labour, sect. 10) for not more than three years. 1 Vict. c. 87, s. 5. Accessories before the fact, the same punishment; ante, p. 16; accessories after the fact, imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for not more than two years. 1 Vict. c. 87, s. 9. Costs, see ante, p. 186; costs of apprehension, see ante, p. 189. As to robbery with violence, see post, p. 424.

Evidence.

To maintain this indictment, the prosecutor must prove

1. The force or violence or threats used by the prisoner, in taking from him, or compelling him to deliver up, the property in question. Robbery is defined to be a felonious taking of money or goods from the person of another, or in his presence, against his will, by violence or putting him in fear. And this violence or putting him in fear must precede or accompany the stealing. And therefore where it appeared that the prisoner caught hold of the prosecutor's watch chain and jerked his watch from his pocket with considerable force, upon which a scuffle ensued and the prisoner was secured; Garrow, B., held that the force used to obtain the watch did not make the offence amount to robbery; nor did the force used afterwards in the scuffle, for the force, &c., necessary to constitute robbery, must be either immediately before or at the time of the larceny, and not after it. R. v. Gnosil, 1 Car. & P. 304. So, where a man having money in his hand, some thieves struck it out, and then by menaces drove the owner off, and they took the money up themselves, and made off with it this was holden not to be robbery; for the menace, which alone put the prosecutor in fear, was after the loss of his money. R. v. Francis et al., 2 Str. 1015. R. v. Grey et al., 2 East, P. C. 708. So, where the prisoner being on horseback, desired the prosecutor to open a gate for him, and whilst he was doing so the prisoner picked his pocket of his purse; the prosecutor turning round, and seeing his purse in the prisoner's hand, demanded it of him, upon which the prisoner threatened him that if he spoke of his purse he would pull his house about his ears, and drive him out of the country: this was holden not to be robbery, because the words of menace were not used until after the taking. Harman's case, Ro. Rep. 154. 1 Hale, 534. 2 East, P. C. 736. 726.

As to what violence is sufficient to constitute robbery,-the ordinary mode formerly of presenting a pistol at a man, is deemed sufficient. In Norden's case, (Fost. 129, ante, p. 364), it is said that the highwayman presented a weapon and demanded his money. So, if the robber assault the party in

any other way, under such circumstances of terror as to cause him to deliver up his money or other property, Hawk. c.34, 8. 8, or if there be a struggle for the property before it is taken, Davies's case, 2 East, P. C. 709, it is sufficient. Where a man attempted to commit a rape, and the woman gave him money to desist, which he took, but still continued his violence to her until interrupted,-this was holden to be robbery. R. v. Blackham, 2 East, P. C. 117. Where a man employed to keep a woman in custody until her husband returned with bail for her, put handcuffs on her, put her into a hackney coach to take her to prison, and whilst in the coach he put his hand into her pocket and took out four shillings: this was holden to be robbery. Gascoigne's case, 2 East, P. C. 709, 1 Leach, 313. Where the prisoner laid violent hold of the seals and chain of the prosecutor's watch, and succeeded in pulling the watch out of his fob; the watch, however, being secured by a steel chain, which went round the prosecutor's neck, prevented the prisoner from immediately taking it; but by pulling, and by two or three jerks, he broke the steel chain, and then ran off with the watch: Park, J., before whom the prisoner was tried, held this to be sufficient violence to constitute the crime of robbery; that although there was no actual injury to the person, yet as force was necessary to separate the thing stolen from the person, it was robbery: the prisoner being convicted, and the case being afterwards reserved for the opinion of the judges, whether there was sufficient violence in this case to constitute robbery, or whether it did not amount merely to a stealing from the person, they were unanimously of opinion that the conviction was right; for the prisoner could not obtain the watch at once, but had to overcome the resistance of the steel chain by actual force. R. v. Mason, R. & Ry. 419. See R. v. Gnosil, supra. So, where a man snatched at an ear-ring in a lady's ear, tore it from the ear, which bled much, and was attended with great pain, this was holden to be robbery. R. v. Lapier, 2 East, P. C. 557, 1 Leach, 360.

