PRISONER, FOR ESCAPE. (924) Against a prisoner for escape out of custody of constable. OFFICERS OF VESSELS. (925) Inflicting cruel and unusual punishment on one of the crew of a ves- (926) Against same for same, the punishment being beating and wounding, &c. (937) Against the captain of a vessel, for bringing into the port a person with an infectious disease, under the Pennsylvania act. (938) Against a captain of a vessel, for not providing wholesome meat for his passengers. (897) Against a magistrate, for committing in a case where he had no jurisdiction. (a) THAT on, &c., at, &c., one T. C., then being one of the constables of the said parish, brought one J. N. before J. S., Esq., then and yet being one of the justices of our said lady the queen, assigned to keep the peace of our said lady the queen in and for the county aforesaid, and also to hear and determine divers felonies, trespasses and other misdeeds committed in the said county; and the said J. N. then and there was charged before the said J. S. with having committed a certain supposed misdemeanor, in having vilified the character and hurt the trade of one A. C. of the parish aforesaid, miller; and the said J. N. was then and there examined before the said J. S. as such justice as aforesaid, touching the said supposed offence so to him charged as aforesaid. And the jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid, do further present, that the said J. S., late of the parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid, esquire, being such justice as aforesaid, wickedly and maliciously contriving and intending to oppress, injure and aggrieve the said J. N. in this behalf and to put him to great charge and expense, and to cause him to undergo and suffer great pain, torture and anguish of body and mind, afterwards, to wit, on the day and year aforesaid, at, &c., did order and direct that the said J. N. should find sureties for his personal appearance at the next general quarter sessions of the peace of our said lady the queen, to be holden in and for the said County of M., to answer the said charge; and, because the said J. N. did not and could not conveniently find such sureties as aforesaid, he the said J. S., being such justice as aforesaid, wickedly and maliciously contriving and intending as aforesaid, wrongfully, unjustly and maliciously, and contrary to the laws of this realm, then and there (by virtue and color of a certain warrant under his hand and seal as such justice as aforesaid), did commit the said J. N. a prisoner to a certain prison called the house of correction, situate at the parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid, to be there safely kept until he the said J. N. should find such sureties as aforesaid, and until he should be fully examined according to the premises; and then and there ordered, directed and commanded the then keeper of the said prison to keep the said J. N. under close confinement in the said prison, and to deny him the use of pen, ink and paper, and to allow no letter to be delivered to or from the said J. N., and also to allow no person to see or speak to him the said J. N. And the jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid, do further (a) Arch. C. P. 5th Am. ed. 689. present, that the said J. S. by virtue and under color of the warrant aforesaid, afterwards, to wit, on the day and year aforesaid, and from thence for a long space of time, to wit, for the space of ten days then next following, at the parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid, wrongfully, unjustly and maliciously, and contrary to the laws of this realm, did cause and procure the said J. N. to be closely confined and imprisoned in the said prison, and to be denied the use of pen, ink and paper, and to be restrained from all communication with his relations and friends, to wit, at the parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid; whereby the said J. N. during all that time underwent and suffered great pain, torture and anguish of body and mind, and was deprived of his liberty and prevented from finding such sureties as aforesaid, and was put to great charge and expense in and about obtaining his discharge and release from the said commitment and imprisonment; to the great scandal of the administration of justice in this kingdom, in contempt of our lady the queen and her laws, to the evil example, &c., and against, &c. (Conclude as in book 1, chap. 3.) (898) Against a magistrate for neglect of duty at a riot. First count, for neglecting to read the riot act. (b) That on, &c., at, &c., divers wicked, seditious and evil disposed persons to the number of fifty and more, whose names are at present unknown to the said attorney-general, with force and arms unlawfully, riotously and tumult (b) R. v. Kennett, Esq., 5 C. & P. 282. This information was filed in the 20 Geo. III. by Mr. Wallace, then attorney-general. There was a verdict of guilty before Lord Mansfield, but no sentence was passed, the defendant dying shortly after trial. The second and third counts were nearly similar, except that they omitted such part of the charges in the first count as related to demolishing houses and furniture. The fourth count stated a riot to have occurred in the defendant's presence, and that he, disregarding his duty, did not make the proclamation, but refused and neglected and omitted so to do. The fifth count stated the riot, and that the defendant was a justice of the peace and present at it, and then went on-" And that the said B. K., being such justice of the peace as aforesaid, and disregarding the duty of his said office, did not apprehend or restrain the said persons so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled as last aforesaid, or any of them, or endeavor so to do, or use any means or endeavors whatsoever to suppress and put an end to the said unlawful, riotous and tumultuous assembly, ⚫or execute or endeavor to execute any of the powers and authorities by the laws of this realm vested in the said B. K. as such justice of the peace as last aforesaid, in that behalf; but the said B. K. then and there unlawfully, wilfully and contemptuously refused, neglected and omitted to apprehend or restrain the said rioters, or any of them, or endeavor so to do, or to use any means or endeavors whatsoever to suppress and put an end to the said unlawful, riotous and tumultuous assembly, or execute or endeavor to execute any of the powers and authorities by the laws of this realm vested in him the said B. K. as justice of the peace aforesaid, in that behalf; and then and there unlawfully permitted and suffered the said persons so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled, to be and continue there so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled, for a long space of time, to wit, for the space of four hours, contrary to the duty of his said office of justice of the peace as aforesaid, in contempt," &c. The sixth count was nearly similar to the fifth count, except that it stated the riot in rather more general terms. Lord Mansfield charged the jury generally, that "A magistrate may assemble all the king's subjects to quell a riot, and may call in the soldiers, who are subjects and may act as such; but this should be done with great caution; and that at the time of the riot, he might repel force by force before the reading of the proclamation from the riot act. If," he declared, "on a riot taking place, the magistrate neither reads the procla mation from the riot act, nor restrains nor apprehends the rioters, nor gives any order to fire on them, nor makes any use of a military force under his command, this is prima facie evidence of a criminal neglect of duty in him; and it is no answer to the charge for him to say that he was afraid, unless his fear arose from such danger as would affect a firm man; and if rather than apprehend the rioters his sole care was for himself, this is also neglect." uously assembled themselves together, to the disturbance of the public peace, tranquillity, order and government of this realm, and to injure and destroy the properties of divers quiet and peaceable subjects of our said lord the king; and being so assembled did then and there unlawfully, riotously, tumultuously and with force, feloniously and against the form of the statute in such case made and provided, begin to demolish and pull down the dwelling-house of M. C. there situate and being, and did also then and there unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously injure and destroy the household furniture and effects of divers quiet and peaceable subjects of our said lord the king, whose names are at present unknown to the said attorney-general, and commit and perpetrate other outrages and enormities; and the said attorney-general of our said lord the king for our said lord the king, giveth the court here to understand and be informed that B. K., late of London aforesaid, esquire, at the time of the said unlawful, riotous and tumultuous assembly, to wit, on, &c., and before and afterwards, was mayor of the City of London aforesaid, and also one of the keepers of the peace and justices of our said lord the king, assigned to keep the peace and also to hear and determine divers. felonies, trespasses and other misdemeanors committed within the said City of London, that is to say, at, &c.; and that the said B. K., being such mayor and justice of the peace as aforesaid, well knew of and was personally present at the time and place of the said unlawful, riotous and tumultuous assembly, and whilst the said persons so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled were committing and perpetrating the aforesaid felony, injuries, outrages and enormities, to wit, on, &c., at, &c.; and it was then and there the duty of the said B. K. as such mayor and justice of the peace as aforesaid, for the dispersing of the persons so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled as aforesaid, and the suppressing and putting an end to the said unlawful, riotous and tumultuous assembly, to have then and there made or caused to be made proclamation in the manner prescribed and directed in and by an act of Parliament, made in the Parliament of the lord George the First, late king of Great Britain, &c., at a session thereof holden at Westminster in the County of Middlesex, in the first year of his reign, entitled "an act for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies, and for the more speedy and effectual punishing the rioters." And the said attorney-general of our said lord the king for our said lord the king, giveth the court here further to understand and be informed, that the said B. K., being such mayor and justice of the peace as aforesaid, and well knowing of the said unlawful and tumultuous. assembly, and being so present as aforesaid, but disregarding his duty as such mayor and justice of the peace as aforesaid and the directions contained in the said act of Parliament for the suppressing of tumults and riots, did not at any time during the said unlawful, riotous and tumultuous assembly, make or cause to be made proclamation in the manner prescribed and directed by the said act of Parliament, but then and there, to wit, on, &c., at, &c., wilfully, obstinately and contemptuously neglected, refused and omitted to make or cause to be made proclamation in the manner prescribed and directed by the said act of Parliament, and thereby then and there unlawfully permitted and suffered the said persons so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled as aforesaid, to be and continue there unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled as aforesaid, for divers, to wit, four hours, doing, committing and perpetrating the said felony, injuries, outrages and enormities, contrary to the duty of him the said B. K. as such mayor and justice of the peace as aforesaid, in contempt, &c. (Conclude as in book 1, chap. 3.) 633 (899) Against a justice of the peace for proceeding to the duties of his office in a state of intoxication. (e) That A. B., &c., on, &c., at, &c., did take his seat as a justice of the peace in the County of Loudon, the ninth of August, one thousand eight hundred and three, on the bench of the said county court, and act as a justice and member of the court then and there sitting, in giving his vote upon a judicial question and examination at the time depending in the said court, and in signing the minutes of its proceedings as presiding justice thereof, while he the said A. B. was in a state of intoxication from the drinking of spirituous liquors, which rendered him incompetent to the discharge of his duty with decency, decorum and discretion, and disqualified him from a fair and full exercise of his understanding in matters and things, at the time and place last mentioned judicially before him, to the great disgrace of the administration of public justice, and to the evil example of persons in authority; whereby the said A. B. was guilty of misbehavior in his office of justice of the peace in and for the said County of Loudon, against, &c. (Conclude as in book 1, chap. 3.) (900) Against a justice of the peace, for issuing a warrant without oath, using falsely the name of a third party as prosecutor. (d) That A. B., on, &c., at, &c., out of malice and evil disposition towards a certain J. H., a surveyor of the highway, and with a wicked and malicious intent to disquiet, defraud and oppress the said J. H., and falsely, wickedly and maliciously to cause the said J. H. to be put to costs and expenses, unjustly, wickedly, maliciously and unlawfully wrote, signed and issued under his own hand, as such justice of the peace, a certain warrant or summons, to a constable directed, commanding him to summon the said J. H. to appear before him, the said A. B., to answer to a certain complaint and information of a certain J. W., made against him the said J. H., for not keeping a road (describing it), in repair, and upon that warrant or summons caused the said J. H. to appear before him the said A. B., as such justice of the peace, to answer the complaint aforesaid, and upon a hearing therein did not acquit the said J. H. of the complaint aforesaid, but unlawfully, corruptly and wickedly adjudged the said J. H. to pay the costs of the same; whereas, in truth and in fact, the said J. W. never did make to the said A. B., nor to any other justice of the peace, the complaint or information aforesaid against the said J. H., nor did the said J. W. nor any other person direct the said prosecution, but the said A. B. falsely and wickedly used the name of the said J. W. without his knowledge, and against his directions, in contempt of his the said A. B.'s oath and duty, as a justice of the peace, to the evil example, &c. (Conclude as in book 1, chap. 3.) (901) Against a justice of the peace in Pennsylvania, for refusal to deliver transcript to party demanding it.(e) That W. B., &c., being a justice of the peace in and for the district num (c) Com. v. Alexander, 1 Va. Cases 156. (d) Wallace v. Com., 2 Va. Cases 130. To this indictment the defendant pleaded not guilty, and the jury convicted him and assessed his fine to one hundred dollars. The Superior Court thereupon entered a judgment against him, that he be removed from his office of justice of the peace, and that he be incapable of exercising the duties of the same, and also a judgment for the fine. An application for a writ of error was afterwards refused by the General Court. (e) Bailey v. Com., 5 R. 59. This indictment is under the Pennsylvania act of bered six, composed of the townships of B. and S. in the said County of B., duly commissioned and sworn to do the duties of the said office with fidelity and according to law, a certain suit was commenced and instituted before him as such, of which suit and of the cause of action thereof he lawfully had jurisdiction and cognizance, wherein a certain J. B. was plaintiff, and a certain F. C. was defendant, and in which suit the said W. B., as a justice of the peace, entered judgment, and that on, &c., at, &c., and within the jurisdiction of this court, with force and arms, &c., he the said W. B., as a justice of the peace, did unlawfully refuse to make out a copy of his proceedings at large in the said suit, and deliver the said copy duly certified by him to the said F. C., the defendant in the suit; he the said F. C., having then and there required and demanded the same of the said W. B. as a justice; and he the said F. C. then and there did tender unto him the said W. B. as a justice of the peace, eighteen and three-quarter cents, the just and legal fee of him the said W. B., for his services in that behalf aforesaid; to the great hinderance and obstruction of public justice, against, &c. (Conclude as in book 1, chap. 3.) (902) Against a justice of the peace in Massachusetts for extortion generally.(f) That A. B., on, &c., then being one of the justices of the peace in and for the County of duly and legally appointed and qualified to perform the duties of that office, not regarding the duties of said office, but contriving and intending one C. D. to injure and oppress, on the said day of in the year aforesaid, at in the county aforesaid, by color of his said office, did wilfully, corruptly and extorsively demand, take and receive of him the said C. D. a greater fee than is allowed and provided by law for the trial of a certain issue, then and there in due form of law joined and pending before him the said A. B., as a justice of the peace for the said County of between the aforesaid C. D. and one E. F., in a certain civil action commenced and entered by the said C. D. against the said E. F., before him the said A. B., justice of the peace as aforesaid, at a justice's court duly appointed, and then and there held by him the said A. B., to wit, the sum of for the trial of the said issue, which sum is more than the fee allowed and provided by law for the service aforesaid; contrary to the duty of him the said A. B. in his office aforesaid, against, &c. (Conclude as in book 1, chap. 3.) (903) Against a justice of the peace for extorting fees for discharging a recognizance, and for not returning the same to the court for which it was taken.(g) That N. J., of, &c., on, &c., and continually afterwards, until the day of the taking of this inquisition, was, and yet is one of the justices of the peace within and for the said county of, &c., duly and legally appointed and authorized to discharge the duties of that office. Nevertheless the said N. J., not regarding the duties of his said office, but perverting the trust reposed in him, and contriving and intending the citizens of this commonwealth, for the private gain of him the said N. J. to oppress and impoverish, and the due 20th March, 1810, s. 23, and was sustained by the Supreme Court as sufficiently descriptive of the offence created by that section. () Davis' Prec. 119. This indictment is founded on Massachusetts statute 1795, c. 41, s. 6, and may, says Mr. Davis, be adopted mutatis mutandis, for extortions by all other officers and persons mentioned in the statute. (g) Davis' Prec. 122; 1 Trem. P. 119. This indictment would be more correct if it contained an allegation of the particular nature and condition of the recognizance, and also that the magistrate was authorized to take it. |