said it was all he had left of it; it was held by a majority of the judges that this evidence was inadmissible. Jones' case, Russ, and Ry. 152 (a); Sed vide Griffin's case, Id. 151 (b), post. Where a prisoner in custody said to the officer in charge of him, "If you will give me a glass of gin, I will tell you all about it ;" and two glasses of gin being given to him, he made a full confession of his guilt, Best, J., considered it as very improperly obtained, and inadmissible in evidence. Sexton's case, Chetw. Burn, tit. "Confession." But the authority of this case has been doubted by an able text writer. 1 Deacon, Dig. Cr. Law, 424 (n.) It certainly differs from the former decisions in the circumstance of the offer to confess coming, in the first instance, from the prisoner. So where a confession is made with a view, and under the hope of being thereby permitted to turn king's evidence, it is not admissible. *Hall's case, cited, [ *38] 2 Leach 559. Though if he is admitted, and refuses to give evidence on the trial of his accomplices, he may be convicted upon such confession. Burley's case, Stark. Ev. part iv. p. 23, 1st ed. If a confession has been obtained from a prisoner by undue means, any statement afterwards made by him under the influence of that confession cannot be admitted. White's case, M. T. 1800; 1 Phill. Ev. 111 (7th ed.) See post, p. 41.

The confession of a servant girl, fifteen years old, occasioned by repeated applications by a neighbor of the prosecutor, and by his wife's mother, amounting to threats and promises, was held by the judges to be inadmissible. Simpson's case, 1 Moody, C. C. 410 (c). The prisoner, a servant girl aged thirteen, was indicted for attempting to set fire to her master's house. After the attempt was discovered her mistress said to her, Mary, my girl, if you are guilty do confess; it will perhaps save your neck: you will have to go to prison; if W. H. (another person suspected, and whom the prisoner had charged) is found clear the guilt will fall on you." She made no answer. The mistress then said, "Pray tell me if you did it?" The prisoner then confessed. The point being reserved, the judges thought the confession ought not to have been received. Upchurch's case, 1 Moo. C. C. 465 (d). On the examination of the prisoner before the committing magistrate upon a charge of felony, the magistrate's clerk told him not to say anything to prejudice himself, as what he said would be taken down "and used for bim and against him at his trial." Coleridge, J., held that this was an inducement to the prisoner to make a confession made by a person in authority, and that the prisoner's statement, which had been taken down and signed, could not be received in evidence. Drew's case, 8 C. and P.. 140 (e). Where it appeared that the constable had taken the prisoner to a public house, and the latter, in consequence of inducements held out by the innkeeper, made a confession to him in the presence of the constable who did not caution the prisoner in any way, Alderson, B., expressed a very strong opinion against its admissibility; but as there were opinions which he was bound to respect opposed to his own, his lordship thought he had better receive the evidence, and, if necessary, reserve the point for the consideration of the judges. The prisoner was acquitted. Pountney's case, 7 C. and P. 302 (ƒ).

New ed. vol. ii. p. 12, n.

(a) 1 Eng. C. C. 152. (b) 1 Ibid. 151. (c) 2 Ibid. 410. (d) 2 Ibid. 465. (e) Eng. Com. L. Rep. xxxiv. 327. (f) Id. xxxii. 516.

There is a difference of opinion among the judges, whether a confession to a person who has no authority after an inducement held out by that person, is receivable in evidence. Spencer's case, 7 C. and P. 776 (a), see post, p. 44.

Must be voluntary-cases in which confessions have been held admissible.] It is not every hope of favor held out to a prisoner that will render a confession afterwards made by him inadmissible, the promise must have some reference to his escape from the charge. Thus where a man and his wife were in prison in separate rooms, on a charge of stealing and receiving, and the constable said to the man, "If you will tell where the property is, you shall see your wife," Patteson, J., held that a confession made afterwards was admissible. Lloyd's case, 6 C. and P. 393 (b) (1). [ *39] *The threats or promises must have reference to some temporal advantage, in order to invalidate a confession. Where a prisoner accused of a murder, had repeated interviews with a clergyman, who urged him to repentance, telling him that "before God it would be better for him to confess his sins," that "his fears respecting his participation in the dreadful deed were fully confirmed, and that, while he was in that state of mind, he (the chaplain) could afford him no consolation by prayer," and subsequently to these exhortations, the prisoner made a confession; the judges were unanimously of opinion that it was properly received in evidence, and the prisoner was executed. Gilham's case, 1 Moody, C. C. 186 (c) ; 2 Russ. 648, S. C. The prisoner being charged with setting fire to an outhouse, her mistres pressed her to confess, telling her amongst other things, that if she would repent and confess, God would forgive her, but she concealed from her that she would not forgive her herself. The prisoner having confessed, another person, the next day, in her mistress's sight, though out of her hearing, told her that her mistress said she had confessed, and drew from her a second confession. Lord Eldon, C. J., admitted the confessions, and the prisoner was convicted. The jury on having the confessions put to them, thought the first confession made under a hope of favor here, and the second under the influence of having made the first. On a case reserved, the judges were of opinion that these points were not for the jury; but that if Lord Eldon agreed with the jury (which he did), the confessions were not receivable; but many of the judges thought the expressions not calculated to raise hopes of favor here, and if not, the confessions were evidence. Nute's case, Chetw. Burn, tit. Confession, 2 Russ. 648.

There is some difficulty in saying what is such a threat as will influence the validity of a confession (2). In the following case the circumstances were held not to operate as a threat or promise. The chief officer of the police at Liverpool, stated that on the 18th November, the prisoner was apprehended by his direction without any warrant, between twelve and one o'clock; and that he was carried to the police office about one o'clock. The magistrates were then sitting at a very short distance, and continued

(1) A confession, made under representations of the infamy which would attend the concealment, made in great agitation, but without threats or promises, is admissible. State v. Crank, 2 Bailey, 66.

(2) The People v. Rankin, 2 Wheeler's C. C. 467. People v. Johnson, Ibid. 378. State v. Aaron, 1 Southard, 231.

(a) Eng. Com. L. Rep. xxxii. 731. (b) Id. xxv. 454. (c) 2 Eng. C. C. 186.

sitting till between two and three, but the prisoner was not carried before them, because the police officer was engaged elsewhere. The officer ordered the prisoner to Bridewell of his own authority, between four and five o'clock, and between five and six o'clock he told the prisoner, that in consequence of the falsehoods he had told, and the prevarications he had made, there was no doubt but he had set the premises on fire, and he therefore asked him if any person had been concerned with him, or induced him to do it? The prisoner said he had not done it. The officer replied that he would not have told so many falsehoods as he had, if he had not been concerned in it, and he again asked him if any body had induced him to do it? The prisoner then began to cry and made a full confession. The prisoner was taken before he had dined, and had had no food from the time he was apprehended until after his confession. Mr. Justice Bayley thought it deserved consideration, whether a confession so obtained, *when the detention of the prisoner was perhaps [ *40 ] illegal, and where the conduct of the officer was likely to intimidate, was admissible in evidence; and rescrved the point for the opinion of the judges, a majority of whom held the confession rightly received, on the ground that no threat or promise had been used. Best, C. J., Bayley, and Holroyd, JJ., were of a contrary opinion. Thornton's case, 1 Moody, C. C. 27 (a). Where, on a prisoner being brought up for examination, the magistrate told him that his wife had already confessed the whole, and that there was enough against him to send a bill before the grand jury, upon which the prisoner immediately made a confession; the reception of the confession was objected to, on the ground of its having been made upon a threat, but Parke, J., overruled the objection, saying, that he rather considered it as a caution. Wright's case, 1 Lewin, C. C. 48. Where a prisoner, charged with arson, was told "that there was a very serious oath laid against her by B. B., who had sworn that she had set fire to O.'s rick," a confession afterwards made by the prisoner, was received in evidence. Long's case, 6 C. and P. 179 (b).

A man who was present

A boy not fourteen was charged with murder. when he was taken up, but who was not a constable, said to him, “ Now kneel you down by the side of me and tell me the truth." The boy having knelt down the man continued, "I am going to ask you a very serious question, and I hope you will tell me the truth in the presence of the Almighty." The boy having made certain statements in answer to questions thus put to him, their admissibility in evidence was reserved for the consideration of the judges, who were unanimous that the confession was strictly admissible, but they much disapproved of the mode in which it was obtained. The prisoner's life was saved, and he was transported for life. Wild's case, 1 Moody, C. C. 452 (c). Where the committing magistrate told the prisoner "to be sure to tell the truth," upon which the prisoner made a statement, it was held that such statement was admissible in evidence. Court's case, 7 C. and P. 486 (d), per Littledale, J.

Inducement to confess—where held to have ceased.] Although a confession made under the influence of a promise or a threat is inadmissible, there are yet many cases in which it has been held, that notwithstanding

(a) 2 Eng. C. C. 27. (b) Eng. Com. L. Rep. xxv. 343. (c) 2 Eng. C. C. 452. (d) Eng. Com. L. Rep. xxxii. 595.

such threat or promise may have been made use of, the confession is to be received, if it has been made under such circumstances as to create a reasonable presumption, that the threat or promise had no influence, or had ceased to have any influence upon the mind of the party (1).

