended were of itself lawful or unlawful (e).

Rout, what.]—A rout is said to be a disturbance of the peace, by persons assembling together with an intention to do a thing, which, if it be executed, will make them rioters; and actually making a motion towards the execution thereof (ƒ).

Unlawful Assembly, what.]—An unlawful assembly, according to the common opinion, is a disturbance of the peace, by persons barely assembling together with an intention to do a thing, which, if it were executed, would make them rioters, but neither actually executing it, nor making a motion towards the execution of it (g).

But (Hawkins adds) this seems altogether much too narrow a definition. For any meeting whatever of great numbers of people, with such circumstances of terror as cannot but endanger the public peace, and raise fears and jealousies among the queen's subjects, seems properly to be an unlawful assembly; as where great numbers complaining of a common grievance (e. g. the inclosure of land, in which they all claim a right of common (h)) meet together, armed in a warlike manner, in order to consult together concerning the most proper means for the recovery of their interests: for no one can foresee what may be the event of such an assembly (i).

Also an assembly of a man's friends for the defence of his person, against those who threaten to beat him, if he go to such a market, or the like, is unlawful; for he who is in fear of such insults ought to demand surety of the peace, and not make use of such violent methods, which cannot but be attended with the danger of raising tumults and disorders to the disturbance of the public peace. Yet an assembly of a man's friends in his own house, for the defence of the possession thereof against those who threaten to make an unlawful entry thereinto, or for the defence of his person against those who threaten to beat him therein, is allowed by law; for a man's house is looked upon

(e) Hawk. B. 1, c. 65, s. 1; R. v. Soley, 11 Mod. 116.

(f) Hawk. B. 1, c. 65, s. 8; 19 Vin. Abr. tit. Riots.

(g) Hawk. B. 1, c. 65. See R. v.

Birt, 5 C. & P. 154.

(h) This instance is put by Hawkins, B. 1, c. 65, s. 8, in defining a "rout." (i) Hawk. B. 1, c. 65, s. 9; 4 Bla. Com. 142.

as his castle (j). But the like liberty is not allowed by the law to a man in defence of other property, ex. gr. his close (k).

On an indictment for a riot against three or more, if a verdict acquit all but two, and find them guilty, the finding is repugnant and void, unless the indictment charge them with having made such riot together with divers other persons unknown; for otherwise it appears that the defendants are found guilty of an offence whereof it is impossible that they should be guilty, for there can be no riot where there are no more than two persons (1). And let it be observed, that though women are amenable to the law as rioters, infants of either sex, under the years of discretion, are not (m). But where six were indicted for a riot, and two of them died before trial, two were acquitted, and two only found guilty, yet judgment was given upon this verdict, for by Lord Mansfield, they must have been found guilty with one or both of those who had not been tried, or it could not have been a riot (n).

If a number of persons being met together at a fair or market, or any other lawful or innocent occasion, happen on a sudden quarrel to break the peace, it seems agreed that they are not guilty of a riot, but of sudden affray only, of which none are guilty but those who actually engage in it, because the design of their meeting was innocent and lawful, and the subsequent breach of the peace happened unexpectedly without any previous intention concerning it (o). Yet it is said, that if persons innocently assembled together, do afterwards, upon a dispute happening to arise among them, form themselves into parties, with promises of mutual assistance, and then make an affray, they are guilty of a riot; because, upon their confederating together with an intention to break the peace, they may as properly be said to be assembled together for that purpose from the time of such confederacy, as if their first coming together had been on such a design (p).

Also it seems to be certain, that if a person, seeing others actually engaged in a riot, do join himself unto them, and assist them therein, he is as much a rioter as if he had at first assembled with them for the same purpose; inasmuch as he has no pretence to contend that he came innocently into the company, but appears to have joined himself unto them, with an intention to second them in the execution of their unlawful enterprise; and it would be endless as well as super

(j) Hawk. B. 1, c. 65, s. 10; 11 Mod. 116.

(k) R. v. the Bishop of Bangor, 1 Russ. C. & M. 255; ante, tit. Forcible Entry.

(1) R. v. Sudbury and others, 1 Ld.

Raym. 484.

(m) Hawk. B. 1, c. 65, s. 14.
(n) R. v. Scott, 3 Burr. R. 1262.
(0) Hawk. B. 1, c. 65, s. 3.
(p) Id. ibid.

H H

fluous, to examine whether every particular person engaged in a riot were, in truth, one of the first assembly, or actually had a previous knowledge of the design of its movers (q).

