The King against Boultbee
Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
Judgment Date | 16 January 1836 |
Date | 16 January 1836 |
Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 111 E.R. 874
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
S. C. 6 N. & M. 26; 1 H. & W. 713; 5 L. J. M. C. 57.
[498] the king against boultbee. Saturday, January 16th, 1836. The rule, that a statute taking away eertiorari does not bind the Crown unless named, ia not limited to cases where the Crown has an actual interest, but extends to all prosecutions in the name of the King. And the rule in favour of the Crown is not defeated by the prosecutor having become nominally defendant; as where a conviction has been quashed at sessions, with costs to be paid by the prosecutor, and he seeks to quash the order of sessions. By the Game Act, 1 & 2 W. 4, c. 32, the justices, before whom any person is summarily convicted in penalties under that statute, may adjudge that such party shall pay the penalty immediately or at a future time, and, in default of payment, be imprisoned for a certain period : and it is enacted, that the conviction may be drawn in a certain form (corresponding with the above provision) : that the party convicted may appeal to the sessions, giving notice to the complainant of the cause and matter of appeal, within three days after the conviction ; and that no such conviction shall be quashed for want of form. A party, summarily convicted under the Act, appealed, giving notice of several objections on the merits. By the conviction, when returned to the sessions, it appeared that the party was adjudged to pay the penalty forthwith, and that nothing was said of imprisonment in case of default. The sessions quashed the conviction on this ground, stating in their order that they quashed it for want of form. The objection was not taken in the notice of appeal, nor did it appear that the appellant, when he gave the notice, had means of knowing how the conviction would be framed. Held that, assuming the conviction to be defective in substance, the sessions had no power to quash it on this objection, no notice of it having been given. [S. C. 6 N. & M. 26 ; 1 H. & W. 713 ; 5 L. J. M. C. 57.] Bichard Pickering was convicted by the Eev. James Boberts, a justice of the peace for the county of Warwick, on the information of John Boultbee, Esq., of having committed a trespass, by entering and being, in the day-time, upon a piece of land in the possession and occupation of John Eowbottom, in search of game, with a dog and gun, contrary to stat. 1 & 2 W. 4, c. 32. The adjudication was as follows:-" And I do adjudge that the said E. P. shall, for the said offence, forfeit the sum of 11., and shall pay the said sum, together with the sum of 10s. for costs, forthwith. And I direct that the said sum of 11., being the amount of the said penalty, shall be paid to John Breedon, one of the overseers of the poor of the said parish in which the said offence was committed, to be by him applied according to the directions of the statute in such case made and provided. And I do order that the said sum of 10s. for costs shall be paid to John Boultbee, Esq. the complainant. Given," &c. Within the time prescribed by the Act, Pickering gave notice of appeal, [499] which was duly served on Mr. Boultbee. Several grounds of appeal were stated in the notice, involving the merits of the information and conviction, and the notice concluded, " And I further give you notice that I am aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction, and shall, on the trial of the appeal aforesaid, insist on all other causes, matters, and things, which I can or lawfully may do." The appeal came on at the sessions, and, by order of the Court, (5) Coleridge J. was absent. See p. 489, ante. (c) See Eex v. Pakefield, p. 612, post. 4 AD. AB.900. THE KING V. BOULTBEE 87,5 recited to be made upon full hearing of the said matter, and counsel on both sides, the conviction was adjudged to be quashed, for want of form, with costs, to be paid by Mr. Boultbee to Pickering. The informality relied upon was, that the justice did not, by the conviction, adjudge that, in default of the penalty and costs being paid, the party convicted should be imprisoned and kept to hard labour, according to the form given by sect. 39 of the statute (a). The [500] causes of appeal mentioned in the notice were not gone into. Application was afterwards made to Lord Denman C.J, at chambers, on behalf of Mr. Boultbee, for a certiorari to remove into this...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
The King (Martin) v Mahony
...(2) 8 E. & B. 529. (3) 8 E. & B. 451. (4) 2 Q. B. 1037. (5) 8 T. R. 536. (6) 8 East, 113. (7) 8 East, 394. (8) L. R. 5 Q. B. 466. (9) 4 A. & E. 498. (10) 22 Q. B. D. (11) 3 B. & S., at p. 632. (1) [1905] 2 I. R. 101, 112. (2) 3 E. & B. 607. (3) 2 H. & N. 219. (4) 22 L. R. Ir. 98. (5) 2 E. &......
-
People (Attorney General) v Kennedy
...F. 534. (13) 4 M. & Sel. 337. (1) 8 Ch. D. 492, at p. 501. (2) 26 L R. (Ir.) 451, at p. 512. (3) 15 East 333. (4) L. R. 1 P. C. 520. (5) 4 Ad & E. 498. (6) 5 B. & Ald. (7) Sayer 90. (1) L. R. 1 P. C. 520. (2) 7 Q. B. D. 198, at p. 200. (3) [1946] I. R. 110. (1) [1946] I. R. 110. (2) 40 I. L......
-
R v Clare Justices
...(5) 5 Q. B. 1. (6) 15 East, 333. (1) 5 B. &Ald. 527. (2) 4 App. Cas. at p. 40. (1) [1898] 1 Q. B. at p. 806. (2) 11 Q. B. D. 704. (3) 4 A. & E. 498. (4) 9 A. & E. (5) 2 Q. B. D. 516. (6) 1 Dowl. & Ry. 132. ...
-
The Sligo Rural District Council, Respondents v Gilbert Hanly and Others, Appellants,
...[1913] 2 I. R. 44. (4) 2 N. I. J. R. 203. (1) 6 A. & E. 893. (2) [1897] 1 Q. B. 433. (3) 4 Q. B. 711. (4) [1902] 2 K. B., at p. 754. (5) 4 A. & E. 498. (1) 2 Ex. D. (2) I. R. 11 C. L. 525. (1) [1893] 2 Ch. 603. (2) [1916] 1 K. B. 433. (3) [1898] 2 Q. B. 358. (4) 1. R. 11 C. L., at pp. 532 a......