He is, in general, punishable with imprisonment for any term not exceeding two years (with or without hard labour), and may also be required to find security for keeping the peace, or, in default, to suffer additional imprisonment for a period not exceeding one year (i). But an accessory after the fact to murder may receive sentence of penal servitude for life, or for any less term to five years, or imprisonment not exceeding two years (j). A receiver of stolen goods is liable to a maximum punishment of penal servitude for fourteen years (k).

It has been observed that the distinction of principals and accessories is found only in the case of felonies.

As to treason-Both every kind of incitement which In treason, all are principals. in a felony would make a man an accessory before the fact, and every kind of assistance which would make him an accessory after the fact, in treason will make the offender a principal traitor. This rule is said to exist propter odium delicti.

accessories.

As to misdemeanors-Those who aid or counsel the In misdecommission of the crime are dealt with as principals (); meanors, no those who merely assist after the misdemeanor has been committed are not punishable, unless indeed the act amount to the misdemeanor of rescue, obstructing the officer, or the like (m).

The following outline of the present state of the Recapitulalaw on the subject of degrees of guilt may serve to

place the matter in a clearer light :

tion.

(i) 24 & 25 Vict. c. 94, s. 4.

(5) 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 67; 27 & 28 Vict. c. 47, 8. 2.

(k) 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 91.

(1) 24 & 25 Vict. c. 94, s. 8.

(m) R. v. Greenwood, 21 L. J. (M.C.) 127.

There are no accessories in treason or misdemeanors, only in felonies.

Principals, whether of the first or second degree, are virtually dealt with in the same way.

Accessories, whether before or after the fact, may be treated as such, or as charged with a substantive felony; but if once tried in either of these capacities, the other may not be afterwards resorted to.

Accessories before the fact receive the same punishment as principals; accessories after the fact generally imprisonment not exceeding two years.

In the following imaginary case examples of each of the four kinds of participation in a crime will be found. A. incites B. and C. to murder a person. B. enters the house and cuts the man's throat, while C. waits outside to give warning in case any one should approach. B. and C. flee to D., who, knowing that the murder has been completed, lends horses to facilitate their escape. Here B. is principal in the first degree, C. in the second degree, A. is accessory before the fact, D. after the

fact.

BOOK II.

book.

CLEARLY it will be advisable to adopt some logical plan Plan of the in treating of the various offences which come under the cognizance of tribunals of criminal jurisdiction. Though, of course, crimes which primarily affect the state or the public also affect the individuals who constitute that state or public; and crimes which in their immediate effect wrong individuals indirectly are productive of public evil, yet the division of crimes into Offences of a Public Nature and Offences of a Private Nature or against Individuals, may be resorted to without fear of confusion. There are other possible modes of arrangement; for example, according to the different tribunals before which, or the different processes by which, the crimes are prosecuted (as in the French Penal Code), according to the punishments with which the crimes are visited, &c.

Taking as the main division that indicated above, the general order will be determined, as far as possible, by the wideness of the province of the various crimes, thus commencing with offences against the law of nations. For the present no notice other than that which is merely incidental will be taken of offences which are merely punishable on summary conviction. A special chapter will be devoted to this subject.

PART I.

OFFENCES OF A PUBLIC NATURE.

CHAPTER I.

OFFENCES AGAINST THE LAW OF NATIONS.

What offences CERTAIN offences are regarded as violating those unare punishable under the law written laws which are admitted by nations in general,

of nations.

and which it is their duty to have enforced. It must not be assumed that any state is at liberty to take upon itself the punishment of an offence against the law of nations, if such offence is committed within the territories of a foreign jurisdiction. The most that it can do in such case is to demand that justice be done by the foreign state: and if such state implicates itself in the offence by neglecting to proceed against the offender, then to put on pressure to enforce its requirements. But the case is otherwise if the offence is committed in parts which are considered extra-territorial, such as the high seas. In these all nations equally have an interest, and will proceed against individuals who are there guilty of offences against the law of nations.

PIRACY.

The term includes both the common law offence, and also certain offences which have been provided against by particular statutes.

Piracy at Common Law (a).-The offence consists in

(a) v. Phillimore, vol. i. part iii. c. 20,

common lawwhat it is.

committing those acts of robbery and depredation upon Piracy at the high seas, which, if committed upon land, would have amounted to felony there (b). Each state is entitled to visit the crime with the penalties which its

own laws may determine (c). In England, formerly the proper courts for the trial of piracy were the Admiralty Where tried. Courts; but later, the trial was by commissioners. nominated by the Lord Chancellor, in whose number were always found some common law judges (d). Now, the judges sitting at the Central Criminal Court and at the assizes are empowered to try cases of piracy (e).

The robbery must be proved as in ordinary cases of Essentials of that crime committed on land. The taking must be the crime. without authority from any prince or state, for a nation. cannot be deemed guilty of piracy. If the subjects of the same state commit robbery upon each other it is piracy. If the injurer and the injured be of different states the nature of the act will depend on the relation of those states. If in amity it is piracy; if at enmity it is not, for it is a general rule that enemies can never commit piracy on each other, their depredations being mere acts of hostility (ƒ).

The gist of the offence is the place where it is com

(b) 1 Russ. 253. v. Trial of Joseph Dawson and others, 13 Howell's State Trials (1696), 456.

(c) v. Manning's Law of Nations, by Amos, 121. The crime has been thus defined by text writers on international law: "The offence of depredating on the seas without being authorized by any sovereign state, or with commissions from different sovereigns at war with each other" (Lawrence's Wheaton's Elements of International Law, 1863, p. 246). The definition is framed to exclude depredations by lawfully authorized privateers, &c.

(d) 28 Hen. 8, c. 15; v. p. 294.

(e) 4 & 5 Wm. 4, c. 36, s. 22; 7 & 8 Vict. c. 2, s. I.

(f) v. In re Tivnan, 5 B. & S. 645; 2 Sir L. Jenk. 790; 1 Sir L. Jenk. xciv.

It should be remembered that the Declaration of Paris (1856) contained a provision that privateering should be abolished, binding on the countries parties to that declaration-Russia, Turkey, England, France, Italy, Austria, and Prussia.