R v John Mattcocks Chapman
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1850 |
| Date | 01 January 1850 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 175 E.R. 356
QUEEN'S BENCH, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER
[846] regina v. john mattocks chapman. (The wilful taking of a false oath before a surrogate, to obtain a niairiage licence, is a misdemeanour ; and it is not essential to this offence that any marriage should have taken place, or that the defendant ever intended to marry. Whether this offence amounts to perjury-qucere Every step towards a misdemeanour, by an act done, is punishable as a misdemeanour. Whether, in an affidavit, the description of the deponent, at the commencement of it, is a part of what he swears-qucere But if, in a count of an indictment for sweating falsely before a surrogate to obtain a marriage licence, this and other things material are alleged to be falsely sworn (but not alleging the false swearing to be in an affidavit), proof of the false swearing as to any one of the other things will sustain the count.) [Subsequent proceedings with annotations, 1 Den. 432 ] False oath.--The first count of the indictment stated, that William James, clerk, was a surrogate for the diocese of Bath and Wells, having authority to grant Licences for marriages therein; and that the defendant applied to him to grant a licence for the solemnization of a marriage at the parish of Wilton, between Joseph Baker and Sarah Fry , and that the defendant, unlawfully intending to deceive the said W James, as such surrogate, to obtain from him such licence, in fraud and violation of the provisions of the stat. 4 Geo 4, c 19 [setting out the title of the Act], did, for the purpose of obtaining from the said W James, as such surrogate as aforesaid, such licence as aforesaid, wilfully, &c , produce before the said W. James, an affidavit in writing, and before the said W. James (he having lawful and competent power, &c.) was sworn, and being so sworn, did in and by the said affidavit depose and swear, that his name was Joseph Baker, that he was a widower, and a yeoman ; and that Sarah Fry had had her usual place of abode in the said parish of Wilton, for fifteen days then last, whereas in truth and in fact, &c [here followed allegations negativing each of these statements, and an allegation that the defendant did obtain from the said W. James a licence for the marriage of Joseph Baker and Sarah Fry, the said W. James then believing the oath of the defendant to be tiue]. The second count was similar to the first, but did not state the false swearing to be in an affidavit. The third count stated that W. James was a surrogate, and that the defendant applied to him ior a marriage licence, for the marriage at Wilton of Joseph Baker and Sarah Fry , and that he, for the purpose of obtaining such licence, was sworn, and took his oath, and did, for the purpose of obtaining the licence, falsely, &c., swear that his name was Joseph Baker, &c , as in the first [847] count This count also contained allegations negativing these statements, and an allegation that he obtained the licence, as in the first count (a) The fourth count was [848] similar to the third, but (a) The third count of the indictment was in the following form . Third Count ]-And the jurors aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid, do further present, that afterwards, to wit, on the day and yeai aforesaid, at the city of Wells aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, and in the diocese of Bath and Wells, the said William James, clerk, then and there was a surrogate for the said diocese of Bath and Wells, having authority to grant licences for marriages therein ; and that the said John Mattocks Chapman then and there applied to the said William James, then and there being such surrogate as aforesaid, to giant a licence for the solemnization of a marriage at the parish of Wilton in the said county and diocese, between the said Joseph. Baker and the said Sarah Fry ; and that the said John Mattocks Chapman unlawfully contriving and intending to obtain from the said William James, as such surrogate, such licence for the said marriage, in fraud and violation of the 2 CAR. & K. 849. REGINA V. CHAPMAN 357 omitted the allegation that the licence was obtained. The fifth count was a count for wilful and corrupt perjury ; it contained prefatory allegations similar to those in the third count, and stated that the defendant swore as in that count, and assigned perjury on it. It was proved, that the defendant went before the Rev William James, a sur-logate for the diocese of Bath and W'ells, to obtain a mairiage licence, and that the several facts stated and lecited in the affidavit were then taken down from the dictation of the defendant, and the affidavit signed by him , that an oath was then administered by him in the presence of Mr James, and he was asked if his name was Joseph Baker, and if the signature was his, to which he said " Yes " , that the affidavit was then read to him, and he was asked if the contents of it were true, to which he said they were ; that Mr James then gave him a licence for the marriage of Joseph Baker and Sarah Fry, at Wilton [t was pro\ed that the several statements wrere all false to the knowledge of the defendant at the time he so dictated them [840] The affidavit was in the following form, and boie a 2s Od stamp :- " Diocese of Bath and Wtlls " On the 27th day of July, 1848, appealed personally Joseph Baker, of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial