prosecution of which the costs may be allowed out of the county rate, and on any other indictable misdemeanor the justice must take bail instead of committing the party. Justices of the peace cannot, however, admit any person to bail in cases of treason (F. Bk. 339; 3 Law Chron. 339; Law Dict. pp. 44, 45; Exam. Quest. 33, 93, 128).

VII. Mention some of the offences for which justices of the peace can convict summarily.

ANS. For a full enumeration of the cases in which justices of the peace may summarily convict and pass sentence upon an accused, see Oke's Mag. Syn. 218-602, 6th ed. Besides those referred to in Answer No. II., the principal cases are offences by apprentices and by masters; offences against licenses of beerhouses, &c.; bettinghouses; adulterating bread, &c.; cruelty to animals; dog-stealing; friendly societies; game; gaming-houses; Public Health Act; malicious injuries (see 24 & 25 Vic. c. 97, ss. 51-53); nuisances; pawnbrokers; poor; ships-passengers; vagrants, &c.

VIII. What are the most usual modes of prosecuting to conviction a person guilty of a criminal offence? State the various ways in which the proceeding may be commenced.

ANS. An information or complaint in writing and upon oath must be laid before the justices; but where only a summons against the person so charged with a criminal offence, the information or complaint may be by parol, and no oath is necessary. The justice before whom such prisoner is brought is bound immediately to examine the circumstances of the crime alleged, and take, in the presence of the prisoner, the examinations on oath of those who know the facts of the case, and put the same into writing; and if upon the whole inquiry the justice or justices shall be of opinion that the evidence is not sufficient to put the prisoner upon his trial, they shall order him to be discharged; but if they shall be of the opposite opinion, or if the evidence raise a strong and probable presumption of his guilt, they shall either commit him to prison or liberate him upon bail (see Exam. Quest. p. 93). After the commitment of the offender by a magistrate for his trial comes his prosecution; and this is either upon a previous finding of the fact by the grand jury, or without such previous finding. By a late Act (22 & 23 Vic. c. 17) the prosecutors in perjury, conspiracy, false pretences, disorderly houses, and indecent assaults must, except under the special circumstances mentioned, apply to a magistrate before going to the grand jury (2 Law Chron., N.S., 3.) The former way is either by presentment or (more usually) indictment. An indictment is a written accusation of one or more persons of a crime of misdemea

nor preferred to and presented upon oath by a grand jury (1 Exam. Chron. 40, 138, 170); the appearance of the offender is enforced by warrant, unless he appears voluntarily, or is already in custody; he is then arraigned and tried before a petit jury (4 Steph. Com. 404, 3rd ed.; Exam. Quest. 14, 178; F. Bk. 336).

IX. Give an explanation of the meaning of the term "felony,''

as applied to crimes in the law of England.

ANS.-Felony, in the general acceptation of the English law, comprises every species of crime which occasioned at common law the forfeiture of lands and goods. Upon the whole, the only adequate definition of felony seems to be an offence which occasions a total forfeiture of either lands or goods, or both, at the common law, and to which capital or other punishment may be superadded, according to the degree of guilt (F. Bk. 292; 1 Exam. Chron. 39, 66).

X. Are there any, and what, offences in which the evidence of two witnesses is required in order to convict the party charged?

ANS. In all cases of treason and misprision of treason, two lawful witnesses are required to convict a prisoner. But by 5 & 6 Vic. c. 51, when the overt act alleged is an attempt to injure the person of the Queen, two witnesses are not required. In prosecutions for perjury there can be no conviction except on the oath of two witnesses; though it will be sufficient that the perjury be directly proved by one witness, and corroborative evidence on some particular point be given by another (F. Bk. 346, 347; Key Crim. L. 21, 52, 53, 98).

XI. State several of the crimes which, in the early part of the present century, were punishable by death, but which are no longer liable to that punishment.

ANS.-At the period referred to about 160 actions, which men were daily liable to commit, were declared by Act of Parliament to be felonies without benefit of clergy, or in other words, worthy of instant death (4 Steph. Com. 93, n., 4th ed.). Eleven only of these crimes are now liable to the punishment of death.

XII. Is a married woman, who has committed a criminal offence, exempt from conviction under any, and what, circumstances? ANS.-If a married woman commit theft, burglary, or other civil offences against the laws of society, by the coercion of her husband, she is not guilty of any crime, being considered as acting by compulsion. But in the cases of murder, manslaughter, robbery, or treason, she is responsible; and in all cases where she offends alone, without the company of her husband, she is treated as if she were a feme sole (Exam. Quest. pp. 33, 129; F. Bk. 293; Key Crim. L. 18).

XIII. Describe the offence of embezzlement, and the evidence necessary to support the charge.

ANS.-Embezzlement is a crime distinguished from larceny, properly so called, as being committed in respect of property which is not at the time in the actual or legal possession of the owner, and consists in the receiving goods, money, &c., under a lawful title (as a clerk receiving money, &c., for his master), but appropriating the same (14 Jur. 513; Key Crim. L. 39, 41; 4 St. Com. 199, 4th ed.). The principal facts to be proved are as follows:-1, That defendant was clerk or servant of the prosecutor, or employed as such for a particular purpose, at the time he received the money or chattel; 2, That he received the money or chattel for or in the name or on account of his master by virtue of such employment; 3, That he embezzled the same or a part (1 Exam. Chron. 140; Key, Crim. L. 44, 45; Archb. Cr. Pl. and Evid. 275, 8th ed.; Exam. Quest. p. 147).

