Rewards for Recovering Stolen Property.

513

stolen property, and advertising a reward for the same purpose. By 6-7 G. 5, 50, 34, 'Every person who corruptly takes any money or reward, directly or indirectly, under pretence, or upon account of helping any person to recover any property which has under circumstances which amount to felony or misdemeanour been stolen or obtained in any way whatsoever, or received, shall (unless he has used all due diligence to cause the offender to be brought to trial for the same) be guilty of felony, and on conviction thereof shall be liable to penal servitude for any term not exceeding seven years, and, if a male under the age of sixteen years, to be once privately whipped in addition to any other punishment to which he may by law be liable.' On an indictment under 7-8 G. 4, 29, 58, rpd., it was not necessary to show that defendant was in any way a party to the felony; it was sufficient if he had some corrupt and improper design when he received the money, and did not bonâ fide intend to use such means as he could for the detection, &c. of the offender. King, 1 Cox C. C. 36, 1844. Where A. was charged with corruptly and feloniously receiving money from B. under pretence of helping B. to recover goods stolen from B., and with not causing the thieves to be apprehended, three questions were left for the jury: 1. Did A. mean to screen the guilty parties. or to share the money with them? Ans.: No. 2. Did A. know the thieves, and intend to assist them in getting rid of the property by procuring B. to buy it? Ans.: No. 3. Did A. know the thieves, and assist B., as her agent, and at her request, in endeavouring to purchase the stolen property from them, not meaning to bring the thieves to justice? Ans.: Yes. It was held that the receipt of the money was corrupt' within s. 58 and that the verdict of guilty was right. Pascoe, 1 Den. C. C. R. 456; 18 L. J. M. C. 186; 3 Cox C. C. 469, 1849.

It is not necessary to prove that the reward was paid before the property was restored if it was paid because there was a previous agreement to pay: O'Donnell, 7 Cox C. C. 337, 1857: C. C. R. Ir.

By 24-5 V. 96, 102, anyone advertising a reward for the return of property stolen or lost, and using any words purporting that no questions will be asked, or that a reward will be given for property stolen or lost 'without seizing or making any inquiry after the person producing such property,' or promising to return to any pawnbroker or other person who may have bought or advanced money upon any property stolen or lost, the money so paid or advanced, or any other sum of money or reward for the return of such property, or any person printing or publishing such advertisement, shall forfeit fifty pounds to any person suing. This s. is governed by 33-4 V. 65, the Larceny (Advertisements) A. 1870.

Dogs See that title.

Triable at Q. S.

COMPROMISING CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS.

See Compounding.

CONCEALING BIRTH OF CHILD.

By 24-5 V. 100, 60: If any woman shall be delivered of a child, every person who shall, by any secret disposition of the dead body of the said child, whether such child died before, at, or after its birth, endeavour to conceal the birth thereof, shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, with or without hard labour: Provided, that if any person tried for the murder of any child shall be acquitted thereof, it shall be lawful for the jury by whose verdict such person shall be acquitted, to find, in case it shall so appear in evidence, that the child had recently been born, and that such person did, by some secret disposition of the dead body of such child, endeavour to conceal the birth thereof, and thereupon the court may pass such sentence, as if such person had been convicted upon an indictment for the concealment of the birth.'

A dead body must be found and identified. Williams, 11 Cox C. C. 684, 1871; cf. Hopkins, 1838. Unless there be a confession: Kersey, 21 Cox C. C. 690, 1908, where there was also a confession of murder; the judge directed the grand jury not to find a bill for murder, and when they did, directed an acquittal therefor. The C. C. A. upheld the conviction for concealment, thinking the confession good. 1 Cr. A. R. 260.

A child'] There must be sufficient maturity at the birth to give a chance of life, to which ' no specific limit can be assigned, but it may perhaps be safely assumed that under seven months the great probability is' against life: per Erle J., Berriman, 6 Cox C. Č. 388, 1854. Perhaps a foetus not bigger than a man's finger, but having the shape of a child, is a child' within the statute. Colmer, 9 Cox C. C. 506, 1864; sed quære, 1 Russ. Cri. 778 8; but in Hewitt, 4 F. & F. 1101, 1866, Smith J. left a similar point to the jury.

Any secret disposition'] In view of these words, where a woman deposited a child while alive in a field, and there left it to die, it was held that she could not be convicted under s. 60. May, 10 Cox C. C. 448; 16 L. T. 362, 1867: C. C. R.

It is a question of law whether the place of disposal is such as the offence may have been committed in (e.g. a dustbin): Clarke, 4 F. & F. 1040, 1866. Defendant denied her pregnancy, and also, after the birth at first denied that, but afterwards confessed to a surgeon. The body was, on the same day, found among the soil in the privy. Patteson J. held it to be essential to the commission of the offence, that she should have done some act of disposal of the body after the child was dead; therefore if she had gone to the privy for another purpose and the child came from her unawares, and fell into the soil, and was suffocated, she must be acquitted, notwithstanding her denial of the birth. Turner, 8 C. & P. 755, 1839: acquitted. So Coxhead, 1 C. & K. 623, 1845. ·

What was a sufficient disposal of the body was a matter of doubt under 9 G. 4, 31, 14, rpd.-secret burying or otherwise disposing of.' Where the evidence was, that defendant had been delivered of a child, and had placed it in a drawer, where it was found locked up, the drawer being opened by a key taken from her pocket, Maule J. directed an acquittal, being of opinion that the statute contemplated a final disposing of the body, by the eiusdem generis rule. Ash, 2 Moo. & R. 294, 1840; Bell, ib. note, 1841. These cases were overruled by a majority of the judges in Goldthorpe, 2 Moo. C. C. R. 244, 1841. There defendant confessed that the child was between the bed and the mattrass, where it was discovered. The point was again reserved in Perry, D. & P. C. O. R. 471; 24 L. J. M. C. 137; 6 Cox C. O. 531, 1855, when Goldthorpe was upheld, except by Pollock C.B. with whom Martin B. agreed in Opie, 8 Cox C. C. 332, 1860. There defendant placed the body under the bolster, with the intention of endeavouring, as far as she could, to conceal it from the surgeon, but with the intention of removing it elsewhere when an opportunity offered.

