R. v. Neale, 9 C. & P. 431; R. v. Vincent, 9 C. & P. 91; R. v. James, 5 C. & P. 153.

IF RIOTERS DO NOT DISPERSE, ETC., ETC.

84. If the persons so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled together as mentioned in the next preceding section, or twelve or more of them, continue together, and do not disperse themselves, for the space of thirty minutes after the proclamation is made or after such hindrance as aforesaid, it is the duty of every such sheriff, justice and other officer, and of all persons required by them to assist, to cause such persons to be apprehended and carried before a justice of the peace; and if any of the persons so assembled is killed or hurt in the apprehension of such persons, or in the endeavour to apprehend or disperse them, by reason of their resistance, every person ordering them to be apprehended or dispersed, and every person executing such orders, shall be indemnified against all proceedings of every kind in respect thereof: Provided, that nothing herein contained shall, in any way, limit or affect any duties or powers imposed or given by this Act as to the suppression of riots before or after the making of the said proclamation, R. S. C. c. 147, s. 3.

See annotation under preceding section.

RIOTOUS DESTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS.

85. All persons are guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life who, being riotously and tumultuously assembled together to the disturbance of the public peace, unlawfully and with force demolish or pull down, or begin to demolish or pull down, any building, or any machinery, whether fixed or movable, or any erection used in farming land, or in carrying on any trade or manufacture, or any erection or structure used in conducting the business of any mine, or any bridge, waggon-way or track for conveying minerals from any mine. R. S. C. c. 147, s. 9; 24-25 V. c. 97, s. 11, (Imp.). See next section.

at

Indictment.-That on J. S., J. W. and E. W., together with divers other evil-disposed persons, to the jurors aforesaid unknown, unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously did assemble together, to the disturbance of the public peace; and being then and there so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled together as aforesaid did then and there unlawfully and with force begin to demolish and pull down, the dwelling-house of one J. N.,

there situate.

See note under next section.

The accused may be convicted of the offence covered by next section, if the evidence warrants it: section 713.

RIOTOUS DAMAGE TO BUILDINGS.

86. All persons are guilty of an indictable offence and liable to seven years' imprisonment who, being riotously and tumultuously assembled together to the disturbance of the public peace, unlawfully and with force injure or damage any of the things mentioned in the last preceding section.

2. It shall not be a defence to a charge of an offence against this or the last preceding section that the offender believed he had a right to act as he did, unless he actually had such a right. R. S. C. c. 147, s. 10; 24-25 V. c. 97, s. 12 (Imp.). "Sub-section 2 removes what is at least a doubt. See R. v. Langford, Car. & M. 602; R. v. Casey, 8 Ir. Rep. C. L. 408."-Imp. Comm. Rep.

See R. v. Phillips, 2 Moo. 252; Drake v. Footitt, 7 Q. B. D. 201.

Indictment.-That on

at

S., J. W. and E. W., together with divers other evil-disposed persons, to the said jurors unknown, unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously did assemble together to the disturbance of the public peace, and being then and there so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled together as aforesaid, did then and there unlawfully and with force injure a certain dwelling-house of one J. N., there situate. Add a count stating "damage" instead of “ injure."

The riotous character of the assembly must be proved. It must be proved that these three or more, but not less than three, persons assembled together, and that their assembling was accompanied with some such circumstances, either of actual force or violence, or at least of an apparent tendency thereto, as were calculated to inspire people with terror, such as being armed, using threatening speeches, turbulent gestures, or the like. It is a sufficient terror and alarm, if any one of the Queen's subjects be in fact terrified: Archbold, 552. Then prove that the assembly began with force to demolish the house in question. It must appear that they began to demolish some part of the freehold; for instance, the demolition of moveable shutters is not sufficient: R. v. Howell, 9 C. & P. 437. A demolition by fire is within the Statute. Prove that the defendants were either active in demolishing the house, or present,

aiding and abetting. To convict under section 85, the jury must be satisfied that the ultimate object of the rioters was to demolish the house, and that if they had carried their intention into effect, they would in point of fact have demolished it; for if the rioters merely do an injury to the house, and then of their own accord go away as having completed their purpose it is not a beginning to demolish within this section. But a total demolition is not necessary, though the parties were not interrupted, and the fact that the rioters left a chimney remaining, will not prevent the Statute from applying. But if the demolishing or intent to demolish be not proved, and evidence of riot and injury or damage to the building is produced, the jury may find the defendant guilty of the offence created by section 86.

UNLAWFUL DRILLING.

87. The Governor in Council is authorized from time to time to prohibit assemblies without lawful authority of persons for the purpose of training or drilling themselves, or of being trained or drilled to the use of arms, or for the purpose of practising military exercises, movements or evolutions, and to prohibit persons when assembled for any other purpose so training or drilling themselves or being trained or drilled. Any such prohibition may be general or may apply only to a particular place or district and to assemblies of a particular character, and shall come into operation from the publication in the Canada Gazette of a proclamation embodying the terms of such prohibition, and shall continue in force until the like publication of a proclamation issued by the authority of the Governor in Council revoking such prohibition.

