INJURIES TO MANUFACTURING MACHINES, ETC. (C)(i).

Taking away part of a frame and thereby rendering it useless, R. v. Tacey, R. & R. 452, and screwing up parts of an engine and reversing the plug of the pump, thereby rendering it useless and liable to burst: R. v. Fisher, 101 Cox, 146, Warb. Lead Cas. 195, are damaging within the Act, although no actual permanent injury be done. If a threshing machine be taken to pieces and separated by the owner the destruction of any part of it is within the statute: R. v. Mackerel, 4 C. & P. 448. So is the destruction of a water-wheel by which a threshing machine is worked: R. v. Fidler, 4 C. & P. 449. So though the sideboards of the machine be wanting, without which it will act but not perfectly, it is within the statute. But if the machine be taken to pieces, and in part destroyed by the owner from fear, the remaining parts do not constitute a machine: within the statute: R. v. West, 2 Russ. 1087. It is not necessary that any part of the machine should be broken; a dislocation or disarrangement is sufficient: R. v. Foster, 6 Cox, 25.

Indictment under (D) (a).

two elm trees, the property of J. N., then growing in a certain park of the said J. N., situate in unlawfully and wilfully, without legal justification or excuse and without colour of right, did cut and damage, thereby then doing injury to the said J. N. to an amount exceeding the sum of five dollars, to wit, the amount of ten dollars. (A count may be added forcutting with intent to steal the trees, under s. 336.

Indictment under (D) (e). ten elm trees, the property of J. N., then growing in a certain close of the said J. N., situate unlawfully and wilfully, without legal justification or excuse and without colour of right, did cut and damage by night, thereby then doing injury to the said J. N. to an amount exceeding the sum of twenty dollars, to wit, the sum of twenty-five dollars. (Add a count under s. 336.)

CRIM. LAW-37

See s. 711, as to a verdict for an attempt to commit the offence charged upon an indictment for the offence, in certain cases. A variance in the number of trees is not material. It must be proved, under (D) (a), that the tree was growing in a park, and that the damage done exceeds five dollars.

Under (D) (e) the damage must not be less than twenty dollars and must have been done by night. The amount of injury done means the actual injury done to the trees by the defendant's act; it is not sufficient to bring the case within the statute that, although the amount of such actual injury is less than twenty dollars, the amount of consequential damage would exceed twenty dollars: R. v. Whiteman Dears. 353; see R. v. Lewis, 2 Russ. 1067, as to indictment; R. v. Williams, 9 Cox, 338; R. v. Thoman, 12 Cox, 54.

Defendant was indicted for unlawfully and maliciously committing damage upon a window in the house of the prosecutor. Defendant, who had been fighting with other persons in the street after being turned out of a public house, went across the street, and picked up a stone which he threw at them. The stone missed them, passed over their heads, and broke a window in the house. The jury found that he intended to hit one or more of the persons he had been fighting with, and did not intend to break the window: Held, that upon this finding the prisoner was not guilty of the charge within this section; to support a conviction of this nature there must be a wilful and intentional doing of an unlawful act in relation to the property damaged R. v. Pembliton, 12 Cox, 607; see on this last case R. v. Welsh, 13 Cox, 121; R. v. Faulkner, 13 Cox, 550, and R. v. Latimer, 16 Cox, 70.

The words "real or personal property" mean actual, tangible property, not a mere legal right: Laws v. Eltringham, 15 Cox, 22, 8 Q. B. D. 283.

Two indictments were preferred against defendants for feloniously destroying the fruit trees respectively of M. and C. The offences charged were proved to have been committed on the same night, and the injury complained of was done in the same manner in both cases. Defendants were put on trial on the charge of destroying the trees of M. and evidence relative to the offence charged in the other indictment was admitted as showing that the offences had been committed by the same persons.

Held, that such evidence was properly received: R. v. McDonald, 10 O. R. 553.

ATTEMPTS TO KILL, ETC., Cattle.

500. Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to two years' imprisonment who wilfully

(a) attempts to kill, maim, wound, poison or injure any cattle, or the young thereof; or

(b) places poison in such a position as to be easily partaken of by any such animal. R. S. C. c. 168, s. 44.

66

Cattle" defined, s. 3; fine, s. 958. See remarks under preceding section. The punishment was not defined in the repealed clause.

As to attempts generally see remarks under s. 64. This s. 500 has no other effect than to reduce the punishment, which, without it, would be seven years under ss. 499-528.

