and surname of him the said A. B., or with such marks with which the said sheep respectively had, for the three preceding years, been usually marked, but had neglected then and there so to do; against the form of the statute in such case made and provided. And I, &c.

Proceedings for penalties.] The proceedings under this Act, may be before one justice; and the conviction shall be in the words or to the effect following

County of Be it remembered, that on this day of

}

in the

year of the reign of ·

A. B. is convicted before of Her Majesty's justices of the peace for the of, by virtue of an Act of parliament made in the thirty-eighth year of the reign of King George the Third, intituled "An Act for preventing the depasturing of forests, commons and open fields, with sheep or lambs infected with the scab or mange, in that part of Great Britain called England:" For that [here specify the offence, with the time and place when and where the same was committed]. And I [or we] the said · do adjudge him [her or them] to forfeit and pay for the same the sum of Given under my hand and seal [or our hands and seals] the day and year aforesaid.

The penalty or forfeiture shall be levied by distress and sale of the offender's goods, by warrant of one justice, together with costs; half to go to the informer and half to the overseers of the place where the offence was committed, in aid of the poor-rate. Id. s. 7.

Appeal, &c.] Any party aggrieved may appeal to the ses sions next after four months from the time the matter of appeal shall have arisen; and the sessions may award costs. Id. s. 9.

No proceedings shall be quashed for want of form, or removed by certiorari, &c. Id. s. 16.

COMPOUNDING FELONY, &c.

Compounding felony.] This offence, called in our old books theft bote, is where a person, whose goods have been stolen, takes his goods again, or other amends, not to prosecute. 1 Hawk. c. 59, 8. 5. But it is no offence merely to take back one's goods which have been stolen, unless some favour be shown to the thief. Id. s. 7.

The offence is punishable with fine, or imprisonment, or both; unless where it is accompanied with that degree of

maintenance of the thief, which may make the party an accessory after the fact to the felony. Id. s. 6. See ante, p. 6.

Compounding penal actions.] Compounding any penal action at the suit of a common informer, without the order or leave of some of the courts at Westminster, was formerly punishable with the pillory, and a fine of £10; 18 El. c. 5, s.4. And see R. v. Crisp et al. 1 B. & A. 282; but now with fine, or imprisonment, or both. 56 G. 3, c. 138, s. 2. And a party may be indicted for taking money for refraining to prefer an information as a common informer, even although the offence, which was to have been the subject of the information, had not in fact been committed; nor is it necessary, to constitute the offence of compounding penal informations, within stat. 18 El. c. 5, that any information should have in fact been laid. R. v. Best, 9 Car. & P. 368.

Rewards for helping to stolen goods.] 'Every person who shall corruptly take any money or reward, directly or indirectly, under pretence or upon account of helping any person to any chattel, valuable security or other property, which shall, by any felony or misdemeanor, have been stolen, taken, obtained or converted,-shall (unless he cause the offender to be apprehended and brought to trial for the same) be guilty of felony" transportation for life or not less than seven years, or imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for not more than four years. 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 29, s. 58.

Commitment:-On at - feloniously and corruptly did take and receive from C. D. certain money and reward, to wit, the sum of ten pounds, of the monies of the said C. D., under pretence of helping the said C. D. to certain goods and chattels of him the said C. D., which had before then been feloniously stolen, taken and carried away, [or before then been unlawfully obtained from the said C. D. by false pretences, or as the case may be], he the said A. B. not having caused the person by whom the said goods were so [stolen, taken, and carried away] as aforesaid, to be apprehended and brought to trial for the same; against the form of the statute in such case made and provided. And you, the said keeper, &c.

Advertising a reward for the purpose of getting back stolen property, without prosecuting the offenders, &c., subjects the party to a penalty of 50%., recoverable by action. 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 29, s. 59.

CONCEALING BIRTH.

"If any woman shall be delivered of a child, and shall, by

secret burying or otherwise disposing of the dead body of the said child, endeavour to conceal the birth thereof:" misdemeanor, imprisonment with or without hard labour for not more than two years; and it shall not be necessary to prove whether the child died before or after its birth. 9 G. 4, c. 31, s. 14. Where a woman, delivered of a seven months' child, threw it down a privy, this was holden to be an endeavour to conceal the birth, although the birth appeared to be known to another woman. R. v. Eliz. Cornwall, R. & Ry. 336. So if the woman effect the act of secretly burying or otherwise disposing of the dead body, by an agent, she may be guilty of the offence defined by the statute. R. v. Douglas and Hall, 7 Car. & P. 644. And where it appeared that such an agent had previously counselled the woman to conceal the birth, it was holden that he might be indicted under the 31st section of the same statute, by which persons counselling a misdemeanor within the Act, are punishable as principals. Id. But it must appear that some act of disposal was done by the woman, after the death of the child; R. v. Snell, 2 Moody & R. 44; and therefore where a woman having gone to a privy for another purpose, the child slipped from her unawares, fell into the soil, and was suffocated, Patteson, J. held that she could not be convicted under this statute, although it was proved also that she had denied the birth of the child. R. v. Turner, 8 Car. & P. 755. See R. v. Coxhead, Car. & K. 623. So where the child was found concealed in a bed among the feathers, it not being known who placed it there, and it appearing that the mother had sent for a surgeon to attend her in her lying-in, and had prepared clothes for her baby: Park, J., held that these latter facts negatived concealment, and directed the jury to acquit the prisoner. R. v. Highley, 4 Car. & P. 366. And in a recent case, before Rolfe, B., on the northern circuit, where it appeared that the woman put the child into her box in her bedroom, with intent to remove and dispose of it permanently afterwards, for the purpose of concealing its birth; his Lordship held that it was not a case within the statute; the words "otherwise disposing of the dead body," must mean a disposal of the same nature as that preceding it in the same sentence, namely, secret burying," and must be such as was intended by the woman to be a final disposal of it. R. v. Mary Alton, York Sp. Ass. 1841, MS. But in a still more recent case, where the woman concealed the child between the bed and the mattress, and it appeared that before her delivery she constantly denied her being with child, and after her delivery persisted in saying that she had not been delivered, but at last confessed to the surgeon that she had,-the woman being convicted, and the case reserved for the opinion of the judges, they held that she was properly convicted. R. v. Goldthorpe, 1 Car. & M. 335.

It may be necessary to mention, that a woman may be convicted for this offence, either on an indictment for it, or, when indicted for murder of the child, she may be acquitted of the murder and found guilty of the concealment. 9 G. 4, c. 31, s. 14.

at

Commitment:-On being then and there delivered of a certain male child, did, by secretly burying the same [or as the case may be], unlawfully endeavour to conceal the birth thereof; against the form of the statute in such case made and provided. And you the said keeper, &c.

The costs of the prosecution are now allowed, in the same manner as in cases of felony. 1 Vict. c. 44.

CONFESSION.

See" Commitment."

CONIES.

See "Larceny."

CONSPIRACY.

If two or more persons conspire to do an unlawful act, or to do a lawful act by unlawful means: it is an indictable offence, punishable with fine, or imprisonment, or both,-whether any overt act be done in furtherance of the conspiracy, by any of the parties to it, or not. 1 Hawk. c. 72, s. 2. R. v. Gill and Henry, 2 B. & A. 204. And see R. v. Fowle and Elliott, 4 Car. & P. 592. R. v. Biers et al., 1 Ad. & El. 327. A conspiracy, by false reports of the death of Buonaparte, to raise the price of the public funds, was holden an indictable offence, even if it had not been pursued to its consequences, or the parties had not been able to carry it into effect. R. v. De Berenger et al., 8 M. & S. 67. So is a conspiracy to extort money from a man, by charging him falsely with the commission of an act, whether such act be criminal in itself or not. R. v. Ripsal, 1 W. Bl. 368, 3 Burr. 1320. And see R. v. Aldridge, 1 Nev. & M. 776. So is a conspiracy to obtain money for an appoint

ment to an office under Government. R. v. Pollman, 2 Camp. 229. So is a conspiracy to obtain from others their goods, under false pretences and by subtle means and devices. R. v. Parker et al., 11 Law J. 102. See King et al. v. R. in error, 14 Law J. 172, m. So, a conspiracy by the master of a female apprentice, an attorney, and a gentleman, to assign the apprentice to the latter, though with her own consent, for the purpose of prostitution, was holden indictable. R. v. Delaval, 3 Burr. 1344; 1 W. Bl. 410, 439. But where an indictment charged a conspiracy to cause a female pauper, who was chargeable to a particular parish, to be married to a pauper of another parish, the court held that this of itself was not unlawful; to render the conspiracy indictable, it should show that the marriage was to be effected by fraud or violence, or other unlawful means. R. v. Seward et al., 1 Ad. & El. 706. So, an indictment will not lie for a conspiracy to commit a mere civil trespass. R. v. Turner, 13 East, 228.

A conspiracy is proved, either expressly, or by proof of facts from which it may fairly be implied. It is seldom proved expressly; nor can a case easily be imagined in which that is likely to occur, unless where one of the persons implicated, consents to be examined as a witness for the prosecution. In nearly all cases, therefore, the conspiracy is proved by what is usually termed circumstantial evidence, namely, by the proof of facts from which it may be implied. The acts done by each of the parties, or by some or all of them jointly, in furtherance of their common purpose, are termed overt acts; and when once the concert between the parties is proved, the overt act of each is deemed evidence against all, no matter where committed, whether in the county or elsewhere. And if there be not express proof of the conspiracy itself, such of these overt acts which tend to prove it, should first be selected, and proved; and then the remaining overt acts may be given in evidence. See R. v. Murphy and Douglas, 8 Car. & P. 297.

If two be charged with a conspiracy, and there be not sufficient evidence against one, the other must be discharged; for one person alone cannot be guilty of a conspiracy. 1 Hawk. c. 72, 8. 8. And for the same reason, a husband and wife cannot alone be indicted for a conspiracy, for they are but one person in law. Id. But if two be indicted for having conspired with others who are not tried, then, if one be acquitted, the other may still be convicted; Id.; or, if two be indicted for or charged with a conspiracy, and one die, the survivor may be convicted. R. v. Nichols, 2 Str. 1227. Commitment:-On did amongst themselves unlawfully conspire, combine, confederate and agree to [here state the purpose to be effected, specifically.] And you the said keeper, &c.

at