R v William Butcher

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date01 January 1858
Date01 January 1858
CourtHigh Court

English Reports Citation: 169 E.R. 1145

IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH AND THE COURTS OF ERROR

Regina
and
William Butcher

S. C. 28 L. J. M. C. 14, 32 L. T O. S. 110; 22 J. P. 739, 4 Jur N. S 1155; 7 W R 38; 8 Cox C C. 77.

[6] 1858. regina v william butcher (The defendant was convicted of obtaining money by false pretences The 1st count of the indictment alleged that the defendant pretended to J H that he (the defendant) was the agent of J. B , and was sent to the pay-table of a certain Company to receive certain monies then payable by the said Company to the said J. B., and that he was authorized to receive such monies for and on behalf of the said J B., by means of which said false pretences the defendant obtained from J. H certain monies of the said Company. The 2nd count alleged that the defendant pretended to A. that he (the defendant) was authorized to send him, the said A , to the said pay-table to get the pay-table money of the said J. B., by means of which said false pretence the defendant obtained from the said J. H. and from the said A certain monies of the monies of the said Company The 3rd count was not material to the decision of this case. The 4th count alleged that the defendant pretended to the said A. that he (the defendant) was the agent of J B , and that he (the defendant) was sent by the said J. B. to the said pay-table to receive certain monies then payable by the said Company to the said J B , and that he (the defendant) was authorized to receive such monies for and on behalf of the said J B , by means of which said false pretences the defendant obtained from A certain monies of the monies of A On the trial it was proved that the defendant promised A a penny to go to the pay-table and ietch J. B 's money ; that A. accordingly went to the pay-table where the said 3 H was, and asked for, and received from J. H , J B.'s pay-table money, which he afterwards gave to the defendant because he had promised him a penny ; and it was also proved that J H would not have parted with the money if A. had not said he was sent for it, and if he had not believed that A. was authorized by J. B. to receive it. Held -1. That A. being the innocent agent of the defendant this amounted to a false pretence, by the defendant himself, that A. was authorized to receive J. B.'s pay-table money; but 2. That the conviction could not be sustained, because there was no count in the indictment charging that as the false pretence on which the money was obtained ) [S. C. 28 L. J. M. C. H , 32 L. T 0. S. 110 ; 22 J. P. 739 , 4 Jur N. S 1155 ; 7 W E 38 ; 8 Cox C C. 77.] The following case was reserved and stated by the Chairman of the Kent Sessions At the General Quarter Sessions of Peace for the county of Kent, holden at Saint Augustine's near Canterbury, on the 6th day of April 1858, William Butcher was tried upon the following indictment Kent, to wit ] The jurors for our lady the Queen on their oath present that William Butcher on the twenty-second day of January in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty-eight unlawfully knowingly and designedly did falsely pretend to one James Holden the treasurer and servant of a certain incorporated Company called The Company of Free Fishers and Dredgers of Whitstable in the said county that he the said William Butcher was the agent of two [7] persona named James Butcher the elder and James Butcher the younger of Whitstable aforesaid which two persons were commonly known by the name of " the Jim Butchers " and that he the said William Butcher was then sent by the said James Butcher the elder and James Butcher the younger otherwise " the two Jim Butchers " to the pay-table of The Company of Free Fishers and Dredgers of Whifcstable aforesaid to receive certain monies then payable by the said Company to the said James Butcher the elder and James Butcher the younger otherwise '' the two Jim Butchers " and that he was then authorized to receive such monies 1146 EEGINA V. WILLIAM BUTCHER BELL 8. for and on behalf of the said James Butcher the elder and James Butcher the younger otherwise " the two Jim Butchers " by means of which said false pretence the said William Butcher did then unlawfully obtain from the said James Holdeu the sum of twcj pounds and three shillings of the monies of the said Company with intent thereby thet to defraud, whereas in truth and in fact the said William Butcher was not then the agent of the said James Butcher the elder and James Butcher the younger or either of them and was not then or at any other time sent by the said James Butcher the elder and James Butcher the younger otherwise " the two Jim Butchers " or by either of them to the pay-table of The Company of Free Fishers and Dredgers of Whitstable aforesaid to receive certain monies or any money payable by the said Company to the said James Butcher the elder and James Butcher the younger otherwise " the two Jim Butchers " or to either of them and the said William Butcher was not then authorized to receive such monies or any money for and on behalf of the said James Butcher the elder and James Butcher the younger otherwise " the two Jim Butchers " or either of them as he the said William Butcher well knew, against the form of the statute in [8] such case made and provided 2nd count And the jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do further present that William Butcher on the twenty-second day of January in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty-eight unlawfully knowingly and designedly did falsely...