It has been holden, that the enterprise ought to be accompanied with some offer of violence, either to the person of a man or to his possessions, as by beating him, or forcing him to quit the possession of his lands or goods, or the like; and from hence it seems to follow, that persons riding together on the road with unusual weapons, or otherwise assembling together in such a manner as is apt to raise a terror in the people, without any offer of violence to any one in respect either of his person or possessions, are not properly guilty of a riot, but only of an unlawful assembly (r). However it seems clearly to be agreed, that in every riot there must be some circumstance either of actual force or violence, or at least of an apparent tendency thereto, as is naturally apt to strike a terror into the people, as the show of arms, threatening speeches, or turbulent gestures (r): for every such offence must be laid to the terror of the people (s). And from hence, adds Hawkins, "it clearly follows that assemblies at wakes or other festival times, or meetings for exercise of common sports or diversions, as bull-baiting [but see now 5 & 6 W. IV. c. 59, s. 3], wrestling, and such like, are not riotous. And from the same ground also it seems to follow, that it is possible for three persons or more to assemble together with an intent to execute a wrongful act, and also actually to perform their intended enterprise, without being rioters; as if a competent number of people assemble together in order to carry off a piece of timber to which one of the company has a pretended right, and afterwards do carry it away without any threatening words or other circumstances of terror." He adds, that by parity of reasoning, the assembling together in a peaceful manner to do a thing contrary to a statute (e. g. to celebrate mass), and afterwards peaceably performing the thing intended, cannot be a riot (t).

Whether the proclamation from the riot act, 1 G. I. c. 5, be read or not, the common law misdemeanour of riot remains, and magistrates, constables, and even private persons may disperse the offenders, and by force if it cannot be otherwise accomplished (u).

Training or Drilling to Use of Arms, &c.]-By 60 G. III. c. 1, every person who shall be present at any meeting or assembly for the

(q) Hawk. B. 1, c. 65, s. 3. (r) Id. s. 4.

(s) Id. ib.; R. v. Hughes, 4 C. & P.

373.

(t) Id. s. 5.

(u) R. v. Furzy, 6 C. & P. 81.

purpose of training and drilling any other person to use of arms, or the practice of military exercise, movements, &c. or who shall train. or drill any person to such practices, &c. or who shall aid and assist therein, without lawful authority from his majesty, or lord-lieutenant or two justices of the county, riding, &c. being legally convicted thereof (i. e. by indictment and verdict), shall be liable to fine and imprisonment for a space not exceeding two years. And all persons so assembled, &c. may be detained and committed for trial, unless sufficiently bailed until next assizes or sessions, general or quarterly. But prosecutions must be commenced within six months after the commission of the offence.

The 57 G. III. c. 19, and 60 G. III. c. 20, related to the assembling of persons for political purposes; but have now expired.

Indictment for a Riot.

That A. B. late of, &c. C. D. late of, &c. E. F. late of, &c. with divers evil disposed persons, to the number of ten or more, to the jurors aforesaid as yet unknown, on, &c. with force and arms, at, &c. did unlawfully, riotously, routously, and tumultuously assemble and meet together to disturb the peace of our lady the Queen (v), and being so then and there assembled and gathered together, did then and there make great noise, riot, tumult, and disturbance, and then and there unlawfully, riotously, routously, and tumultuously remained and continued together, making such noises, tumults, and disturbances for a long space of time, to wit, &c. to the great terror (w) and disturbance, not only of the liege subjects of our said lady the Queen there inhabiting and residing, but of all the other liege subjects of our said lady the Queen there passing and repassing in and along the public streets and queen's common highways there, in contempt, &c., and against the peace, &c.

Indictment for a Rout in a Licensed Country Theatre, in order to compel the Dismission of an Actor.

That on, &c. and long before that time, A. B. and C. D. were the proprietors and managers of a certain theatre or playhouse, situate in the parish of, &c. and then and there had lawful power, license, and authority (a) from time to time, for

(v) It is said that an unlawful purpose of assembly must be shown; but this seems doubtful, as a riot may occur, though the original object of the meeting was lawful. See R. v. Gulston, 2 Ld. Raym. 1210.

(w) These words are essential to sustain a charge of riot; but if the indictment omit them, and riotous acts, as cutting down fences, &c. are proved, it will still support a conviction of an "unlawful assembly," R. v. Cox, 4 C.

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »