viction for a similar offence, it shall be sufficient, after charging the subsequent offence, to state the substance and effect only, omitting the formal part of the indictment and conviction for the previous offence.

By 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 20, in any indictment for perjury, it shall be sufficient to set forth the substance of the offence charged upon the defendant, and by what court or before whom the oath, or affirmation, or writing was taken or made or subscribed,-without setting forth the proceeding in law or equity, or any part of the proceedings in the course of which such offence was committed, and without setting forth the commission or authority of the court or person before whom it was committed (r).

And by sect. 21, that in every indictment for subornation of perjury it shall be sufficient, wherever such perjury shall have been actually committed, to allege the offence of the perjured person in such manner as would be sufficient in an indictment against him for such perjury, and then to allege that the defendant unlawfully, wilfully and corruptly did cause and procure the said person the said offence in manner and form aforesaid to do and commit; and wherever such perjury shall not have been actually committed, it shall be sufficient to set forth the substance of the offence charged upon the defendant, without setting forth or averring any of the matters or things thereinbefore rendered unnecessary to be set forth or averred in the case of wilful and corrupt perjury.

Besides all these, there are other provisions of a more general kind. For

By 9 Geo. IV. c. 15, all judges at nisi prius, or at any court of oyer and terminer and gaol delivery, are empowered to amend the record upon which any trial may be pending in any indictment or information for any misdemeanor, when any variance shall appear between any matter in

(r) As to perjury and subornation of perjury, vide sup. pp. 321, 323.

-

writing or in print, produced in evidence, and the recital or setting forth thereof on the record. And by 11 & 12 Vict. c. 46, s. 4, it shall be lawful for any court of oyer and terminer and gaol delivery, if such court shall see fit so to do, to cause the indictment or information for any offence whatever, when any variance shall appear between any matter in writing or in print produced in evidence, and the recital or setting forth thereof in the indictment or information whereon the trial is pending,-to be forthwith amended in such particular or particulars by some officer of the court. And by 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 1 (s), whenever on the trial of any indictment for any felony or misdemeanor, there shall appear to be a variance between the statement in such indictment and the evidence offered in proof thereof, in the name of any county, riding, division, city, borough, town corporate, parish, township or place or in the name or description of any person or persons, or body politic or corporate, therein alleged to be the owner or owners of any property (real or personal) which shall form the subject of any offence charged therein, or therein alleged to be injured or damaged, or intended to be injured or damaged, by such offence; or in the christian name or surname, or other description whatsoever of any person or persons therein named or described; or in the name or description of any matter of thing whatsoever therein named or described; or in the ownership of any property named or described therein :-it shall be lawful for the court before which the trial shall be had, in any of the above cases, if it shall consider such variance not material to the merits of the case, and that the defendant cannot be prejudiced thereby in his defence on such merits, to order the indictment to be amended, according to the proof, by some officer of the court or other person; on such terms as to postponing the trial, to

(s) As to the effect of this section, see Sill's case, 1 Dearsley's C. C. R.

132; The Queen v. Green, 26 L. J., M. C. 17.

be had before the same or another jury, as the court shall think reasonable.

By 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, ss. 5, 7, and 24 & 25 Vict. c. 98, ss. 42, 43, whenever it becomes necessary, in any indictment, to make any averment as to any instrument whatever, in writing, print or figures;-it shall be sufficient to describe such instrument therein by any name or description by which it is usually known, without setting forth any copy or fac-simile.

Moreover, by 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 9, if on the trial of any person charged with any felony or misdemeanor, it shall appear to the jury that the defendant did not complete the offence, but was guilty only of an attempt to commit the same, he shall not by reason thereof be entitled to be acquitted, but the jury may find that he is not guilty of the felony or misdemeanor charged, but is guilty of an attempt to commit the same; and he shall be punished in the same manner as if he had been indicted for the attempt.

