cerned in giving the order originally to Salt. For that purpose, it seems to me, the evidence is but slight; but should you think that he did originally instruct the other prisoners, and that by his authority they went and employed Salt, they may all be convicted. If you do not think that, Rault must be acquitted. You will therefore say, whether Ramuz and Mazeau knew what the contents of the plate were, and what the nature of the instrument was; and you will also say whether Rault was a party concerned in giving the original instructions to Salt." (n) (n) Reg. v. Mazeau, 9 C. & P. 676. The jury found Mazeau and Ramuz guilty, and that they knew the nature of the instrument. With the greatest deference to the very learned Judge, it is submitted that it deserved consideration, whether supposing that Rault gave the order to Mazeau and Ramuz, and they in his absence gave it to Salt, who was an innocent agent, Rault was more than an accessory before the fact. If Rault had given the order to Ramuz and Mazeau, and they in his absence had themselves engraved the plate, it is conceived they would have been principals, and Rault an accessory before the fact; and it is submitted that this case is not varied by the act of an innocent agent, as that act is, according to all the authorities, just the same as if it was done by the party procuring it to be done. C. S. G. CHAPTER THE FORTIETH. OF FALSELY PERSONATING ANOTHER. THE bare fact of personating another, for the purpose of fraud, is Offence at no more than a cheat or misdemeanor at common law, and punish- common law. able as such. (a) And the principal cases in which it has been considered as indictable have been laid as cases of conspiracy. In a case where the prisoner had been acquitted on an indictment preferred against him for forgery, upon its appearing that he had merely passed himself off for the person whose real signature appeared on the instrument, in concert with that person, (b) he was indicted again for the misdemeanor: but it is observed that this second indictment did not turn singly on the fact of such false personating for a fraudulent purpose, but was framed against him and his associates for the conspiracy as well as the cheat. (c) And where a woman, living in the service of her master, conspired with another man that he should personate her master, and in that character should solemnize a marriage with her, which was accordingly done, for the purpose of afterwards raising a specious title to the property of the master; the gist of the indictment was for the conspiracy, and the conviction proceeded upon that ground. (d) And in a case where a cheat was effected by one person pretending to be a merchant, and another pretending to be a broker, we have seen that judgment appeared ultimately to have been given for the crown, on the ground that it was a case of conspiracy. (e) A case however is reported, in which the indictment only charged that the defendant personated a clerk to a justice of the peace, with intent to extort money from several persons, for procuring their discharge from misdemeanors for which they stood committed; and the Court refused to quash it upon motion, and put the defendant to demur to it. (f) But it is observed, that it might probably have occurred to the Court that this was something more than a bare endeavour to commit a fraud by means of falsely personating another; that it was an attempt to pollute and render odious the public justice of the kingdom, by making it a handle and pretence for corrupt practices. (g) How far the refusal to quash the in (a) 2 East, P. C. c. 20, s. 6, p. 1010. (b) Ante, p. 326. (c) 2 East, P. C. c. 20, s. 6, p. 1010. The defendants were convicted upon this second indictment. (d) Rex v. Robinson and Taylor, O. B. 1746. 1 Leach, 37. 2 East, P. C. c. 20, s. 6, p. 1010. (e) Reg. v. Mackarty and Fordenbourgh, ante, p. 281. (f) Dupee's case, 12 Geo. 1, 2 Sess. Cas. 11. 2 East, P. C. c. 20, s. 6, p. 1010. (9) 2 East, P. C. c. 20, s. 6, p. 1011. Of the offence by statutes. 