352

As to a joint uttering by a husband and wife, see post, title, Coercion by Husband.

Vide

Proof of uttering counterfeit gold or silver coin-evidence of the compound offence of uttering, having other counterfeit coin in possession.] Where the charge is for the compound offence, the prosecutor must [*353] prove, in addition to the evidence required to support *the charge of simply uttering, that the prisoner had at the time of tendering, other counterfeit coin in his possession. The statute does not require that an intent to pass the latter coin should be proved. The nature of the possession is explained by the interpretation clause of the new statute. post. The following cases arose, with regard to this point, upon the repealed statute, 15 Geo. 2, c. 28, s. 3. A man and a woman were jointly indicted for uttering a counterfeit shilling, having about them, &c. another counterfeit shilling, knowing, &c. It appeared that they came together to a public-house, and the woman, in the absence of the man, paid away the counterfeit shilling; that on the same day the man went to another public-house and offered to sell a large quantity of counterfeit shillings; and that on the following day the prisoners were apprehended while in bed. Near the bed was found a quantity of bad halfpence, some silver (four shillings and sixpence) in the man's pocket, which was good, and one shilling and sixpence bad; and concealed under his arm was found a paper parcel of bad shillings, which, if good, would have been worth 147.; in the woman's pocket were found a good half-crown, seven good shillings, and six counterfeit shillings, like the counterfeits found in the paper under the man's arm. Upon this evidence it was insisted for the prisoners that there was no ground to convict the man, he not having uttered the shilling, nor being present at the time the woman uttered it. With respect to the woman, she could only be convicted of the simple offence of uttering the shilling, it not appearing that, at the time of uttering it, she had any other counterfeit money about her. Both the prisoners being convicted, the judges held the conviction of the woman for the single offence good, but not good for uttering and having about her at the time other money; and as to the conviction of the man, they held it could not be supported. Else's case, Russ. and Ry. 142 (a). In the following case, two persons were convicted of a joint uttering, having another counterfeit shilling in their possession, although the latter coin was found upon the person of one of them only. It appeared that one of the prisoners went into a shop and there purchased a loaf, for which she tendered a counterfeit shilling in payment. She was secured, but no more counterfeit money was found upon her. The other prisoner who had come with her, and was waiting at the shop-door, then ran away, but was immediately secured, and fourteen bad shillings were found on her, wrapped in gauze paper. It was objected that the complete offence stated in the indictment was not proved against either of the prisoners, and the above case of R. v. Else was cited. Garrow, B., was of opinion that the prisoners coming together to the shop, and the one staying outside, they must both be taken to be jointly guilty of the uttering, and that it was for the jury to say, whether the possession of the remaining pieces of bad money was not joint. The jury found both the prisoners guilty. Skerrit's case, 2 C. and P. 427 (b).

(a) 1 Eng. C. C. 142. (b) Eng. Com. L. Rep. xii. 203.

353

By the 2 Wm. 4, c. 34, s. 9, where any person [who] shall have been convicted of any offence against this act, shall afterwards be *in- [ *354] dicted for any offence against this act, committed subsequent to such conviction, a copy of the previous indictment and conviction, purporting to be signed and certified as a true copy by the clerk of the court or other officer having the custody of the records of the court where the offender was first convicted, or by the deputy of such clerk or officer, shall, upon proof of the identity of the person of the offender, be sufficient evidence of the previous indictment and conviction, without proof of the signature or official character of the person appearing to have signed and certified the same.

Proof of buying or selling counterfeit coin for less value than its denomination-importing counterfeit coin.] By the 2 Wm. 4, c. 34, s. 6, "if any person shall buy, sell, receive, pay, or put off, or offer to buy, sell, receive, pay, or put off, any false or counterfeit coin resembling, or apparently intended to resemble or pass for, any of the king's current gold or silver coin, at or for a lower rate or value than the same by its denomination imports or was coined or counterfeited for; or if any person shall import into the United Kingdom from beyond the seas any false or counterfeit coin, resembling, or apparently intended to resemble or pass for, any of the king's current gold or silver coin, knowing the same to be false or counterfeit; every such offender shall be guilty of felony, and, being convicted thereof, shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be transported beyond the seas for life or for any term not less than seven years, or to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding four years."

The words of this clause are intended to include all the acts of persons who deal in false coin. Under the former statute (8 & 9 Wm. 3, c. 26, s. 6,) it was held, that a mere offer to put off false money was not indictable; Wooldridge's case, 1 Leach, 307; 1 East, P. C. 179; but such an offence is provided for by the new act.

