transportation matrix, stamp, die, pattern, mould, edger, edging tool, collar, instrufor life, &c. ment, press, or engine used or employed in or about the coining of coin, or any useful part of any of the several matters aforesaid, or any coin, bullion, metal or mixture of metals, every such offender shall, in England and Ireland, be guilty of felony, and in Scotland of a high crime and offence, and, being convicted thereof, shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be transported beyond the seas for life, or for any term not less than seven years, or to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding four years.” (k) Making or session copper coining tools. By sec. 12, "if any person shall knowingly, and without lawful having in pos- authority (the proof of which authority shall lie on the party accused) make or mend, or begin or proceed to make or mend, or buy or sell, or shall knowingly, and without lawful excuse (the proof of which excuse shall lie on the party accused), have in his custody or possession any instrument, tool, or engine adapted and intended for the counterfeiting any of the King's current copper coin, every such offender shall, in England and Ireland, be guilty of felony, and in Scotland of a high crime and misdemeanor, and, being convicted thereof, shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be transported beyond the seas for any term not exceeding seven years, or to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years." (k) Meaning of terms custody and possession. Having posses sion of a press for coinage, or a mould, was within 8 & 9 W. 3, c. 26. And by sec. 21, "where the having any matter in the custody or possession of any person is in this Act expressed to be an of fence, if any person shall have any such matter in his personal custody or possession, or shall knowingly and wilfully have any such matter in any dwelling house or other building, lodging, apartment, field, or other place, open or inclosed, whether belonging to or occupied by himself or not, and whether such matter shall be so had for his own use or benefit, or for that of another, every such person shall be deemed and taken to have such matter in his custody or possession within the meaning of this act." Several points arose as to the tools or instruments which were within the words of the 8 & 9 W. 3. Where the prisoner was indicted for having in his custody a press for coinage without any lawful authority, a question was raised whether a press for coinage was one of the tools or instruments within that clause of the act on which the indictment was founded: and a majority of the judges held that it was. (m) In another case, the prisoner was indicted for having in his custody and possession, without any lawful or sufficient excuse, one mould made of lead, on which was made and impressed the figure, stamp, resemblance, and similitude of one of the sides or flats of a shilling, viz., the head side of a shilling: and the prisoner being convicted, it was submitted to the judges whether the mould found in the prisoner's custody was comprised under the general words "other tool or instrument before mentioned," so as to make the unlawful custody of it high treason; and also whether, if it were so comprised, it should not have been laid in the indictment to be a tool or instrument in the words of the act. And the judges were unanimously of opinion that this mould was a tool or instrument mentioned in the former part of the statute, and therefore comprised under these general words; and that as a mould is expressly mentioned by name in the first clause of the act which respects the (k) See s. 19, ante, p. 61, as to hard labour. (m) Bell's case, Fost. 430. making or mending it, need not be averred to be a tool or instru ment so mentioned. (n) sidered a pun The prisoner was indicted for having in his custody and posses- What was consion a puncheon made of iron and steel, in and upon which was cheon withmade and impressed the figure, resemblance, and similitude of the in the meaning head side of a shilling, without any lawful authority, &c. It was of the repealed fully proved that several puncheons were found in the prisoner's statutes. lodgings, together with a quantity of counterfeit money, and that he had them knowingly for the purposes of coining. These puncheons were complete and hardened ready for use: but it was impossible to say that the shillings which were found were actually made with these puncheons, the impressions being too faint to be exactly compared; but they had the appearance of having been made with them. The manner of making these puncheons was as follows: a true shilling was cut away to the outline of the head; that outline was fixed on a piece of steel, which was filed or cut close to the outline, and this made the puncheon; the puncheon made the die, which is the counter-puncheon; a puncheon is complete without letters, but it may be made with letters upon it; though from the difficulty and inconvenience it is never so made at the Mint; but after the die is struck the letters are engraved on it; a puncheon alone, without the