By the same statute (sect. 12), if upon the trial of any person for for any misdemeanor it shall appear that the facts given in evidence amount in law to a felony, he shall not by reason thereof be entitled to be acquitted of the misdemeanor; and no person tried for such misdemeanor shall be liable to be afterwards prosecuted for felony on the same facts, unless the court shall think fit to discharge the jury from giving any verdict, and direct such person to be indicted for felony, in which case he shall be dealt with in all respects as if he had not been put on his trial for the misdemeanor.

By sect. 18, in every indictment in which it shall be necessary to make averment as to any money, or note of the Bank of England or other bank, it shall be sufficient to describe such money, or bank note, simply as money, without specifying any particular coin or bank note; and such allegation, so far as regards the description of the property, shall be sustained by proof of any amount of

coin or of any bank note, although the particular species of coin of which such amount was composed, or the particular nature of the bank note, shall not be proved.

By sect. 24, no indictment (u) for any offence shall be held insufficient for want of the averment of any matter unnecessary to be proved, nor for the omission of the words as appears by the record;" or the words "with force and arms;" or the words "against the peace;" nor for the insertion of the words "against the form of the statute," instead of " against the form of the statutes," or vice versâ; nor for that any person is designated by a name of office or other descriptive appellation, instead of his proper name; nor for omitting to state the time at which the offence was committed, in any case where time is not of the essence of the offence; nor for stating the time imperfectly; nor for stating the offence to have been committed on a day subsequent to the finding of the indictment, or on an impossible day, or on a day that never happened; nor for want of a proper or perfect venue; nor for want of a proper or formal conclusion; nor for want of or imperfection in the addition of any defendant; nor for the want of the statement of the value or price of any matter or thing; or the amount of damages, injury or spoil, in any case where the value or price, or the amount of damage, injury or spoil, is not of the essence of the offence.

Lastly, by 19 & 20 Vict. c. 16, s. 17, it shall not be necessary for any purpose whatsoever, to prove that any indictment or inquisition for any offence committed, or supposed to have been committed, out of the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court, has been duly removed into the Court of Queen's Bench, or duly transmitted or removed into the Central Criminal Court, under the provisions of that Act; but every such indictment shall be

(u) The statute of 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, includes under the word indictment, an information, inquisition, presentment; and also any plea, replication, and other pleading; and any

nisi prius record. (Sect. 36.) As to the practice and amendments under this statute, see Frost's case, 1 Dearsley's C. C. R. 474.

presumed to have been duly removed, or duly removed and transmitted, upon production of the same in the Central Criminal Court, by the proper officer having custody of the records of the Central Criminal Court; and no evidence or proof to the contrary shall be admitted (v).

III. The remaining method of prosecution to which we formerly referred (x), is that which dispenses with any previous finding by a jury [to fix the authoritative stamp of verisimilitude upon the accusation.] An instance of this, by the common law, [was when a thief was taken with the mainour, that is, with the thing stolen upon him in manu. For he might, when so detected, flagrante delicto, be brought into court, arraigned, and tried, without indictment; as, by the Danish law, he might be taken and hanged upon the spot, without accusation or trial. But this proceeding was taken away by several statutes in the reign of Edward the third;] so that the only species of regular prosecution, without a previous indictment or presentment by a grand jury, now seems to be that of information.

The term Information is variously applied in our law. We understand by it, either a charge on oath, laid before a justice or justices of the peace with a view to a summrry conviction, and of which we have already had occasion to speak; or a complaint exhibited by a common informer in one of the superior courts of law, to recover a penalty, which some penal statute has made recoverable, by him who shall first sue, or inform, for the same in those courts; and that either on his own behalf or (more usually) on behalf of himself and the Crown jointly (y);-or lastly, a complaint exhibited in the name of the Crown itself in the Court of Exchequer, or the Court of Chancery, in respect of a civil claim on the part of the Crown; or in the Court of Queen's Bench, in respect of any offence under the

(v) See also 25 & 26 Vict. c. 65, s. 4. () Vide sup. p. 438.

(y) By 22 Vict. c. 32, her Majesty

is enabled to remit penalties after conviction, though payable to some party other than the Crown.