R v Henry Avery and William Henry Avery
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1859 |
| Date | 01 January 1859 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 169 E.R. 1207
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH AND THE COURTS OF ERROR
S. C. 28 L. J. M C 185; 33 L. T O S 138; 23 J. P. 324; 5 Jur N. S. 577; 7 W. R. 431; 8 Cox C. C 184
1859 bechna v henry avery and william henry avery. (A. and B. took the goods of a husband without his consent, and with the intent to deprive him absolutely of his property in them , but the taking was in the presence and with the consent and privity of the wife A and B were uncle and cousin of the wife, who at the time of the taking intended to leave, and afterwards left, her husband's house without the intention of returning, and went with one of the prisoners to the house of the other ; but there was no evidence that she had committed or intended to commit adultery with either of them. It was not left to the jury to say which was the principal in taking ihe goods, the wife, or A and B , or either of them Held, that it must be considered that the wife took the goods, and A and B. assisted, and that they were not guilty of larceny ) [S. C. 28 L. J. M C 185 ; 33 L. T 0 S 138 ; 23 J. P. 324 ; 5 Jur N. S. 577 ; 7 W. R. 431 ; 8 Cox C. C 184] The following case was reserved by the Recorder of the liberty of Romney Marsh. Henry Avery and William Henry Avery were tried before me at the Quarter Sessions, holden at Dymchurch, for the liberty of Romney Marsh, m Kent, on the 9th of April, 1859 The indictment charged them with stealing a carpet, a featherbed, boxes, baskets, and a quantity of wearing apparel, the pro-[151J-perty of the prosecutor, from his dwelling-house The prosecutor was a labouring man living with his wife. The prisoner Henry was uncle, and William Henry was cousin, to the wife. The prisoners came together on the night of the 7th of February, and again on the night of the 10th. to the prosecutor's house without his knowledge, and after he had gone to bed ; the wife was at home on each occasion and admitted tkera. On the first night they packed and took away, in the wife's presence, and with her privity and consent, a box containing property of the prosecutor, and on tie second night they took, in her presence, and with her privity and consent, a carpet and a large iron cooking pot On the morning of the llth, after the prosecutor, who was in the habit of leaving home early, had gone to his work, the prisoner William Henry Avery went to the prosecutor's house between 8 and 9 o'clock, and, with the wife's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v James Rowton
...and Regina v Tollett, which thus once more received the sanction of the Court, as they did again mferentially in Regina v Avert/ (Bell, C. C. 150), and directly in Regina, v Deer (ante, p 240). In Regina v. Tollett (Car. & M. 112) Coleridge J. is reported also to have remarked, 'cMr. Carrin......
-
Campbell v M'Holm
...“otherwise any recalcitrant party might stop the progress of the case at his own pleasure by merely absenting himself whenever he chose'—(Bell, p. 150, and authorities there cited). Neither is it of any relevancy or consequence to say that the defender was present, and was heard, and led ev......