it could also be shown that coin could | "oned for any term not exceeding be made by it. Reg. v. Mac Millan, "two years, with or without hard 1 Cox, C. C. 41-Maule. labour, and with or without solitary confinement." A press for coinage was a tool or an instrument within that branch By s. 11, "whosoever shall have of the 8 & 9 Will. 3, c. 26, which" in his custody or possession three made it treason to have the same or more pieces of false or counterknowingly in the party's custody." feit coin, resembling or apparRex v. Bell, 1 East, P. C. 169. ently intended to resemble, or pass 189. 66 So having knowingly in posses-"for any of the Queen's current sion a puncheon for the purpose of "gold or silver coin, knowing the coining, though that alone, without "same to be false or counterfeit, the counter puncheon, would not "and with intent to utter or put off make the figure. Rex v. Ridgelay, "the same or any of them, shall, in 1 East, P. C. 171; 1 Leach, C. C." England and Ireland, be guilty "of a misdemeanor, and, being conSo a collar of iron, for graining "victed thereof, shall be liable, at the edges of counterfeit money, was "the discretion of the court, to be an instrument, although it was to " kept in penal servitude for the be used in a coining press. Rex v. "term of five years, or to be imMoore, 2 C. & P. 235; 1. M. C. C.". prisoned for any term not exceed'ing two years (27 & 28 Vict. c. " 47), with or without hard labour, "and with or without solitary con"finement." (Former provision, 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 34, s. 8.) 122. So a mould of lead, having the stamp of one side of a shilling, was a tool or an instrument. Rex v. Lennard, 2 W. Bl. 807; 1 Leach, C. C. 90; 1 East, P. C. 170. It is a misdemeanor at common law to have tools for coining in possession with intent to use them. Rex v. Sutton, 1 East, P. C. 172. 14. Unlawful possession of Base 66 Having a large quantity of counterfeit coin in possession, many of each sort being of the same date, and made in the same mould, and each piece being wrapped in a separate piece of paper, and the whole distributed in different pockets of the dress, is some evidence that the possessor knew that the coin was counterfeit, and intended to utter it. Reg. v. Jarvis, Dears. C. C. 552; 1 Jur., N. S. 1114; 25 L. J., M. C. 30; 7 Cox, C. C. 53. Having counterfeit silver in possession, with intent to utter it as good, was no offence before 2 & 3 or. Will. 4, c. 34, s. 8. Rex v. Heath," rent gold or silver coin, knowing R. & R. C. C. 184; S. P., Rex v. "the same to be false or counterStewart, R. & R. C. C. 288. "feit, and shall, at the time of such Procuring base coin, with intent" tendering, uttering, or putting off, to utter it as good, is a misdemean- "have in his custody or possession, Rex v. Fuller, R. & R. C. C."besides the false or counterfeit "coin so tendered, uttered or put Having in possession a large "off, any other piece of false or quantity of base coin is evidence of "counterfeit coin, resembling or ap having procured it with intent to "parently intended to resemble or utter it, unless there are other cir-" pass for any of the Queen's curcumstances to induce a belief that "rent gold or silver coin, or shall, the defendant was the maker. Ib." either on the day of such tender 308. Having the possession of counter-ing, uttering or putting off, or feit money, with intention to pay it "within the space of ten days then away as for good money, was an "next ensuing, tender, utter, or put indictable offence at common law."off any false or counterfeit coin, Rex v. Parker, 1 Leach, C. C. 41. "resembling or apparently intended Possession of bad money five" to resemble or pass for any of the days after, may be given in evidence"Queen's current gold or silver to shew guilty knowledge. Har-"coin, knowing the same to be rison's case, 2 Lewin, C. C. 118-"false or counterfeit, shall, in EngTaunton. "land and Ireland, be guilty of a When pieces of counterfeit coin" misdemeanor, and, being convictare found on one of two persons, "ed thereof, shall be liable, at the acting in guilty concert, and both" discretion of the court, to be imknowing of the possession, both are "prisoned for any term not exceed. guilty. Reg. v. Rogers, 2 M. C. 85; 2 Lewin, C. C. 119, 297. 15. Uttering. C."ing two years, with or without "hard labour, and with or without "solitary confinement." (Former provision, 2 & 3 Will. 4, c 34, s. 7.) By s. 11, "whosoever shall have in his custody or possession three or more pieces of false or counter Statute.]-By 24 & 25 Vict. c. 99, s. 9, "whosoever shall tender," utter or put off any false or coun"terfeit coin, resembling or appar-" feit coin, resembling or apparent 66 66 66 66 66 66 "ly intended to resemble or pass "for any of the Queen's current "gold or silver coin, knowing the "same to be false or counterfeit, ently intended to resemble or pass "for any of the Queen's current 'gold or silver coin, knowing the same to be false or counterfeit, shall, in England and Ireland, be" and with intent to utter or put off guilty of a misdemeanor, and "the same or any of them, shall, in being convicted thereof, shall be "England and Ireland, be guilty of "liable, at the discretion of the "a misdemeanor, and being con"court, to be imprisoned for any "victed thereof, shall be liable, at "term not exceeding one year, with "the discretion of the court, to be or without hard labour, and with "kept in penal servitude for the or without