The Queen against Thomas Henrick The Elder and Thomas Kenrick the Younger

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date01 January 1843
Date01 January 1843
CourtCourt of the Queen's Bench

English Reports Citation: 114 E.R. 1166

IN THE QUEEN'S BENCH

The Queen against Thomas Henrick The Elder and Thomas Kenrick the Younger

S. C. D. & M. 208; 12 L. J. M. C. 135.

[49] the queen against thomas kenrick the elder and thomas kenrick THE younger. 1843. An indictment charged that A. and B. conspired, by false pretences and subtle means and devices, to obtain from F. divers large sums of money, of the moneys of F., and to cheat and defraud him thereof. The means of the alleged conspiracy were not stated, except as above. Held sufficient, and that the indictment was sustained by proof that A. and B. conspired to make a representation, knowing it to be false, that horses were the property of a private person, and not of a horse dealer, thereby inducing F. to buy them. A false pretence, knowingly made to obtain money is indictable, though the money be obtained by means of a contract which the prosecutor was induced by the falsehood to make. A. and B. having pleaded not guilty to an indictment for conspiracy, B. died between the venire and distringas. A. was tried alone, and found guilty. Held not a mistrial. Admitted, that an indictment for false pretences muab state whose moneys, &c. it was intended to obtain by the pretence. [S. C. D. & M. 208; 12 L. J. M. C. 135.] Indictment, found at the Middlesex Sessions, May 1841, and removed by certiorari at the instance of the defendatits. First count. That Thomas Kenrick the Elder, late of, &c., " horsedealer, and Thomas Kenrick the Younger, late of," &c., " horsedealer, being evil disposed persons, and seeking to get their living by various subtle, fraudulent and dishonest practices, on the 19th day of April in the fourth year," &c., "with force and arms, at," &c., " together with divers other evil disposed persons, unlawfully, fraudulently and deceitfully did combine, conspire, confederate and agree together, by divers false pretences and subtle means and devices to obtain and acquire to themselves, of and from one George William Featherstonhaugh, divers large Bums of money of the moneys of the said G. W. F., and to cheat and defraud him thereof, to the great damage of the said G. W. F., to the evil example," &c., "and against the peace," &c. Second count. Like the first, except that the conspiracy, &e. was alleged to be " to obtain and acquire to the said Thomas Kenrick the Elder " (only), of and from the said G. W. F., &. [60] Third count. Like the second, only substituting Thomas Kenrick the Younger for Thomas Kenrick the Elder. Fourth count. That defendants, on the said 19th day of April in the fourth year," &c., "at,"&c., "unlawfully, knowingly and designedly, did falsely pretend to the said G. W. Featherstonhaugh that a certain carriage, to wit a carriage called a phaeton, and a certain mare and a certain gelding, which they the said " defendants " then and there offered for sale to the said G. W. F., had then been the property of a lady then deceased, and were then the property of her sister, and were not then the property of any horsedealer, and were then the property of a private person, and that the said mare and the said gelding were then respectively quiet to ride and drive, and quiet and tractable in every respect. By means of which said false pretences the said " defendants "did then and there unlawfully, knowingly and designedly obtain from Q.B. M. THE QUEEN V. KENRTCK 1167 the said G-. W. F. a certain valuable security, to wit an order for the payment of 1681., with intent then and there to cheat and defraud him the said G-. W. F. of the same. Whereas, in truth and in fact, the said carriage, the said mare and the said gelding had not then been the property of a lady then deceased, arid were not then the property of her sister; and whereas, in truth and in fact, the said carriage, the said mare and the said gelding were the property of a horsedealer, and whereas, in truth and in fact, the said carriage, the aaid mare and the said gelding were not then the property of a private person ; and whereas, in truth and in fact, the said mare and the said gelding were not then quiet to ride and drive, and were not then quiet and tractable in every respect; and whereas the said " defendants "then and there well [51] knew that the said carriage, the said mare and the said gelding had not then been the property of a lady then deceased, and were not then the property of her sister; and also then and there well knew that the same were then the property of a horsedealer, and that the same were not then the property of a private person, and that the said mare and the said gelding were not then quiet to ride and drive, and were not then quiet and tractable in every respect. To the great damage and deception of the said G. W. F., to the evil example," &c., " against the form of the statute in such case," &c., "and against the peace," &c. Fifth count, like the fourth, except that the offering for sale was alleged to have been by Thomas Kenrick the Elder only. On the trial, before Lord Denman C.J., at the Middlesex sittings after Michaelmas term, 1841, it wa* stated that Kenrick the Younger was dead. The trial proceeded against Kenriek the Elder; and evidence was given that both the defendants had been parties to the representations stated in the fourth count: that the bargain had been made by Featherstonhaugh in consequence of his belief in the representations: that they were false; and that the horses were vicious. The Lord Chief Justice told the jury that, if they believed, upon this evidence, that there had been a concert between the two to effect the deceit, they must find Kenrick the Elder guilty. Verdict, guilty. In Hilary term, 1842, Byles obtained a rule for arresting the judgment, on the ground that the indictment was insufficient (for the reasons afterwards stated in argument); or for a venire de novo, or for a new trial, on the grounds of misdirection, and that there had been [52] a mistrial in trying one defendant after the death of the other. As to the last point, he produced an affidavit to the effect that the defendants pleaded to the indictment in Trinity terra, L841, and that the trial took place on 1st December 1841, when the counsel for the prosecution stated that Kenrick the Younger was dead : and it appeared by the affidavit that he died on 1st November 1841. The record shewed that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Department of Public Prosecutions v Shannon
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 19 June 1974
    ...with Bygrave the Court could give judgment against Nicols though Bygrave was dead at the time of the indictment. 26 The case of R. v. Kenrick in 1843, 5 Q.B. 49: 114 E.R. 1166 showed that where A and B pleaded not guilty to an indictment for conspiracy there was no mis-trial when, B having......
  • Macadeen Ameerally and Aubrey Bentham v Attorney General DPP and Magistrate Prem Persaud
    • Guyana
    • Court of Appeal (Guyana)
    • Invalid date
  • S v Cooper and Others
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...means or devices for attaining the object be agreed upon; R. v. Gill and Henry, (1818) 2 B. & Ald. 204 (106 E.R. 341); R. v. Kenrick, (1843) 5 Q.B. 49 (114 E.R. 1166); R. v. 1976 (2) SA p880 Boshoff J Gompertz, (1846) 9 Q.B. 824 (115 E.R. 1491); Sydserff v. R. (1847) 11 Q.B. 245 (116 E.R. 4......
  • S v Panayiotou
    • South Africa
    • Eastern Cape Division
    • 2 November 2017
    ...means or devices for attaining the object be agreed upon; R. v. Gill and Henry, (1818) 2 B. & Ald. 204 (106 E.R. 341); R. v. Kenrick, (1843) 5 Q.B. 49 (114 E.R. 1166); R. 2017 JDR 1739 p106 Chetty J [97] The data to which I have adverted establishes a course of conduct directed to the achie......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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