2 Wm. 4, order to obtain 11 Geo. 4, dictment upon motion can be considered as an authority is questionable; as we have seen that it was the practice of the Court, as often declared, not to quash on motion indictments for offences founded in fraud or oppression, though such indictments might appear not to be sustainable, but to leave the defendants to plead. (h) The offence of falsely personating another for purposes of fraud is so nearly allied to forgery, and so often blended with it, that these offences have been frequently included by the legislature in the same enactments, and made felonies alike subject to the same punishment. Many of the statutes, therefore, which relate to falsely personating, with a few cases determined upon their construction, have necessarily been introduced in the preceding chapters; as those concerning the personating the proprietors of public stocks, &c. (i) and the personating of soldiers and seamen, and their widows, &c. in order to obtain wages, pensions, prizemoney, &c. (j) But the general provision of the 2 Wm. 4, c. 53, entitled "an act for consolidating and amending the laws relating to the payment of army prize money," may properly be introduced in this place. That statute, by sec. 49, enacts, that "if any person shall knowingly and willingly personate or falsely assume the name or character or procure any other to personate or falsely assume the name person or character of any officer, non-commissioned officer, soldier or other person entitled or supposed to be entitled to any prize-money, grant, bounty money, share or other allowance of money due or payable or supposed to be due or payable for or on account of any service performed or supposed to have been performed by any officer, non-commissioned officer, soldier, or other person who shall have really served or be supposed to have served in his Majesty's army or in any other military service, or shall personate or falsely assume, or act, aid, or assist in personating or falsely assuming the name or character, or procure any other person to personate or falsely assume the name or character of the executor or administrator, wife, widow, next of kin, relation or creditor of any such officer, non-commissioned officer, soldier, or other person as aforesaid, in order to receive or to enable any other person to receive any prize-money, grant, bounty money, share or other allowance of money due or payable or supposed to be due or payable for or on account of any service performed or sup posed to have been performed by any such officer, non-commissioned officer, soldier, or other person as aforesaid; all and every person so offending, being thereof lawfully convicted, shall be and are and is hereby declared and adjudged to be guilty of felony, and shall be transported beyond the seas for life, or for any term not less than seven years, as the Court before whom such person or persons shall be convicted shall adjudge.” (k) The 11 Geo. 4, c. 20, entitled "an act to amend the laws relating (h) Ante, p. 283, note (i). (i) Ante, p. 418, et seq. (k) The 2 Wm. 4, c. 53, contains no are punishable (under the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, to the officers, &c., pay of the royal navy," by sec. 84, enacts that "if any person c. 20, s. 84. shall falsely and deceitfully personate any commission, warrant or Personating petty officer, or seaman, or commission or non-commissioned officer of the navy. of marines or marine, or the wife, widow, or relation, executor, administrator, or creditor of any such officer, seaman or marine, or any person entitled to any allowance from the compassionate fund of the navy, in order to receive any wages, pay, half pay, prize-money, bounty money, pension or any part thereof, gratuity or other allowance for money due or payable, or supposed to be due or payable, to any such officer, seaman or marine, or to the wife or widow, relation, executor, administrator, or creditor of any such deceased officer, seaman, or marine, or any allowance to any person from the said compassionate fund, with intent to defraud any person whomsoever; every such offender shall be guilty of felony, 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 nor less than two years." (1) ing must be of some sea man, &c.. Upon some of the former statutes relating to the false personating The personatof seamen, it was decided, that as the false personating must be done in order to receive the wages, &c. of some seamen, &c. entitled or supposed to be entitled thereto, there must be some evidence to shew shown to have that there was such a person of the name and character assumed, who been in was either entitled, or might prima facie at least be supposed to be existence. entitled to receive the wages, &c. attempted to be acquired. Thus where the prisoner was indicted on the 31 Geo. 2, c. 10, (m) for personating and falsely assuming the name and character of Wm. Wheeler, a person supposed to be entitled to prize-money, for service done on board his Majesty's ship Terpsichore, in order to receive certain prize money, &c. one of the objections taken after conviction was, that there was no evidence that Wm. Wheeler ever served on board the Terpsichore in any capacity; or, indeed, that any such person existed: and the Judges, after a conference, held that the conviction was wrong, there being no evidence that there was any such person as Wm. Wheeler, who either was entitled, or at least prima