solitary confinement."" term of five years (27 & 28 Vict. (Similar to former provision, 2 & 3" c. 47), or to be imprisoned for any Will. 4, c. 34, s. 7.) "term not exceeding two years, By s. 10," whosoever shall ten-" with or without hard labour, and "der, utter or put off any false or "with or without solitary confine"counterfeit coin, resembling or ap- "ment." parently intended to resemble or pass for any of the Queen's cur 66 66 By s. 12, "whosoever, having "been convicted, either before or "after the passing of this act, of "any such misdemeanor or crime "and offence as in any of the last "three preceding sections mention"ed, or of any felony or high crime "and offence against this or any "former act relating to the coin, "shall afterwards commit any of "the misdemeanors or crimes and "offences in any of the said sections "mentioned, shall, in England and "Ireland, be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof, shall be "liable, at the discretion of the court, to be kept in penal servitude, for life, or for any term not "less than five years (27 & 28 Vict. 47), or to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, "with or without hard labour, and "with or without solitary confinement." C. What amounts to.]-A prisoner went into a shop, asked for some coffee and sugar, and in payment put down on the counter a counterfeit shilling; the prosecutor said that the shilling was a bad one; whereupon the prisoner quitted the shop, leaving the shilling and also the coffee and sugar:-Held, that this was an uttering and putting off within the statute. Reg. v. Welch, T. & M. 409; 2 Den. C. C. 78; 15 Jur. 136; 20 L. J., M. C. 101. ed an uttering and a putting off counterfeit coin, the evidence was that the prisoner went into a shop and asked to purchase some articles, putting down a counterfeit shilling in payment, the shopkeeper said it was a bad one, and the prisoner then left the shop without the shilling or goods:-Held, that he was guilty of uttering. Reg. v. Welch, 4 Cox, C. C. 430-Jervis. The giving of a piece of counterfeit money in charity is not an uttering, although the person may know it to be a counterfeit; as in cases of this kind there must be some intention to defraud. Reg. v. Page, 8 C. & P. 122-Abinger. But where a person gave a counterfeit coin to a woman with whom he had shortly before had intercourse:-Held, an uttering. Reg. v. 1 Cox, C. C. 250-Denman and Coltman. Joint Uttering.]-If two utterers of counterfeit coin, with a general community of purpose, go different ways, and utter coin apart from each other, and not near enough to assist each other, their respective utterings are not joint utterings by both. Rex v. Manners, 7 C. & P. 801-Bolland. If two jointly prepare counterfeit coin, and utter it in different shops, apart from each other, but in concert, and intending to share the proceeds, the utterings of each are the joint utterings of both, and they may be convicted jointly. Reg. v. Hurse, 2 M. & Rob. 360-Maule. The prisoner and J. were indicted for a misdemeanor in uttering counterfeit coin. The uttering was effected by J. in the absence of the prisoner, but the jury found that they were both engaged on the evening on which the uttering took place, in the common purpose of uttering counterfeit shillings, and that in pursuance of that common purpose J. uttered the coin in question: -Held, that the prisoner was rightly convicted as a principal, there being no accessories in a misdemeanor. Reg. v. Greenwood, 2 Den. C. C. 453; 5 Cox, C. C. 521; 16 Jur. 390; 21 L. J., M. C. 127. Prisoners together uttered a bad Upon an indictment which charg-half-crown. Shortly afterwards they On an indictment for a joint uttering of counterfeit coin, where both are not present at the time of the uttering, the true question seems to be, whether the one was so near the other as to help the other to get rid of the counterfeit coin. Reg. v. Jones, 9 C. & P. 761; Reg. v. Rogers, 2 M. C. C. 85; 2 Lewin, C. C. 119, 297. Franks, 2 Leach, C. C. 644. Rex V. separated, and one of them went | ful money; for the words of the to a shop and uttered another bad statute were in the disjunctive utter half-crown, and then the other or tender in payment. went to the same shop and uttered a third bad half-crown; but at these second and third utterings neither was proved to have been near the other-Held, that the proof of previous concert would not sustain a count for a joint uttering in either of the second or third utterings. Reg. v. West, 2 Cox, C. C. 237Creswell. By Husband and Wife.]-Husband and wife were jointly indicted for uttering counterfeit coin:-Held, that the wife was entitled to an acquittal, as it appeared that she uttered the money in the presence of her husband. Rex v. Price, 8 C. & P. 19-Park, Bosanquet and Colt man. A wife went from house to house uttering base coin. Her husband accompanied her, but remained outside-Held, that the wife acted under her husband's compulsion. Conolly's case, 2 Lewin, C. C. 229Bayley. Indictment. ] An indictment, charging that the prisoner, one piece of counterfeit coin, &c., "did utter and put off to A., knowing the same to be false and counterfeit," is good, whether the objection of uncertainty as to the time, &c., and in knowing, is taken before or after verdict. Reg. v. Page, 2 M. C. C. 219; 9 C. & P. 756. A count charging the prisoner with having counterfeit money in his possession at the time he uttered other counterfeit money, must contain a distinct