counter-puncheon, will not make the figure; but to make an old shilling or a base shilling current, nothing more is necessary than the instrument now produced. They may be used for other purposes, such as making seals, buttons, medals, or other things, where such impressions are wanted. Eleven of the judges (absente Lord C. J. De Grey) were unanimously of opinion that this was a puncheon within the meaning of the act; for the word "puncheon" is expressly mentioned in the statutes, and will, by the means of the counter-puncheon or matrix, "make or impress the figure, stamp, resemblance, or similitude of the current coin," and these words do not mean an exact figure, but if the instrument impress a resemblance in fact, such as will impose on the world, it is sufficient, whether the letters are apparent on the puncheon or not; otherwise the act would be quite evaded, for the letters would be omitted on purpose. The puncheon in question was one to impress the head of King William; and the shillings of his reign, though the letters are worn out, are current coin of the kingdom. The puncheon made an impression like them, and the coin stamped with it would resemble them on the head side, though (a) Lennard's case, 1 Leach, 90. 1 East, P. C. c. 4, s. 17, p. 170. Another point was afterwards raised in this case upon the form of the indictment. The doubt was, whether the mould which was found in the prisoner's custody, it having only the resemblance of a shilling inverted, viz. the convex parts of the shilling being concave in the mould, and vice versa, the head or profile being turned the contrary way of the coin, and all the letters of the inscription reversed, was not properly an instrument which would make and impress the resemblance, stamp, &c., rather than an instrument on which the same were made and impressed, as laid in this indictment, the statute seeming to distinguish between The 8 & 9 W. newly-invented instru ments. Having a tool or instrument in possession for the purpose of coining foreign gold coin, was not within' 8 & 9 W. 3. c. there were no letters. This was compared to the case mentioned by Sir Matthew Hale, (o) that the omission or addition of words in the inscription of the true seals, for the purpose of evading the law, would not alter the case. (p) It has been held that the part of the 8 & 9 Wm. 3, c. 26, which 3, extended to relates to instruments to mark the edges of coins, was not confined to such instruments as were in use when the act passed; but extended to newly-invented instruments, which would produce the same effect; and also that it was not confined to such instruments as, used by the hand, unconnected with any other power, would produce the effect. A collar, therefore, marking the edge of coin, by having the coin forced through it by machinery, is an instrument within the 8 & 9 Wm. 3, c. 26, though this mode of marking the edges is of modern invention, and though the collar cannot be used by itself, but must be used in conjunction with other machinery. (q) It was decided that having a tool or instrument (of such sort as is included in the 8 & 9 W. 3, c. 26) in possession for the purpose of coining foreign gold coin not current here, was not within that statute. A majority of the judges considered that this act was only intended to prevent the counterfeiting the current coin of this kingdom, and not foreign coin. But Lord C. J. Ryder and Mr. J. Foster dissented, considering that the act, though principally levelled against counterfeiters of the current coin of the kingdom, was not confined solely to that object. That the intention of the Legislature was to keep out of private hands, as far as possible, all means of counterfeiting the coin; and therefore make it high treason to be knowingly possessed of such instruments, in fact, without lawful authority or sufficient excuse. That it was, therefore, incumbent on the defendant to shew such lawful authority or sufficient excuse. that, supposing his mere intention to be an ingredient in the case, the intention found of using the tool or instrument in question for the purpose stated, did not amount to a sufficient excuse; and upon the fullest consideration afterwards, Mr. Justice Foster was of opinion that the case did fall within the act; in which opinion it appears that Lord Hardwicke fully concurred. (qq) 26. Sed qu. Proof of a die iron or steel. But On an indictment for having in possession a die made of iron and made either of steel, proof of a die made of either material will be sufficient: and it seems that if the indictment should state that the die was made of iron, steel, and other materials, proof that it was made of any material would be sufficient; and that it would not be necessary even to prove the exact material. In a case where the indictment was for having in possession a die made of iron and steel, a witness who saw the die said it was made of iron; another of the witnesses who had not seen it, said that dies were usually made of steel, and that iron dies would not stand: and upon the point being saved whether this evidence would support the indictment, the Judges held that it would, for it was immaterial to the offence of what the die was (0) 1 Hale, 184. 