facie entitled to prize money, as a seaman on board the Terpsichore. (n) and assuming the name of persons who were dead, held to be within the statutes. In a case upon one of the former statutes, 54 Geo. 3, c. 93, s. 89, Personating the indictment charged the prisoner with personating and falsely assuming the name and character of one Joshua Boatwright, a seaman entitled to certain prize money; and it was proved that the prisoner applied at Greenwich Hospital for prize-money in the name of Boatwright; but it appeared that he did not obtain the money, and that Boatwright was then dead. The counsel for the prisoner objected, that to personate Boatwright under these circumstances, or to assume his name and character, was not an offence within the meaning of the act, which related only to existing persons; that after the death of Boatwright he could not be entitled to prizemoney, but that the personal representatives or next of kin were (1) See sec. 88, and the 1 Vict. c. 90, s. 5, ante, p. 478, note (k), as to principals in the second degree, accessories, hard labour, and solitary confinement. (m) Repealed by the 11 Geo. 4, c. 20. The personating must be of some person name, who was entitled, or supposed to be entitled, to prize-money, &c., and it must be so charged in the indictment. the persons entitled, and that in fact he was not supposed to be entitled to prize-money, since it was supposed at the prize-office that he was dead, and that his next of kin was in the course of obtaining administration in order to receive it. The prisoner was found guilty, and the point being reserved for the consideration of the Judges, they were of opinion that the conviction was right, and that the statute applied, though the seaman personated was dead. (0) So where the prisoner personated one Cuff, who was dead, and whose prize-money had been paid to his mother, the Judges were of opinion that a conviction upon the same statute was right. (p) In a case upon the 57 Geo. 3, c. 127, s. 4, the indictment charged the prisoner with wilfully and knowingly personating, and by his correct falsely assuming the name and character of Peter M'Cann, a person entitled to prize-money for and in respect of his services performed on board of a ship of his Majesty's called the Tremendous, in order to receive such prize-money, with intent to defraud the commissioners and governors of the Greenwich Hospital; and a second count described Peter M'Cann as a person supposed to be entitled, &c., for services supposed to have been performed. Upon the evidence it appeared by the prize list and muster-book of the Tremendous, produced by the proper officer from Greenwich Hospital, that there was a person of the name of Peter M'Carn entitled to prize-money, but no person of the name of Peter McCann. The learned Judge, by whom the prisoner was tried, inclined to direct an acquittal upon this variance in the name, but he ultimately left the case to the jury, directing them to say whether the prisoner intended to personate Peter M'Carn. The jury found that he did so intend, and returned a verdict of guilty; upon which judgment was respited, and the point reserved for the consideration of the twelve Judges, who were of opinion that the "personating" must apply to some person who had belonged to the ship, and that the indictment must charge a personating of some such person; and as that was not the case here, they held the conviction wrong. (g) It was held upon the same statute, 57 Geo. 3, c. 127, s. all persons present aiding and abetting another in the personating and falsely assuming the name, &c., of a sealnan, were principals, and that the offence was not confined to the individual only, by whom the seaman was personated. (r) Aiders and abettors. 4, that It remains now to mention the statute which relates to the acknowledging of deeds, bail, &c., in the name of another. The 21 Jac. 1, c. 26, the 4 W. & M. c. 4, s. 4, and the 7 Geo. 3, c. 43, s. 4, which formerly provided for the punishment of these offences, are repealed by the 1 Wm. 4, c. 66, s. 31. Fraudulently But that statute by sec. 11, enacts, "that if any person shall, acknowledging before any Court, Judge, or other person lawfully authorized to take any recognizance or bail, acknowledge any recognizance or bail in the name of any other person not privy or consenting to the same, whether such recognizance or bail in either case be or be not filed; (8) any recognizance, bail, fine, recovery, or judgment, (o) Rex v. Martin, East. T. 1817, Russ. & Ry. 324. (p) Rex v. Cramp, East. T. 1817, Id. 327. (q) Rex v. Tannet, East. T. 1818. Russ. & Ry. 351. See Reg. v. Pringle, ante, p. 477. (r) Rex v. Potts, East. T. 1818. Russ. & Ry. 353. (s) The words in italics are new. |