But actual force is not essentially necessary to constitute robbery; if by the use of threats, by word or gesture, sufficient to overcome a mind of ordinary firmness, a man be induced to part with his property to another who has no pretence or claim of right to it, it is as much a robbery as if it had been obtained by actual violence. Fost. 128. Where a man was intimidated by a mob asking him for money, which he gave them, it was holden to be robbery. Taplin's case, 2 East, P. C. 712. And where, upon the trial of an indictment for robbery, it appeared that a mob came to the prosecutor's house, and the prisoners, who were amongst them, advised him to give them something to get rid of them and prevent mischief, and they obtained money from him by these means:

Parke, J., (after consulting with Vaughan, B., and Alderson, J.,) admitted evidence of the acts of the mob at other places, both before and after on the same day, to show that the advice of the prisoners was not bonâ fide, but in reality a mere mode of robbing the prosecutor. R. v. Winkworth et al., 4 Car. & P. 392. So, if a man give money, on a threat to destroy his child if he refused, this would be robbery. Per Hotham, B., in Donolly's case, 2 East, P. C. 718. Where, at a time of great riots in Birmingham, where the mob had plundered and pulled down several houses, the prisoners went to the prosecutor's house near Birmingham, accompanied by a stranger, whom they represented as the head of the mob; the stranger told him that his house was marked to come down the next morning at two o'clock, and that it should be so unless he gave him something for his men to drink; he asked twenty guineas, but all the prosecutor had was nine guineas and a half, and, terrified for the safety of his property, but not apprehensive of any injury to his person, he gave them to the stranger, and the prisoners afterwards had a share of them; the prisoners being indicted for this as robbery, the jury found that the prosecutor did not deliver his money from any apprehension of personal danger, but from fear that if he refused, his house would thereafter be pulled down as other houses in Birmingham had been; and the case being reserved for the opinion of the judges, they held it to be robbery. R. v. J. and E. Astley, 2 East, P. C. 729, S. P. R. v. Simons, and R. v. Brown, Id. 731. So, it was formerly holden that obtaining money from a man, by threatening to charge him with unnatural practices, was robbery, whether the threats were accompanied with any constraint of his person, R. v. Canon and Coddington, R. & Ry. 146, or not; R. v. Egerton, R. & Ry. 375; and this, although he gave up the property, not from any apprehension of danger to his person, nor of prosecution or punishment, but from a fear of losing his character or situation, by having so abominable an offence imputed to him, Id., or even from a desire and intention to detect and prosecute the offender. R. v. Fuller, R. & Ry. 408. It was afterwards declared to be robbery by stat. 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 29, 8. 7. But it is now made a substantive offence, by stat. 1 Vict. c. 87, s. 4, and I have already treated of it, ante, p. 327. So, accusing, or threatening to accuse a man of such an offence, with intent to extort, although no money be obtained by it, are, we have seen, (ante, pp. 323, 325), felonies, and punishable with great and deserved severity. So, sending a letter threatening to kill or murder any person, or to burn or destroy his house, out-houses, barns, stacks of corn, &c., is a felony, and punishable with severity; of which latter offence the reader will find the form of indictment and the evidence, in the next section. But where a woman was forced into a mock auction room in the Strand, and kept there, and required to

pay for goods said to be knocked down to her, and threatened to be taken before a magistrate, and from thence to Newgate, for not paying for them, by which latter threat the parties obtained money from her: this was holden not to be robbery, for as the woman had done no wrong, she ought not to be afraid of going before the magistrate. R. v. Wood and Knewland, 2 East, P. C. 732.