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 cases
  • Asic v Narain
    • Australia
    • Full Federal Court (Australia)
    • Invalid date
  • Smyth v Tunney
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 21 Abril 2004
    ...V CULLEN 1894 2 IR 683 EVANS V O'DONNELL 1886 LR IR 170 1885 19 ILTR 53 REAL PROPERTY LIMITATION ACT 1874 WALL V WALSH IR 4 CL 103 JOHNSON V BELL 6 IR CLR 526 LOWSLEY V FORBES 1999 1 AC 329 WT LAMBE & SONS V RIDER 1948 2 KB 331 NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PLC V POWNEY 1991 CH 339 LOUGHER ......
  • Andrew James Bridgen v Paul Julian Bridgen
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 8 Septiembre 2023
    ...be calculated from all five private company transactions identified by Mr Bell and Mr Lewis. Mr Lewis calculates a multiple of 4.95 and Mr Bell 6.71, giving a combined multiple of 5.83. This combined multiple should be increased by the value of the increase in the BDO PCPI in the 18 months ......
  • Evans v O'Donnell and Another
    • Ireland
    • Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)
    • 10 Noviembre 1883
    ...of 1874 only refers to judgments marked before the Judgment Mortgage Act. The judgments in the cases of Wall v. Walsh (5), and Johnson v. Bell (6), were upon judgments marked before 1850 when judgments were charges upon land. In O'Hara v. Creagh (7), the judgment was a charge upon the land,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
5 books & journal articles
  • Strategery's refuge.
    • United States
    • Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Vol. 99 No. 4, September 2009
    • 22 Septiembre 2009
    ...views, but in no circuit is the distribution as noticeable and as contentious as in the Sixth Circuit. (147) Case Example 1: West v. Bell (6th Cir. In the last case on sentencing ineffectiveness the Sixth Circuit decided in 2008, the majority relied on Burger and denied the writ; the dissen......
  • The Florida Public Records Act in the Era of Modern Technology.
    • United States
    • Florida Bar Journal Vol. 92 No. 9, November 2018
    • 1 Noviembre 2018
    ...(1885); see also Bell v. Kendrick, 6 So. 868 (1889) (establishing the "discharge of duty" analysis to define what is a public record). (2) Bell, 6. So. at (3) Amos v. Gunn, 94 So. 615, 634 (1922). (4) Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaffer, Reid & Assocs., Inc., 379 So. 2d 633, 640 (Fla. 19......
  • Dow Jones & Co Inc v Gutnick: negotiating 'American legal hegemony' in the transnational world of cyberspace.
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 27 No. 2, August 2003
    • 1 Agosto 2003
    ...Cf Amway Corporation v Procter & Gamble Co, (Unreported, United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan, Judge Holmes Bell, 6 January 2000); Blumenthal v Drudge, 992 F Supp 44 (DC, 1998). For further discussion of these cases see Mehta, above n 90, (94) 293 F 3d 707 (......
  • Revisiting the Luck of the Draw.
    • Canada
    • Queen's Law Journal Vol. 45 No. 1, September 2019
    • 22 Septiembre 2019
    ...LeBlanc 10.1 Gagne 9.6 Roussel 9.3 Mosley 8.8 McVeigh 8.6 Fothergill 8.4 Montigny 7.9 Bedard 7.3 Shore 7.3 St-Louis 7.1 Phelan 7.0 Hughes 6.9 Bell 6.5 Harrington 5.8 Tremblay-Lamer 5.6 Noel 5.6 Crampton 5.0 McDonald 5.0 Beaudry 4.6 Annis 4.1 Scott 3.4 Gascon 3.0 Snider 2.6 Boivin 1.8 All Le......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 provisions
  • Montana Register, 2018, Issue 14, July 20, 2018 Pages 1322 to 1455
    • United States
    • Montana Register
    • Invalid date
    ...2 Great Falls Reappointed 6/11/2018 Governor 4/1/2020 Mrs. Caitlyn Ashley Patera Qualifications (if required): Agency Representative Helena Bell 6/11/2018 -1442- Montana Administrative Register 14-7/20/18 Appointed By Appointment/End Date EXECUTIVE BRANCH APPOINTEES FOR JUNE 2018 Appointee ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT