nesses, and a question was raised whether the crime of perjury was complete until his examination was finished. Held, When it appears that a wilful perjury has been committed, it is not necessary to wait until the examination be finished, before cognizance is taken of the offence.

1. Respublica v. N. Gross and J. Scott, 1799, 2 Yeates, 479.-The indictment charged perjury in an ejectment suit. The prosecutor neglected to bring up the postea. Held, The postea must be produced in evidence.

1. Respublica v. Robert Newell, 1802, 3 Yeates, 407.-" In an indictment for perjury in answering interrogatories on a rule to show cause why an attachment should not issue for a contempt in speaking opprobrious words of the court, in a civil suit, the interrogatories may be entitled as between the State and the party, and the perjury be assigned the answers thereto, before the attachment actually issued."

"Such indictment is sufficiently certain by averring that the party was sworn in due form of law."

1. Kramer v. Commonwealth, 1811, 3 Binney, 577.-" The courts of Quarter Sessions for this State have jurisdiction of all criminal offences which were not capital at the passing of the Act of 22d May, 1722. Their jurisdiction remains unchanged, although since that act, several offences which were then felonies of death, have ceased to be so; they accordingly have jurisdiction of perjury."

2. "Persons convicted of perjury are liable to fine and imprisonment at hard labor, but not to any particular kind of treatment as to diet or discipline." 3. "A sentence, therefore, which adjudges that the convict shall be confined, fed, clothed, and treated as the law directs, is erroneous."

ED. NOTE.-Above case obsolete by subsequent statutes.

1. Commonwealth v. Cornish, 6 Binney, 250.-"One who swears wilfully and deliberately to a matter that he rashly believes, but which he has no probable cause for believing, and which is false, is guilty of perjury."

ED. NOTE.-Denied in United States v. Shellmire, Baldwin's R., 378. But see Steinman v. McWilliams, 6 Penna., 178; Brooks v. Olmstead, 17 Penna., 29.

1. Commonwealth v. Kuntz, 1844, 2 Clark, 375.—Perjury consists of a false oath,the intention to swear falsely being wilful; the oath must be made in a judicial proceeding, the party must be lawfully sworn, the assertion must be absolute, and the falsehood must be material to the matter in question.

See Foster v. McDevitt, 9 Watts, 345.

1. Commonwealth v. Dickinson, 1846, 3 Clark, 265.-Perjury, alleged to have been committed in an affidavit of defence, cannot be prosecuted until the case, in which the perjury is alleged to have been committed, has reached final judg

ment.

1. Rump v. Commonwealth, 1858, 6 Casey, 477.-" False swearing in a naturalization proceeding is punishable by our State laws." It is perjury at common law.

2. "Naturalization is a judicial act." 4 Pet., 406.

1. Perdue v. Commonwealth, 1880, 96 Penna., 317.-The Supreme Court will not reverse a conviction on the ground that the indictment is written in flagrant disregard of the rules of grammar and rhetoric, provided the court is able to eliminate from it a definite statement of a positive offence.

1. Linn v. Commonwealth, 1880, 96 Penna., 287.-The defendant filed excep

tions to the sufficiency of bail in error in a cause depending in the Quarter Sessions of Butler County. He accompanied the exceptions with his own affidavit, and it was the statements contained in the affidavit that led to his conviction for perjury. Held, "There being no law which required exceptions to bail in error to be sworn to, the oath taken by the defendant was extra-judicial, and, if false, was not the subject of an indictment for perjury."

2. Where an indictment sufficiently charges an offence, a failure to convict for want of evidence does not take from the jury the control of the costs in cases of misdemeanors. But where an offence is neither charged nor proved, the jury have nothing to do with the costs, nor have they any duties to perform whatever. 1. Linn v. Commonwealth, 1881, 38 vol. Legal Intel., 1881, 286.-"A person cannot be indicted for perjury for an extra-judicial oath.. No law requires exceptions to bail in error to be sworn to, and, therefore, even if the affidavit is false, an indictment does not lie."

1. Perdue v. Commonwealth, 1881, 38 vol. Legal Intel., 1881, p. 285.-" An indictment for perjury in an answer to a bill in equity must at least contain an averment that the fact set forth in the answer was false or untrue.

2. The indictment in this case is fatally defective."

In re Felts, Luzerne Leg. Register R., 468.—“ While the pendency of the cause in which an alleged false oath is taken would be good cause for postponement of the trial of the charge of perjury, yet, neither the policy of the law, nor the practice in this country, make it a bar to the arrest and indictment of the person charged."

Commonwealth v. Corfield, 1 Weekly Notes, 457.—Perjury. Affidavit of de

fence.

Commonwealth ex rel. Mary E. Reed v. Sheriff, 1881, 11 Weekly Notes, 134.Habeas corpus: Relator was charged with perjury in swearing that appeal was not taken for delay, but if judgment was permitted to stand, she would have to pay more money than was justly due. Held, The record not sufficient evidence to hold the prisoner to answer.

XV. FALSE SWEARING BY OFFICERS OF BANKS OR SAVINGS INSTITUTIONS, BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON BANKS OF THE SENATE OR HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, OR BEFORE ANY JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, OR OTHER AUTHORIZED PERSON TO ADMINISTER OATHS.

