R v Cruse and Mary his Wife
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1839 |
| Date | 01 January 1839 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 173 E.R. 610
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER
Subsequent proceedings with annotations, 2 Mood. C. C. 53.
[541] regina v. cruse and mary his wife (On an indictment on the stat 1 Viet. c. 85, s. 2, for the capital offence of inflicting an injury dangerous to life, with intent to murder, the jury ought not to convict, unless they are satisfied that the prisoner had in his mind a positive intention to murdec ; and it is not sufficient that it would have been a case of murder if death had ensued. If A. is charged with this offence, and B. is charged with aiding and abetting him it is essential, to make out the charge as to B , that B. should have been aware of A.'s intention to commit murder Whether, if husband and wife jointly commit this offence, she is entitled to the legal presumption of her having acted under coercion, Qucere , but she is clearly not entitled to be acquitted on this ground at the end of the case for the prosecution, for if the jury find a verdict for an assault only (under sect 11 of the stat. 1 Viet. c. 85), the wife is punishable as well as the husband. An indictment on the stat. L Viet. c. 85, s. 2, stated that the prisoner feloniously, and of his malice aforethought, did assault C. H., and did cause unto C H. " a certain bodily injury, dangerous to the life of her the said C H , by then and there feloniously, with his hands and fists, beating and striking the said C H. in and upon the head and back of her the said C H., and then and there, with the left foot of him the said T. C , feloniously kicking the said C. H. in and upon the back of her the said G. H ; and then and there, with his hands, feloniously seizing and lifting the said C. H., and then and there feloniously striking the head of the said C. H. against a certain wooden beam of a certain ceiling there, and then and there feloniously, with his arms and hands, lifting up the said C. H., and with great force and violence casting down, flinging, and throwing the said C H. upon and against a certain brick floor there, with intent in so doing her the said C. H. then and there, and thereby feloniously, wilfully, and of his malice aforethought, to-fcill and murder " -Held, by the fifteen Judges, that this indictment was good, and that it sufficiently described the injury.) [Subsequent proceedings with annotations, 2 Mood. C. C. 53.] Indictment against the prisoners on the statute 1 Viet, c 85, s. 2 The indictment was as follows ò- " Berkshire, ^\The jurors for our Lady the Queen upon their oath, present that to wit. J Thomas Cruse, late of the parish of Thatcham, in the county of Berks aforesaid, labourer, not having the fear of God before his eyes, but being moved and seduced by the instigation of the devil, on the 5th day of June, in the first year of the reign of our Sovereign Lady Victoria, by the grace of God, of the united kingdom of Grqat Britain and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith, with force and arms at the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, in and upon one Charlotte Heath, in the peace of God and our said Lady the Queen, then and there being feloniously, wilfully, and of his malice aforethought, did maliciously make an assault ; and that the saidT. C. then and there feloniously did cause unto the said C. H. a certain bodily injury dangerous to the life of her the said C. H. by then and there feloniously with his hands and fists, and beating and striking the said C H in and upon the head and back 0f her the said C H , and then and there with the left foot of him the said T. C. fekmiously kicking the said C. H in [542] and upon the back of her the said C. H.,, and then and there with his hands feloniously seizing and lifting the said C. H , and then and there feloniously striking the head of the said C. H. against a certain wooden beam of a certain ceiling there ; and then and there feloniously with his arms and hands lifting up the said C. H., and with great force and violence casting down, flinging and throwing the said C H upon and against a certain brick floor therer with intent in so doing her the said C. H. then and there and thereby feloniously (6-) See the cases of Reg. v. Boucher, ante, p. 141, and Reg. v. Beard, td 142 ftP. 643. REGINA V. CRUSE 611 mlfully, and of his malice aforethought, to kill and murder, by means whereof the said CL H, was then and there grievously injured m her body, and her life waa then and there greatly endangered, against the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace of our Lady the Queen, her Crown and dignity " And the jurors aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid, do further present that Mary Cruse, late of the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, the wife of the said Thomas Cruse, on the day and year aforesaid, with force and arms at the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, feloniously was present aiding, abetting, and assisting the said T. C. the said felony to do and commit contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace of our said Lady the Queen, he Crown a-nd dignity " As soon as the prisoners were called upon to plead, Camngton, for the prisoners, put in two demurrers, one for each prisoner (a) J. J. Williams, for the prosecution, joined in demurrer. Carrington, for the prisoner -The ground of demurrer is, that the indictment does not at all specify what the [543] injury was, although it states very fully and properly how it was inflicted. The defect, if it be one, can only be taken advantage of on demuirer, as it would be aided, after verdict, by the statute 7 Geo IV. c. 64, s. 21, as the indictment is in the words of the statute creating the offence Patteaon, J.-I at present incline to think that the indictment is not good ; but as this is a very recent Act of Parliament, I should like to have the point considered. If I were to decide in favour of the demurrers, that would put an end to the case, and if I overruled the demurrers, the prisoners would be obliged to sue out a wnt of error. However, if the demurrers are withdrawn, I will reserve the case for the consideration of the fifteen Judges, and will take care that the prisoners shall have every advantage of the demurrers if the Judges should think the objection valid The demurrers were withdrawn, and the prisoners pleaded not guilty The following evidence was given .- Frances Alder-I live at Stroud Green, in the parish of Greenhaiu , I live next door to the prisoners , I know Charlotte Heath , she is seven years old, and is the natural daughter of the female prisoner ; I saw the prisoners between six and seven on the evening of the 5th of June ; Thomas Cruse asked his wife for more money , she skid he should have no more that night , he shut the door, and he and his wife being tken in the house, I heard...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Huebsch
...distinction between the mental element in murder and that in attempted murder had been recognised in the earlier cases of Regina v Cruse, 173 E.R. 610; Regina v Jones, id. 826 and Regina v Bourdon, 175 A E.R. 151. The subject is referred to by KOTZE, J.A., in Rex v Jolly and Others, 1923 AD......
-
R v Huebsch
...distinction between the mental element in murder and that in attempted murder had been recognised in the earlier cases of Regina v Cruse, 173 E.R. 610; Regina v Jones, id. 826 and Regina v Bourdon, 175 A E.R. 151. The subject is referred to by KOTZE, J.A., in Rex v Jolly and Others, 1923 AD......
-
Thomas Shea, in Error, v The Queen. William Dwyer, in Error, v The Queen
...7 C. & P. 446. Rex v. Ellis 5 . & C. 395. Rex v. JenningsENR 2 Lewin, C. C. 541. Rex v. Cadman 1 M. C. C. 114. Regina v. CruiseENR 8 C. & P. 541 Powell v. SonnettENR 3 Bing. 381. Cosey v. DiggonsENR 2 B. & Al. 546. Edge v. Wandesford 9 Ir. Law Rep. 161. Tinkler v. RowlandENR 4 Ad. & E. 868.......
- R v Thomas Cruse and Mary, his Wife
-
On the origins of consorting laws.
...William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England (Clarendon Press, 1769) bk 4, 165-6. (71) R v Cruse (1838) 8 Car & P 541, 557; 173 ER 610, 616 (Carrington) (during (72) Egyptians Act 1783, 23 Geo 3, c 51. (73) Paula J Byrne, Criminal Law and Colonial Subject: New South Wales, 18......