2 Hale, 212, 215. Robinson's case, 2 Roll. Rep. 50. 1 East, P. C. c. 2, s. 25, p. 86. (p) Ridgelay's case, 1 Leach, 189. 1 East, P. C. c. 4, s. 18, p. 171. (q) Rex v. Moore, R. & M. C. C. R. 122; S. C. 2 C. & P. 235. (97) Bell's case, 1 East, P. C. c. 4, s 17, p. 169, 170 Fost. 430, and Preface to the 3d edition of Fost p. 8. made, and proof of a die either of iron or steel, or both, would satisfy this charge. (r) It was agreed by all the judges, that in proceedings upon the 8 & 9 Wm. 3, c. 26, it was not necessary to prove that money was actually made with the instrument in question. (s) The having tools for coining in possession, with intent to use them, has been held to be a misdemeanor at common law. An indictment, which was framed as for a misdemeanor at common law, charged that the defendant, without any lawful authority, had in his custody and possession two iron stamps, each of which would make and impress the figure, resemblance, and similitude of one of the sceptres impressed upon the current gold coin of this kingdom, called half-guineas, with intent to make the impression of sceptres on divers pieces of silver coin of this realm, called sixpences, and to colour such pieces of the colour of gold, and fraudulently to utter them to His Majesty's subjects as lawful half-guineas, against the peace, &c. Lord Hardwicke, at the assizes, doubted whether the bare possession was unlawful, unless made use of, or unless made criminal by statute: but upon the indictment being removed into the Court of King's Bench by certiorari, (t) Page, Probyn, and Lee, justices, held, that the bare having such instruments in possession, with the intent charged, was a misdemeanor. (u) It is not necessary to prove money made with the instru ment. Having tools for coining in possession, with intent to use them, is a common law. need not bear blance to the an exact resem It seems that the degree of similitude to the real coin which the The tool or tools or instruments must be capable of impressing in order to bring instrument the case within the statute must be governed by considerations similar to those which have been stated with respect to the counterfeit coin itself. (v) Whether the instrument in question be calculated to impress the figure, stamp, resemblance, or similitude of the coin current is a question for the jury: and it is clear, that the offence is not confined to an exact imitation of the original and proper effigies of the coin. (w) coin. If an indictment charge that the prisoner had session of a mould having the resem blance of shilling on it, proved that the mould had the entire impres it must be Upon an indictment which alleges that a prisoner feloniously had in his possession a mould having the resemblance of the obverse side of a shilling impressed upon it, it must be proved that the entire impression was upon the mould. The prisoner was charged in one count with having in his possession a mould, "upon which was impressed the figure and apparent resemblance of one of the sides (that is to say) the obverse side of the King's current coin called a shilling," and in another count the word "reverse" was substituted for "obverse," the moulds when produced appeared not to have a complete impression of the obverse and reverse sides of a shilling, but only the outside rim, and a slight portion of the other parts of the impression. ling on it. It was held, that if the jury believed that no more than part of the impression was impressed upon the moulds while the prisoner was in possession of them, that he ought to be acquitted. (x) But where an indictment charges that the prisoner made a But if an inmould, which was intended to impress the resemblance of the ob- dictment verse side of a shilling, it is sufficient to prove that the prisoner made (r) Rex v. Oxford, East, T. 1819. MS. Bayley, J., and Russ. & Ry. 382. S. P. Rext. Phillips, Russ. & Ry. 369. () Ridgelay's case, 1 East, P. C. c. 4, s. 18, p. 172. (t) The defendant was brought up by habeas corpus, and committed to Newgate. (u) Rex v. Sutton, Rep. temp. Hardw. 370. But see the remarks on this case, ante, p. 48. (v) Ante, p. 58. (w) 1 East, P. C. c. 4, s. 18, p. 171. teson, J. sion of a shil charge that the prisoner made 74 a mould in press the re semblance of a shilling, it is sufficient to prove that he Of making, &c. and having in possession Coining Instruments. a mould, which would make a part of the impression. One count tended to im- charged the prisoner with making a mould, "which said mould was intended to make and impress the figure and apparent resemblance" of the obverse side, and another the reverse side, of a shilling, the evidence being the same as in the former case; it was held that the term "intended" did not mean in a state to make an entire impression, and therefore if the prisoner had only begun to make, the intention to make the whole might be inferred, though only part was actually the impression. made, and consequently that the evidence was sufficient. (y) made a mould which will make part of (y) Rex v. Foster, 7 C. & P. 495, Patteson, J. |