XIV. Describe a nuisance, and state the evidence necessary to support the indictment.

ANS.-Nuisances are either common (or public) or private (Com. L. Princ. 319). The remedy for the latter is by action or suit; the former are chiefly punishable by indictment, being a species of offence against the public order and regimen of the state, and either the doing a thing to the annoyance of all the Sovereign's subjects, or neglecting to do something which the common good requires. They are of the class of misdemeanors. The evidence necessary to support the indictment will necessarily vary according to the nature of the act complained of; but the general matters are the erection or creation of the nuisance, or its continuance after erection or creation by some other person; that it was used, &c., as stated in the indictment; that it is injurious to health, offensive, or otherwise injurious to the public or to the neighbourhood, &c. (Archb. Cr. Pl. and Ev. 628, 8th ed.; F. Bk. 311).

XV. What is meant by the extradition of criminals, and how do the provisions of a treaty with a foreign state become the law? Give an instance.

ANS-By the extradition of criminals is meant that where any person having committed a crime in his own country has fled into a foreign state, it is provided in a treaty between the two countries that the perpetrator of such crime shall be given up to his own Government. The provisions of such a treaty become the law in Great Britain by an Act of Parliament (Law Dict. 21; 1 Exam. Chron. 42).

EXAMINATION QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.
(TRINITY TERM, 1862.)

COMMON LAW.

I. State shortly what is required to be shown in an affidavit to obtain a Judge's order to hold a defendant to bail. ANS.-This question is answered ante, p. 113, No. X. The three points are:-A pending action, a cause of action to the amount of £20, and that the defendant is about to quit the country, unless apprehended (Com. L. Pract. 79-83).

II. What additional powers for the benefit of creditors are given by the "Absconding Debtors' Arrest Act, 1851?"

ANS.-Under the Act referred to, the 14 & 15 Vic. c. 52, s. 1, if there is not time to obtain a writ of capias from a Judge of one of the superior Courts against a debtor about to leave England, the creditor may apply to the nearest County Court Judge (except in Middlesex or Surrey) or Commissioner in Bankruptcy for a warrant to arrest the defendant. This application can only be made when the plaintiff's demand is in the nature of a debt, so that a warrant cannot issue in every case in which a capias can be obtained. The Judge or Commissioner applied to must be satisfied by affidavit (intituled in one of the superior Courts) of the existence and amount of the debt, and also of the debtor's intention to abscond. The warrant when granted may be executed in any part of England: but it is only in force for seven days, and before the expiration of that period a writ of capias must be obtained, otherwise the whole proceedings are nugatory (Law Dict. 3; ante, p. 113; 15 Jur. pt. 2, p. 324).

III. If a person were sued for money or goods, also claimed of him by a third party, what course should you advise on his behalf, and how would you proceed?

ANS. As stated in vol. i., pp. 125, 126, 163, when a person is sued at law for the recovery of money or goods (wherein he has no interest), and which are claimed of him by some third person, he may, by 1 & 2 Wm. 4, c. 58, after declaration and before plea, apply to the Court or Judge on affidavit, showing that he does not claim any interest in the subject-matter of the suit, but that such right thereto is claimed, or supposed to belong to some third party, who has sued or is expected to sue for the same, and that the applicant does not in any manner collude with such third party, but is ready

to bring into Court, or to pay or dispose of the subject-matter of the action in such manner as the Court, or any Judge thereof, may order or direct and the Court or Judge may call upon such third party to appear, and to state the nature and particulars of his claim, and maintain or relinquish his claim, and thereupon hear the allegations of the parties, and in the meantime stay the proceedings in such action, and finally order such third party to make himself defendant in the same, or some other action, or to proceed to trial on one or more feigned issue or issues, and also direct which of the parties shall be plaintiff or defendant in such trial, or with the consent dispose of the merits of their claims, and determine the same in a summary manner, and make rules and orders as to costs and other necessary matters (see fully Com. L. Pract. 282, 286; also 1 Exam. Chron. pp. 125, 126, 163).

IV. Where notice of action is required by statute, what notice is sufficient?

ANS. By the 5 & 6 Vic. c. 97, in all cases where notice of action was required by any statute before that time, it must be given one calendar month before the commencement of the action. This Act, however, only applies to statutes previously passed. Some Acts of Parliament have been since passed under which, in actions under them, a different notice is required (Will. Pract. 67).

V. If a plea containing a defence arising after the commencement of the action be pleaded, how may the plaintiff proceed? ANS.-By the Pl. Rule of Hil. T., 1853, pl. 23, when a plea is pleaded, with an allegation that the matter of defence arose after the last pleading (technically called a plea puis darrein continuance, see Com. L. Pract. 166, 167), the plaintiff is at liberty to confess such plea, and is entitled to the costs of the cause up to the time of pleading such plea; but this does not apply to the case of such plea pleaded by one or more only out of several defendants. If the plaintiff considers the plea not sufficient, he may demur or reply thereto (Will. Pract. 125).

VI. In what cases can the common law Courts relieve tenants from forfeiture in actions of ejectment under the Common Law Procedure Act, 1860?

ANS.-By sec. 1 of the above Act, in the case of any ejectment for a forfeiture brought for non-payment of rent, the Court or a Judge may, upon rule or summons, give relief in a summary manner, but subject to appeal, up to and within the like time after execution executed, and subject to the same terms and conditions in all respects as to payment of rent, costs, and otherwise, as in the Court of Chancery. If the lessee, his executors, administrators, or assigns,