Act 26 January, 1849, Sec. 2, P. L., 21.—If any officer of a bank or savings institution, appearing before the committee on banks, of either the Senate or House of Representatives, or before any justice of the peace, or other person authorized by law to administer oaths, shall wilfully swear falsely to any interrogatories propounded by the committee on banks, or shall, after having been sworn or affirmed by the chairman, or any member thereof, to make true answers to the questions asked him, wilfully state

anything that is false respecting the condition, resources or liabilities of such institutions, or shall wilfully misrepresent any fact concerning their organization, indebtedness, means, or the administration of their affairs, he shall be deemed guilty of perjury, and be subject to prosecution and punishment therefor.

XVI. FALSE SWEARING BEFORE COUNTY AUDITORS PERJURY.

Act 15 April, 1834, Sec. 51, P. L., 546.—The auditors of each county shall have power to administer oaths and affirmations to all persons brought or appearing before them, whether accountants, witnesses or otherwise; and all persons guilty of swearing or affirming falsely on such examination, shall be liable to the pains and penalties of perjury.

XVII. FALSE SWEARING TO ANY BANK STATEMENT DEEMED TO BE PERJURY.

Act April, 1840, P. L., 716.-The wilful and deliberate false swearing by any officer or agent of any bank, or any other person, to or in relation to any statement or statements required by law to be made, or other duty enjoined by law, shall be deemed perjury in law, and punishable as such; and the confinement within the penitentiary of this State, which is hereby required to be part of the sentence in each such case, on conviction, shall not be less than one, nor more than six years.

Commonwealth ex rel. Wainwright v. Megee, 2 Phila. R., p. 396.-Under the Act of April 16, 1850, the officers of a bank cannot be held for the crime of perjury, unless it appear they have wilfully violated the provisions of the act.

1. Commonwealth v. Huntzinger, 2 Legal Record R., 181.-"By the Banking Act of 1850 it was the duty of the cashier of a bank (but not of the president) to swear to the truth of statements of assets and liabilities of the bank."

2. "Not being required to swear to it he cannot be tried for swearing falsely to such a statement.

3. "Nor does an averment in the indictment that he also undertook the duties of the cashier render him liable."

4. "Where an act mentions particular classes of persons, and then uses general words such as 'all others,' only such classes of persons as are named are included."

XVIII. FALSE PERSONATION.

Act 31 March, 1860, Sec. 16, P. L., 388.-If any person shall fraudulently and corruptly acknowledge, or procure to be acknowledged, any deed, or any writing authorized to be acknowledged, or any recognizance of judgment, in the name of any other person not privy thereto, or consenting to the same, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction, be sentenced to pay a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, and undergo an imprisonment, by separate or solitary confinement at labor, not exceeding seven years.

XIX. MISDEMEANORS BY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.

Act 31 March, 1860, Sec. 17, P. L., 389.-If any district attorney shall wilfully and corruptly demand, take or receive any other fee or reward, than such as is prescribed by law, for any official duties required by law to be executed by him in any criminal proceeding, or if such district attorney shall be guilty of wilful and gross negligence in the execution of the duties of his office, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor in office, and on conviction thereof, be sentenced to pay a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, and to undergo an imprisonment not exceeding one year, and his said office shall be declared vacant. Upon complaint in writing, verified by the oath or affirmation of the party aggrieved, made to the court in which any district attorney shall prosecute the pleas of the Commonwealth, charging such district attorney with wilful and gross negligence in the execution of the duties of his office, the said court shall cause notice of such complaint to be given to the said district attorney, and of the time fixed by the said court for the hearing of the same. If, upon such hearing, the court shall be of opinion that there is probable cause for the said complaint, they shall bind over or commit the said district attorney to answer the same in due course of law. If the court shall be of opinion that there is no probable cause for such complaint, they shall dismiss the same with reasonable costs, to be assessed by the court.

Act 31 March, 1860, Sec. 18, P. L., 389.—If any district attorney shall be charged according to law, with any crime or

misdemeanor, before, or bound over, or committed by any court, to answer for wilful and gross negligence in the execution of the duties of his office, it shall be the duty of the court to appoint some competent attorney thereof, to prepare an indictment against such district attorney, and to prosecute the same on behalf of the Commonwealth, until final judgment, to whom a reasonable compensation, to be fixed by the court, shall be paid for his services, out of the county treasury; if such district attorney shall be convicted of any crime, for which he may be sentenced to imprisonment, by separate or solitary confinement at labor, in addition thereto, his said office shall be declared vacant by the court passing such sentence.

XX. WHEN DISTRICT ATTORNEY SHALL NEGLECT OR REFUSE TO PROSECUTE, HOW PRIVATE COUNSEL MAY DO SO.

Act 12 March, 1866, Sec. 1, P. L., 85.-If any district attorney within this Commonwealth shall neglect or refuse to prosecute, in due form of law, any criminal charge, regularly returned to him, or to the court of the proper county; or if, at any stage of the proceedings, the district attorney of the proper county and the private counsel employed by the prosecutor should differ as to the manner of conducting the trial, it shall be lawful for the prosecutor to present his or her petition to the court of the proper county, setting forth the character of the complaint, and verify the same by affidavit; whereupon, if the court shall be of the opinion that it is a proper case for a criminal proceeding or prosecution, it shall be lawful for it to direct any private counsel employed by such prosecutor to conduct the entire proceeding, and where an indictment is necessary, to verify the same by his own signature, as fully as the same could be done by the district attorney, and this act shall apply to all criminal proceedings heretofore commenced and still pending, as well as to those which shall be instituted hereafter.

XXI. PENALTY FOR ATTEMPTS TO CORRUPT ARBITRATORS.

Act 16 June, 1836, Sec. 50, P. L., 727.—If either party, his agent or attorney, or any other person in his behalf, shall, after