2. Every person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to two years' imprisonment who, without lawful authority and in contravention of such prohibition or proclamation

(a) Is present at or attends any such assembly for the purpose of training or drilling any other person to the use of arms or the practice of military exercises or evolutions; or

(b) At any assembly trains or drills any other person to the use of arms or the practice of military exercises or evolutions. R. S. C. c. 147, ss. 4 & 5. 60 Geo. III. and 1 Geo. IV. c. 1, (Imp.). (Amended.)

Limitation, 6 months, section 551; see Archbold, 822.

UNLAWFULLY BEING DRILLED.

88. Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to two years' imprisonment who, without lawful authority, attends, or is present at, any such assembly as in the last preceding section mentioned, for the purpose of being, or who at any such assembly is, without lawful authority and in contra

vention of such prohibition or proclamation, trained or drilled to the use of arms or the practice of military exercises or evolutions. R. S. C. c. 147, s. 6.

Limitation, 6 months, section 551.

FORCIBLE ENTRY OR DETAINER.

89. Forcible entry is where a person, whether entitled or not, enters in a manner likely to cause a breach of the peace, or reasonable apprehension thereof, on land then in actual and peaceable possession of another.

2. Forcible detainer is where a person in actual possession of land, without colour of right, detains it in a manner likely to cause a breach of the peace, or reasonable apprehension thereof, against a person entitled by law to the possession thereof.

3. What amounts to actual possession or colour of right is a question of law. 4. Every one who forcibly enters or forcibly detains land is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to one year's imprisonment.

Archbold, 886; R. v. Smyth, 5 C. & P. 201; Lows v. Telford, 13 Cox, 226, Warb. Lead Cas. 51.

"Forcible entry and detainer are offences at common law; and this section, we believe, correctly states the existing law."Imp. Comm. Rep.

on

Indictment.-That A. D., C. D., E. F., G. H., and J. K., day of in the year of our Lord unlawfully and injuriously and with a strong hand entered into a certain mill, and certain lands and houses, and the sites of a certain mill and certain houses, with the appurtenances, situate in the parish of in the said county, and then in the possession of one L. M., and unlawfully and injuriously and with a strong hand, expelled and put out the said L.M. from the possession of the said premises, in a manner likely to cause a breach of the peace.

AFFRAY.

90. An affray is the act of fighting in any public street or highway, or fighting to the alarm of the public in any other place to which the public have

access.

2. Every one who takes part in an affray is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to one year's imprisonment with hard labour. R. S. C. c. 147, s. 14.

The words "to the alarm of the public" should be inserted after the word "fighting" in the first line. Under section 14, chapter 147 of the Revised Statutes, this offence

was punishable by three months on summary conviction. It must now be proceeded against by indictment.

CHALLENGE TO FIGHT A DUEL.

91. Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to three years' imprisonment who challenges or endeavours by any means to provoke any person to fight a duel, or endeavours to provoke any person to challenge any other person so to do.

This was an offence at common law: R. v. Rice, 3 East, 581; R. v. Philipps, 6 East, 463: 3 Chit. 487.

PRIZE FIGHTS, ETC., ETC.

92. In sections ninety-three to ninety-seven inclusive the expression "prize-fight" means an encounter or fight with fists or hands, between two persons who have met for such purpose by previous arrangement made by or for them. R. S. C. c. 153, s. 1.

R. v. Perkins, 4 C. & P. 537; R. v. Murphy, 6 C. & P. 103; R. v. Coney, 15 Cox, 46, 8 Q. B. D. 534; in R. v. Taylor, 13 Cox, 68, it was held that a stakeholder to a prizefight is not an accessory before the fact nor an abettor. to the manslaughter, if one of the combatants is killed, he not being present: see R. v. Orton, Warb. Lead. Cas. 54, and R. v. Coney, Id. 56.

The following three sections of chapter 153, Revised Statutes are unrepealed.

6. If, at any time, the sheriff of any county, place or district in Canada, any chief of police, any police officer, or any constable, or other peace officer, has reason to believe that any person within his bailiwick or jurisdiction is about to engage as principal in any prize-fight within Canada, he shall forthwith arrest such person and take him before some person having authority to try offences against this Act, and shall forthwith make complaint in that behalf, upon oath, before such person; and thereupon such person shall inquire into the charge, and if he is satisfied that the person so brought before him was, at the time of his arrest, about to engage as a principal in a prize-fight, he shall require the accused to enter into a recognizance, with sufficient sureties, in a sum not exceeding five thousand dollars and not less than one thousand dollars, conditioned that the accused will not engage in any such fight within one year from and after the date of such arrest; and in default of such recognizance, the person before whom the accused has been brought shall commit the accused to the gaol of the county, district or city within which such inquiry takes place, or if there is no common gaol there, then to the common gaol which is nearest to the place where such inquiry is had, there to remain until he gives such recognizance with such sureties.