averment of the fact of uttering. Rex v. Kelly, 3 Esp. 28 -Buller. An indictment on 15 Geo. 2, c. 28, for uttering bad money by the common trick called "ringing the changes," was good, although it did not state that it was uttered in payment as and for good and law An indictment for knowingly uttering counterfeit coin, charged that the prisoner "did utter and put off to one S. A., the wife of W. G., knowing the same to be false and counterfeit " :-Held, that the allegation of the scienter was sufficient, and that the word "knowing" must be taken to apply to the prisoner, and not to "S. A., the wife of W. G.," who was the last antecedent; and that the scienter must be taken to apply to the time of the uttering, although it was not stated to be "then and there." Reg. v. Jones, 9 C. &P. 761-Coleridge. Evidence of Guilty Knowledge.] -On an indictment for uttering counterfeit coin, to prove a guilty knowledge, evidence may be given of a subsequent uttering by the prisoner of counterfeit coin of a different denomination to that mentioned in the indictment. The difference in the denomination of the coin goes to the weight of evidence, but not to its admissibility. Reg. v. Forster, Dears. C. C. 456; 1 Jur., N. S., 407; 3 C. L. R. 681; 24 L. J., M. C. 134; 6 Cox, C. C. 521. Twice within Ten Days.]-An indictment for knowingly uttering counterfeit coin twice on the same day, charged an uttering of a counterfeit half-crown, and that the defendant on the same day, uttered "one other piece of false and coun terfeit (omitting the word 'coin'), resembling, and apparently intended to resemble, and pass for a piece of the Queen's current silver coin, called a half crown, unlawfully, &c., did utter and put off to one S. A., the wife of W. G., knowing the same to be false and counterfeit":-Held, that the omission of the word "coin" did not render the indictment bad, as the words "false and counterfeit " might be alone in the absence of the man: rejected as surplusage, and the in-Held, that the man was not 66 one other liable to be convicted with the actdictment would then be, piece resembling, and apparently ual utterer, although proved to be intended to resemble, and pass for the associate of the woman on the a piece of the Queen's current silver day of uttering, and to have had coin, called a half-crown." Reg. v. other bad money about him for the purpose of uttering; and, secondly, Jones, 9 C. & P. 761-Coleridge. that the woman could not be convicted of the second offence of having other bad money in her possession, on the evidence of her associating with a man not present at the uttering, but having large quantities of bad money about him for the purpose of uttering. Rex v. Else, R. & R. C. C. 142. But see Reg. v. Greenwood, 5 Cox, C. C. 521; 2 Den. C. C. 453. On a conviction of two separate offences of uttering counterfeit coin, in two counts, one judgment for two years' imprisonment, under 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 34, s. 7, was bad. Rex V. Robinson, 1 M. C. C. 413. In an indictment on 15 Geo. 2, c. 28, s. 3, it was not necessary to aver that the defendant was a common utterer of false money. Smith, 2 B. & P. 127, Rex v. While having other Counterfeit 16. When Offence complete. Money.]-If two prisoners are indicted for uttering a counterfeit By 24 & 25 Vict. c. 99, s. 30, shilling, having another counterfeit shilling in their possession, it is not "every offence of falsely making or necessary to prove with certainty" counterfeiting any coin, or of buywhich of the pieces was the one ut-"ing, selling, receiving, paying, tentered, and which was found on them "dering, uttering or putting off, or of unuttered, if both the pieces of the "offering to buy, sell, receive, pay, money are proved to be counterfeit."utter or put off, any false or counAnd if it appears that two prisoners "terfeit coin, against the provisions went to a shop, and that one of "of this act, shall be deemed to be them went in and uttered the bad" complete, although the coin so "made or counterfeited, or bought, money, having no more in her possession, and the other stayed outside" sold, received, paid, tendered, utthe shop, having other bad pieces of "tered or put off, or offered to be money, both may be convicted;"bought, sold, received, paid, utterthe uttering and the possession be- "ed or put off, shall not be in a fit ing both joint. Rex v. Skerritt, 2 C." state to be uttered, or the coun"terfeiting thereof shall not be fin& P. 427-Garrow. Where one of two persons in "ished or perfected." coin, Forging the impression of money company utters counterfeit and other counterfeit coin is found on an irregular piece of metal, withon the other person, they are joint-out finishing it, so as to make it ly guilty of the aggravated offence current, was an incomplete crime, under 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 34, s. 7, if and not high treason. Rex v. Varacting in concert, and both know-ley, 2 W. Bl. 682; 1 Leach, C. C. 76, ing of the possession. Reg. v. Ger- 253; 1 East, P. C. 164. rish, 2 M. & Rob. 219-Maule. That it is not necessary to comWhere a man and woman were plete the offence that the possession indicted for uttering a bad shilling should be with a felonious intent to B., and having in their possession other than knowledge of possession another bad shilling at the time, without lawful authority or excuse. and the uttering was by the woman | Reg. v Harvey, 11 Cox, C. C. 662. FISH. DIG.--7 |