The King against Read
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 27 November 1812 |
| Date | 27 November 1812 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 104 E.R. 1142
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
1142 THE KING .V. READ 16 EAST, 405: the king against head. Friday, Nov. 27th, 1812. By 1 G. 1, c. 47, upon an information filed in this Court for persuading soldiers to desert, and tried at the assizes, this Court is the proper Court to award punishment, and if they award imprisonment, besides the penalty of 401., they are Abound also to award the pillory. The defendant was convicted before Bayley, J. at the last assizes for Northumberland, on a record out of this Court, upo'n an information founded on the 1 G. 1, c. 47, for persuading soldiers to desert. There were two counts charging separate offences in respect of two soldiers. Hullock for the defendant, who was now brought up to receive the sentence of the Court, referred to the 1st section of the Act, which imposes a penalty of 401. upon every person convicted of the offence, and then enacts, " That if it shall happen that any such offender hath not any goods, &c. to the value of 401. to satisfy the same, or that from the circumstances and heinousness of the crime, it shall be thought proper and convenient, the Court before which the said conviction shall be made, shall award the offender to prison, there to remain for any time not exceeding six months, without bail or mainprize, and also to stand in the pillory for the space of one hour, &c." He submitted first, that the words of the Act which direct the Court before which the conviction shall be made to award the offender to prison, &c., seemed to point out that the punishment should be awarded at the assizes, where the trial and conviction took place; but he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ex parte Jose Luis Fernandez
...J. Justices in eire are certainly now among the more principal superior courts.] The King v. Jolliffe, 4 T. E. 285, and The King v. Read, 16 East, 404, regard being had to the questions there before tbe court, are authorities to shew that the judges of assize, though their authority emanate......
-
The Queen v Charleton
...7 Ad. & El. 58. Rex v. EllisENR 5 B. & C. 395. Rex v. Little Russ. & Ry. C. C. R. 130. Rex v. JolliffeENR 4 T. R. 285. Rex v. ReadENR 16 East, 404. Rex v. JacksonENR 6 T. R. 145. Rex v. LovedenENR 8 T. R. 615. Rex v. James 2 M. & Sel. 321. Rex v. ReasonENR 6 T. R. 375. Rex v. NicollsENR 13 ......
-
The King against Vantandillo
...J. V., well knowing the premises, afterwards, and whilst the said J. V. was so infected, on, &c. (a)1 5 T. E. 272. (a)2 See Rex v. Read, 16 East, 404. 4M.&S.74. THE KING V. VANTANDILLO 763 with force and arms at, &c. unlawfully and injuriously did take and carry the said J. V. into and alon......
-
The King against Lawrence Kenworthy
...any offence, there is no power to alter that in the judgment, either by addition or diminution. Bex v. Walcott (4 Mod. 395), Bex v. Heed (16 East, 404). Lastly, the Court below should either have sentenced the prisoner to be transported to such place as the King in Council should appoint, o......