Wilkinson against Dutton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 02 May 1863 |
| Date | 02 May 1863 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 122 E.R. 307
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH AND THE EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 32 L. J. M. C. 152; 8 L. T. 276; 9 Jur. N. S. 1104. Referred to, R. v. Miles, 1890, 24 Q. B. D. 434.
wilkinson against dutton. Saturday, May 2d, 1863.-Jurisdiction of justices. 24 & 25 Viet. c. 100, s. 42. Assault. Evidence of felony.-Under 24 & 25 Viet. c. 100, a. 42, a female charged a man before justices of the peace with an assault, and on her examination deposed not only that he had assaulted her and hurt her ^nee, but tb,at he had connexion with her, though she " did not consent, and 308 WILKINSON V. DUTTON 3 B. & S. 822. did what she could to resist him." The other evidence shewed that the part of her statement which related to indecent assault was very improbable, and the justices, disbelieving it, convicted him of an assault: Held that they had juris-dietion to do so, although the evidence, if believed, disclosed a felony. [S. C. 32 L. J. M. C. 152; 8 L. T. 27&; 9 Jur. N. S. 1104. Referred to, R. v. Miles, 1890, 24 Q. B. D. 434.] The following case was stated by justices under stat. 20 & 21 Viet. c. 43. At a Petty Sessions holden at the Northleach Petty [822] Sessions Court at Hampnett, for the division of Northleach, in the county of Gloucester, on the 19th day of November, 1862, the information and complaint of Jane Button (hereinafter called the respondent) against Thomas Wilkinson (hereinafter called the appellant), made in writing on oath before the Kev. Frederick Biscoe, one of the undersigned justices of the peace, on the 17th day of November, 1862, under stat. 24 & 25 Viet. c. 100, s. 42, whereby the respondent, on her oath, declared that, on the 1st November, the appellant unlawfully assaulted her, at the parish of Hampnett, in the said county, contrary to the form of the statute &c., was heard and determined by us, the said justices, and upon such hearing the appellant was duly convicted before us of the said offence, and we adjudged him to be imprisoned in the common gaol of Gloucester, for the county of Gloucester, for the term of one month. The case then set out the evidence before the justices. The respondent deposed that, on the occasion in question, the appellant had not only assaulted her and hurt her Ene, but that he had connexion with her, though she "did not consent, and did what she could to resist him." The other evidence, however, shewed that that part of her statement which related to indecent assault was very improbable, and the justices, disbelieving it, convicted the appellant of an assault. Sawyer, for the respondent.-The eonviction took place under stat. 24 & 25 Viet. c. 100, s. 42, which enacts :-" Where any person shall unlawfully assault or beat any other person, two justices of the peace, upon complaint by or on behalf of the party aggrieved, may [823] hear and determine such offence, and the offender shall, upon conviction thereof before them, at the discretion of the justices, either be committed to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Clare Justices
... ... , by striking him on the face with a stone and cutting him, an order was made on, &c., against Cornelius Collins, farmer's son, to the following effect, viz.—Convicted; fined 21 s. , with 20 ... To the same effect is Wilkinson v. Dutton ( 1 ). In The Queen v. Elrington ( 2 ) the information charged only a common ... ...