The prosecutor must prove that the money put off, &c. was counterfeit, and must show that it was put off, &c. as stated in the indictment. The averment, with regard to the mode of putting off, &c., is considered as the allegation of a contract, and must be proved as laid. Therefore the names of the persons to whom the putting off, &c. took place must be proved; and if it was to persons unknown, the same rule applies as in the case of stealing the goods of a person unknown. the price alleged to be given for the false coin must be proved. Where 1 East, P. C. 180. So the indictment stated, that five counterfeit shillings were put off at two shillings, and the proof was that they were put off at half-a-crown, it was held a variance, and the prisoner was acquitted. Joyce's case, 3 C. and P. 411 (n.); Carr. Supp. 184, 1st ed. But where the prisoner was charged with putting off a counterfeit sovereign and three counterfeit shillings for the sum of five shillings, and the evidence was, that the prisoner said the purchaser should have a sovereign at four shillings, and three shillings at one shilling, and the purchaser paid in two good half-crowns, it was held all one transaction, and no variance. Hedges' case, 3 C. and P. 410 (a).

(a) Eng. Com. L. Rep. xiv. 374.

*Proof of having possession of counterfeit coin.] By the 2 Wm. 4, c. 34, s. 8, "if any person shall have in his custody or possession three or more pieces of false or counterfeit coin, resembling, or apparently intended to resemble or pass for any of the king's current gold or silver coin, knowing the same to be false or counterfeit, and with intent to utter or put off the same, every such offender shall, in England and Ireland, be guilty of a misdemeanor, and in Scotland of a crime and offence, and, being convicted thereof, shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding three years; and if any person so convicted shall afterwards commit the like misdemeanor or crime and offence, such person shall be deemed guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof, shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be transported beyond the seas for life or for any term not less than seven years, or to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding four years."

The prosecutor must prove, 1, the possession of the false coin, 2, the guilty knowledge, and, 3, the intent to utter or put off the same.

The nature of the possession required to constitute the offence is explained by the interpretation clause (s. 21) of the 2 Wm. 4, c. 34. Post, p. 361.

The prisoner was indicted under the above clause (s. 8) for having in his possession three or more pieces of counterfeit coin. The prisoner was taken in company with a man named Large. On their being searched, only two bad shillings were found on the former, but upon Large were found sixteen bad shillings. The jury found that the prisoner knew that Large had the sixteen bad shillings in his possession; that he knew that all the shillings found on Large and himself were counterfeit, and that both parties had the common purpose of uttering them. Alderson, B., thereupon directed the jury that the possession of Large was the possession of the prisoner; and if so, that the latter had three or more counterfeit pieces in his possession, although only two were found upon him. The prisoner being convicted, the learned judge reserved the point for the consideration of the judges, thinking that a difficulty arose out of the interpretation clause (s. 21, post, p. 361,) which seemed to confine the possession to the personal custody or possession of the party accused. On the case being argued before the judges, they were divided in opinion, but a majority held that the possession of Large was the possession of the prisoner, and that the latter was properly convicted. Rogers's case, 2 Lewin, C. C. 119, 297.

The guilty knowledge will be proved in the same manner as under an indictment for uttering false coin. Ante, p. 352.

The intent to utter must be proved from circumstances; amongst the most cogent of which will be, the fact that upon other occasions the prisoner has uttered false coin.

Where the prisoner is indicted as for a felony, for having in his custody [*356] or possession three or more pieces of counterfeit coin, after *a previous conviction for the misdemeanor, in addition to the above proofs, evidence must be given of the previous conviction, and of the identity of the parties, according to the 9th section of the statute. Ante, p. 354.

Proof of counterfeiting, &c. the copper coin.] By the 12th section of the 2 Wm. 4, c. 34, the various offences relating to the copper coin are consolidated into one clause, and it is enacted, "that if any person shall

falsely make or counterfeit any coin resembling, or apparently intended to resemble or pass for any of the king's current copper coin, or if any person shall knowingly, and without lawful authority, (the proof of which authority shall lie on the party accused), make or mend, or begin or proceed to make or mend, or buy or sell, or shall, knowingly, and without lawful excuse, (the proof of which excuse shall lie on the party accused,) have in his custody or possession, any instrument, tool, or engine adapted and intended for the counterfeiting any of the king's current copper coin; or if any person shall buy, sell, receive, pay, or put off, or offer to buy, sell, receive, pay, or put off, any false or counterfeit coin resembling, or apparently intended to resemble or pass for, any of the king's current copper coin, at or for a lower rate or value than the same by its denomination imports or was coined or counterfeited for; every such offender shall, in England and Ireland, be guilty of felony, and in Scotland of a high crime and offence, and, being convicted thereof, shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be transported beyond the seas for any term not exceeding seven years, or to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years; and if any person shall tender, utter, or put off any false or counterfeit coin resembling, or apparently intended to resemble or pass for any of the king's current copper coin, knowing the same to be false or counterfeit, or shall have in his custody or possession three or more pieces of false or counterfeit coin resembling, or apparently intended to resemble or pass for, any of the king's current copper coin, knowing the same to be false or counterfeit, and with intent to utter or put off the same, every such offender shall, in England and Ireland, be guilty of a misdemeanor, and in Scotland of a crime and offence, and, being convicted thereof, shall be liable to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding one year."