2. A larceny of the property from the person, namely, a taking, a carrying away, and a felonious intent, as directed, ante, p. 371. The taking may be actual or constructive, as in larceny. See ante, p. 371. An actual taking, is where the robber, by violence or threats, actually takes the money or other property from the prosecutor. And not only the taking of money out of a man's pocket, or the horse on which he is riding, but the taking of any thing openly and before his face, which is under his immediate and personal care and protection, may properly enough be said to be a taking from the person. 1 Hawk. c. 34, s. 6. And therefore a man who assaults me and takes away my horse standing by me, or having put me in fear drives my cattle away in my presence ont of my pasture, or takes up my purse which in my fright I cast into a bush, or my hat which fell from my head, or robs my servant of my money before my face,-may be indicted as having robbed me of them. Id. But if a robber cut my girdle to get my purse, and the purse fall to the ground, and he never gets it into his possession, this is not a robbery. 1 Hawk. c. 34, 8. 3. If thieves come to rob A., and finding little about him, force him by menace of death to bring them a greater sum, which he does, and they take it: this is robbery, the fear from the menace operating until the delivery of the money. Staundf. 27. 1 Hale, 532. A constructive taking, is, where a robber obtains my money or other property from me under some feigned pretence, and I from fear yield to the pretence, although I know it to be feigned. As if a man with a drawn sword, under circumstances calculated to create terror and evincing a felonious intent, ask alms of me, and I fearing the consequences of a refusal, give him money, this is robbery; and the like as to all colourable gifts extorted by fear of violence. 1 Hale, 533. Or if violence be used at first ineffectually, and the robber then desist, and ask the money as alms, and from fear of further violence I give it to him, it is robbery. 1 Hawk. c. 34, s. 8. Where during the riots in London, in 1780, a boy, with a cockade in his hat, knocked violently at the door of the house of one Mahon, and when Mahon opened it, the boy said, "God bless your honour, remember the poor mob," but Mahon told him to go along, and the boy said, "Then I will go and fetch my captain;" the boy came back presently with a mob of about one hundred per

sons, armed with sticks, &c., headed by one Taplin on horseback, and the boy said, "Now I have brought my captain," and some of the bystanders said "You must give them something; " Mahon then asked Taplin "How much,” and Taplin answered, "Half-a-crown;" upon which Mahon gave him the half crown, although before that he had intended giving only a shilling; and then the mob gave three cheers and passed on: this was holden to be robbery. Taplin's case, 2 East, P. C.712. Where a man took a bushel and a half of wheat, worth eight shillings, and forced the owner to take thirteen pence for it, threatening to kill her if she refused: the judges held this clearly to be robbery. R. v. Simons, 2 East, P. C. 712. So, where upon an indictment for robbery, it appeared that the prisoner with a great mob came to the prosecutor, who had then corn belonging to other persons in his possession, and offered him thirty shillings a load for it, and they said that if he would not take that, they would take the corn away; and the prosecutor was therefore obliged to sell it for thirty shillings a load, although it was worth thirtyeight shillings: this was held to be robbery, and the prisoner was convicted. Spencer's case, 2 East, P. C. 712. In an action against the hundred by one Merriman, for the value of some cheeses, &c., of which he had been robbed, it appeared that he was going along the highway with the cheeses in a cart, when he was stopped by one Hall, who insisted on seizing them for want of a permit (which was found by the jury to be a mere pretence for the purpose of defrauding Merriman, no permit being necessary), and after some altercation they agreed to go before the magistrate to determine the matter; in the mean time, other persons riotously assembled on account of the dearness of provisions, and in confederacy with Hall, carried away the goods in Merriman's absence: this was holden by Hewitt, J., to be robbery. Merriman v. Hundred of Chippenham, 2 East, P. C. 709.

The carrying away must be proved, as in simple larceny. See ante, p. 379. Where upon an indictment for robbery, it appeared that the prisoner snatched at an ear-ring in a lady's ear, tore it from the ear, but it fell amongst her hair, where she found it on her return home,-this was holden a sufficient asportation, and (from the force and violence with which was effected) robbery. R. v. Lapier, 2 East, P. C. 557. 1 Leach, 360. But where the prisoner, with a felonious intent, stopped a man carrying a feather bed, and told him to lay it down or he would shoot him; the man accordingly laid the bed upon the ground, but before the prisoner could take it up so as to remove it from the spot where it lay, he was apprehended the judges held the offence to be incomplete. R. v. Farrel, 1 Leach, 266 n.

It must appear also that the property was taken against the