INJURIES TO OTHER ANIMALS.

501. Every one is guilty of an offence and liable, on summary conviction, to a penalty not exceeding one hundred dollars over and above the amount of injury done, or to three months' imprisonment with or without hard labour, who wilfully kills, maims, wounds, poisons or injures any dog, bird, beast, or other animal, not being cattle, but being either the subject of larceny at common law, or being ordinarily kept in a state of confinement, or kept for any lawful purpose.

2. Every one who, having been convicted of any such offence, afterwards commits any offence under this section, is guilty of an indictable offence, and liable to a fine or imprisonment, or both, in the discretion of the court. 53 V. c. 37, s. 16. R. S. C. c. 168, s. 45 (Amended).

The punishment under s-s. 2 is provided for by s. 951. Greaves says: "This clause is new, and is a great improvement of the law, as it will protect domestic animals

from malicious injuries. It includes any beast or animal, not being cattle, which is the subject of larceny at common law. It also includes birds which are the subject of larceny at common law, such as all kinds of poultry and, under certain circumstances, swans and pigeons. So also it includes any bird, beast or other animal ordinarily kept in a state of confinement, though not the subject of larceny, such as parrots and ferrets; and it is to be observed that the words ordinarily kept in a state of confinement, are a description of the mode in which the animals are usually kept, and do not render it necessary to prove that the bird or animal was confined at the time when it was injured. Lastly the clause includes any bird or animal kept for any domestic purpose, which clearly embraces cats."

As to a verdict of attempt to commit the offence charged in certain cases see s. 711.

The words or kept for any lawful purpose cover all animals kept in a circus, menagerie, etc.

THREATS TO INJURE CATTLE.

502. Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to two years' imprisonment who sends, delivers or utters, or directly or indirectly causes to be received, knowing the contents thereof, any letter or writing threatening to kill, maim, wound, poison, or injure any cattle. R. S. C. c. 173, s. 8. 24-25 V. c. 97, s. 50 (Imp.).

See ante, under s. 487.

Fine, s. 958. "Cattle" defined, s. 3.

The punishment was ten years by the repealed clause. It is still ten years, under s. 487, for sending a letter threatening to burn any building, stack of grain, etc. Why it should be two years under this section and ten under s. 487 is not clear.

INJURIES TO POLL-BOOKS, ETC.

503. Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to seven years' imprisonment who wilfully-

(a) destroys, injures or obliterates, or causes to be destroyed, injured or obliterated; or

(b) makes or causes to be made any erasure, addition of names or interlineation of names in or upon

any writ of election, or any return to a writ of election, or any indenture, poll-book, voters' list, certificate, affidavit or report, or any document, ballot or paper made, prepared or drawn out according to any law in regard to Dominion, provincial, municipal or civic elections. R. S. c. 168, s. 55 (Amended).

The words "Dominion" and "ballot

on

are new. They were not required; s. 102 of c. 8, R. S. C. fully covers them. See under s. 551, post, a reference to the above section. Indictment.that A. B. at unlawfully and wilfully, without legal justification or excuse, and without colour of right, did destroy (injure or obliterate) a certain writ of election (describe) prepared and drawn out according to a law of the Dominion of Canada, to wit, the Act (as the case may be).

To destroy any ballot or paper is by the above section punishable by seven years. To destroy any ballot paper, or a ballot box, or a packet of ballot papers is, by s. 100, c. 8, R. S. C., punishable by any term not exceeding six months!

INJURIES BY TENANTS.

504. Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to five years' imprisonment who, being possessed of any dwelling-house or other building, or part of any dwelling-house or other building which is built on lands subject to a mortgage or which is held for any term of years or other less term, or at will, or held over after the termination of any tenancy, wilfully and to the prejudice of the mortgagee or owner

(a) pulls down or demolishes, or begins to pull down or demolish the same or any part thereof, or removes or begins to remove the same or any part thereof from the premises on which it is erected; or

(b) pulls down or severs from the freehold any fixture fixed in or to such dwelling-house or building, or part of such dwelling-house or building. R. S. C. c. 168, s. 15 (Extended). 24-25 V. c. 97, s. 13 (Imp.).

as tenant for a term of years then unexpired; and that the said A. B., being so possessed as aforesaid, on the day and year aforesaid, did wilfully, to the prejudice of C. D., the owner, without legal justification or excuse, and without colour of right, pull down and demolish the said dwelling