The evidence upon indictments for offences in counterfeiting or uttering the copper coin, is in general the same as upon indictments for similar offences against the gold or silver coin. It must appear, however, where the charge is for counterfeiting the copper coin, that it was in a fit state to be uttered, the third section of the 2 Wm. 4, c. 34, as to the coining not being complete, not applying to the copper coin.

Proof of counterfeiting foreign coin.] There is no statutory provision against the counterfeiting of foreign coin current in this country by proclamation, the statute 4 Hen. 7, c. 18, being repealed by the 2 Wm. 4, c. 34. The counterfeiting of foreign coin not so *current, is [ *357] provided for by the stat. 37 G. 3, c. 126, s. 2, which reciting, that the practice of counterfeiting foreign gold and silver coin, and the bringing into this realm, and uttering within the same, false and counterfeit foreign gold and silver coin, and particularly pieces of gold coin commonly called louis d'ors, and pieces of silver coin commonly called dollars, has of late greatly increased; and it is expedient that provision be made more effectually to prevent the same, enacts, that if any person or persons shall, from and after the passing of this act, make, coin, or counterfeit any kind of coin, not the proper coin of this realm, nor permitted to be current within the same, but resembling, or made with intent to resemble or look like any gold or silver coin of any foreign prince, state, or country, or to pass as such foreign coin, such person or persons offending therein shall be

deemed and adjudged to be guilty of felony, and may be transported for any term of years not exceeding seven years.

Upon an indictment under the statute, it must be proved that the coin was counterfeit, in the same manner as in cases of counterfeiting the coin of the realm, ante, p. 348, except that there is no provision in the 37 Geo. 3, as to the coin not being perfected. Evidence must be given, that the coin counterfeited is that of the foreign country mentioned in the indictment. By the words in the statute, "not permitted to be current within the realm," must be understood, not permitted to be current by proclamation under the great seal. 1 East, P. C. 161.

By section 7 of the above statute, a power is given to a justice of the peace, to grant a warrant upon oath, to search the dwelling-house, &c. of persons suspected of counterfeiting foreign coin.

Proof of importing foreign counterfeit coin.] By the third section of the 37 Geo. 3, c. 126, it is enacted, "that if any person or persons shall, from and after the passing of this act, bring into this realm any such false or counterfeit coin as aforesaid, resembling, or made with intent to resemble or look like, any gold or silver coin of any foreign prince, state, or country, or to pass as such foreign coin, knowing the same to be false or counterfeit, to the intent to utter the same within this realm, or within any dominions of the same, all and every such person or persons shall be deemed and adjudged to be guilty of felony, and may be transported for any term of years, not exceeding seven years."

The collecting the counterfeit monies of foreign countries from the venders of it in this country, is not a bringing of it into the realm, within the above section. 1 East, P. C. 177.

To support the indictment there must be proved, the fact of the coin being counterfeit, the bringing it into the realm, the guilty knowledge of the prisoner, and his intent to utter it within the realm or the dominions of the same.

Proof of uttering foreign counterfeit coin.] By the 4th section of the 37 Geo. 3, c. 126, it is enacted, "that if any person or persons shall, from and after the passing of this act, utter or tender in payment, [*358] *or give in exchange, or pay or put off to any person or persons, any such false or counterfeit coin as aforesaid, resembling, or made with intent to resemble or look like, any gold or silver coin of any foreign prince, state, or country, or to pass as such foreign coin, knowing the same to be false or counterfeit, and shall be thereof convicted, every person so offending shall suffer six months' imprisonment, and find sureties for his or her good behavior for six months more, to be computed from the end of the said first six months; and if the same person shall afterwards be convicted a second time for the like offence of uttering, or tendering in payment, or giving in exchange, or paying or putting off, any such false or counterfeit coin as aforesaid, knowing the same to be false or counterfeit, such person shall, for such second offence, suffer two years' imprisonment, and find sureties for his or her good behavior for two years more, to be computed from the end of the said first two years; and if the same person shall afterwards offend a third time, in uttering or tendering in payment, or giving in exchange, or paying or putting off, any such false