S. 601 It seems clear under s. 60 that it is immaterial' whether the secret disposition was temporary or permanent,' since the words are any secret disposition.' I Russ. Cri. 773 s. Where defendant denied to her mistress that she was pregnant, but told the doctor that she had been confined and the child was in a box in her bedroom, and it was so found, the lid being open, Byles J. left it to the jury to say if they thought this was a secret disposition of the body: secrecy was the essence of the offence,' i.e. the place must be one where the body is not likely to be found. Sleep, 9 Cox C. C. 559, 1864: not guilty. Where defendant put the dead body of her child over a wall into a field which was quite unfrequented, this was held to be a secret disposition. Brown, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 244; 39 L. J. M. C. 94; 11 Cox C. C. 517, 1870; secret disposition must depend upon the circumstances of each particular case.' There must be some concealment.

6

Notification of pregnancy to others] Frances D. and Robert H. had been living together for some time, and about four in the morning she was delivered of a child, in the presence of H., its father. He very soon afterwards put the child (which had not been separated from the after-birth) into a pan, carried it downstairs into the cellar, and threw the whole into the privy, the female remaining in bed upstairs. She was proved to have said she knew it was to be done. The fact of her being with child was, some time before her delivery, known by her mother, who lived at some distance, and was apparent to other women. No female was present at the delivery, though one had been sent for about twelve at night. No provision had been made, but defendants were in a state of the most abject poverty: verdict, guilty of endeavouring to conceal, &c. The judges were of opinion that the communication made to other persons was only evidence, but no bar, under the statute, to the conviction which was good; but they recommended a pardon. Douglas, 1 Moo. C. C. 480, 1836.

Born dead] So in Mary Skelton and Henry Batting, 3 C. & K. 119, 1850, the judge directed the jury, that if a woman be delivered of a dead child, and a man take the body and secretly bury it, she was indictable for the concealment by secret burying under rpd. s. 14, above, and he as an accessory, for aiding, &c. (under s. 31 of the

same A.), if there was a common purpose in thus endeavouring to conceal the birth; but that the jury must be satisfied, not only that she wished to conceal the birth, but was a party to the secret burial by the man, in pursuance of a common design; if the woman was acquitted, the man must be: both were found guilty. This followed Bird, 2 C. & K. 817, 1849.

Not complete] Where defendant was stopped going across a yard, in the direction of a privy, with a bundle, which on examination was found to be a cloth sewed up, containing the body, it was held that she could not be convicted, the offence not having been completed. Snell, 2 Moo. & R. 44, 1837.

Indictment] Under s. 14, rpd., it needed not to be stated whether the child died before, at, or after' the birth, for that s. expressly provided that the moment of death need not be proved.' Coxhead, above. So under s. 60, though there are no such express words. See Saunders on Indictments, no. 57.

On indictment for the murder of a child, any person may now be convicted under s. 60 of endeavouring to conceal the birth. Formerly, under s. 14, above, no person but the mother could be so convicted. Wright, 9 C. & P. 754, 1841; 1 Russ. Cri. 773. Where defendant was tried for murder on the coroner's inquisition only, it was held that she might be found guilty of the concealment, 43 G. 3, 58, 4, rpd., speaking of any person charged with such murder,' the judges holding that the coroner's inquisition was a charge. Maynard, R. & R. 240, 1812; Cole, 2 Lea. 1095; 3 Camp. 371, 1813. There seems no doubt that a defendant might in the same way be convicted under s. 60, for he or she is tried for the murder of the child, as much on the inquisition as the indictment.

CONCEALMENT BY BANKRUPT.

See Bankrupts.

Concealment of Deeds, &c.

517

CONCEALMENT OF DEEDS, WILLS, INCUMBRANCES,
OR EVIDENCE.

By 22-3 V. 35, 24: Any seller or mortgagor of land or of any chattels, real or personal, or choses in action conveyed or assigned to a purchaser [or mortgagee-23-4 V. 38, 8], or the solicitor or agent of any such seller or mortgagor who shall, after the passing of this Act, conceal any settlement, deed, will, or other instrument material to the title, or any incumbrance, from the purchaser [or mortgagee-23-4 V. 38, 8], or falsify any pedigree upon which the title does or may depend, in order to induce him to accept the title offered or produced to him, with intent in any of such cases, to defraud, shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and, being found guilty, shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to suffer such punishment by fine or imprisonment for any term not exceeding two years, with or without hard labour, or by both, as the court shall award.'

By 38-9 V. 87, the Land Transfer A. 1875, s. 99: 'If in any course of any proceedings before the registrar or the court in pursuance of this Act any person concerned in such proceedings as principal or agent, with intent to conceal the title or claim of any person, or to substantiate a false claim, suppresses, attempts to suppress, or is privy to the suppression of any document or of any fact, the person so suppressing, attempting to suppress, or privy to suppression, shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and upon conviction on indictment shall be liable to be imprisoned for a term not exceeding two years, with or without hard labour, or to be fined such sum, not exceeding five hundred pounds, as the court before which he is tried may award.' So by s. 100, of fraudulent entries or erasures in the (land) register: such entries, &c. to be void between the parties.

See generally, Written Instruments.

Triable at Q. S.

CONCEALMENT OF TREASON, FELONY.
See Misprision.