Thus if the impression that a confession is likely to benefit him has been removed from the mind of a prisoner, what he says will be evidence against him, although he has been advised to confess. Where the prisoner, on being taken into custody, had been told by a person who came to assist the constable, that it would be better for him to confess, but on his being examined before the committing magistrate on the following day, was frequently cautioned by the magistrate to say nothing against himself, a confession under these circumstances was held by Mr. Justice Bayley to be clearly admis[*41 ] sible. *Lingate's case, 1815. Phil. Ev. 431, 8th ed. So where it appeared that a constable told a prisoner he might do himself some good by confessing, and the prisoner afterwards asked the magistrate if it would be any benefit to him to confess, on which the magistrate said, he would not say it would; the prisoner having afterwards, on his way to prison, made a confession to another constable, and again in prison, to another magistrate; the judges unanimously held that the confessions were admissible in evidence, on the ground that the magistrate's answer was sufficient to efface any expectation which the constable might have raised. Rosier's case, East. T. 1821. Phill. Ev. 431. So it has been held to be no objection to a confession made before a magistrate, that the prosecutor, who was present, first desired the prisoner to speak the truth, and suggested that he had better speak out; as the magistrate or his clerk immediately checked the prosecutor, desiring the prisoner not to regard him, but say what he thought proper. Edwards' case, East. T. 1802. Phill. Ev. 431. A prisoner charged with murder was visited by a magistrate, who told him that if he was not the man who struck the fatal blow he would use all his endeavors and influence to prevent any ill conséquences from falling on him, if he would disclose what he knew of the murder. The magistrate wrote to the secretary of state, who returned an answer, that mercy could not be extended to the prisoner; which answer was communicated to the prisoner, who afterwards sent for the coroner, and desired to make a statement to him. The coroner cautioned him, and added that no hopes or promise of pardon could be held out to him. Littledale, J., ruled · that a confession subsequently made by the prisoner to the coroner was admissible, for that the caution given by the latter must be taken to have completely put an end to all the hopes that had been held out. Clewes's case, 4 C. and P. 224. (a) See also Howes' case, 6 C. and P. 404 (b). A girl charged with poisoning was told by her mistress, that if she did not tell all about it that night, the constable would be sent for next morning to take her to S. (meaning before the magistrates there), upon which the prisoner made a statement. The next morning a constable was sent for, who took the prisoner into custody, and on the way to the magistrates, without any inducement from the constable, she confessed to him. Bosanquet, J. said, "I think this statement receivable. The inducement was,

(1) Moore v. The Commonwealth, 2 Leigh, 701. The presumption is that the influence of the threats or promises continues. State v. Guild, 5 Halst. 163. Case of Bowerhan and al. 4 Rogers' Rec. 136. Case of Stage and al., 5 Id. 177. Case of Milligan and an. 6 ld. 69. (a) Eng. Com. L. Rep. xix. 356. (b) Id. xxv. 459.

that if she confessed that night the constable would not be sent for, and she would not be taken before the magistrates. Now she must have known, when she made this statement, that the constable was taking her to the mgistrates. The inducement therefore was at an end." Richard's case, 5 C. and P. 318 (a).

Inducement to confess—where held not to have ceased.] It is said by Mr. Justice Buller, that there must be very strong evidence of an explicit warning by a magistrate not to rely on any expected favor, and that it ought most clearly to appear, that the prisoner thoroughly understood such warning, before his subsequent confession can be given in evidence, 2 East, P. C. 658. In the following case the warning was not considered sufficient. A confession having *been improperly obtained, by giving the prisoner [*42] two glasses of gin, the officer to whom it had been made, read it over to the prisoner, before a magistrate, who told the prisoner that the offence imputed to him affected his life, and that a confession might do him harm. The prisoner said, that what had been read to him was the truth, and signed the papers. Best, J., considered the second confession, as well as the first inadmissible; and said that had the magistrate known that the officer had given the prisoner gin, he could, no doubt, have told the prisoner, that what he had already said could not be given evidence against him; and that it was for him to consider whether he would make a second confession. If the prisoner had been told this, what he afterwards said would have been evidence against him; but for want of this information he might think that he could not make his case worse than he had already made it, and under this impression might sign the confession before the magistrate. Sexton's case, Burn, tit. "Confessions." So where the committing magistrate told the prisoner, that if he would make a confession, he would do all he could for him; and no confession was then made, but after his committal the prisoner made a statement to the turnkey, who held out no inducement, and gave no caution, Parke, J., said he thought the evidence ought not to be received after what the committing magistrate had said to the prisoner, more especially as the turnkey had not given any caution. Cooper's case, 5 C. and P. 535 (b).

The constable having a search warrant found the two hams charged in the indictment in the prisoner's house, and therefore in the presence of one of the prosecutors said to the prisoner, " You had better tell all about it." The prisoner then made a confession, which it was admitted could not be given in evidence. In the afternoon of the same day another of the prosecutors went to the prisoner's house and entered into conversation with her about the hams, when she repeated the confession she had made to the constable in the morning, but no promise or menace was on this occasion held out to her. Taunton, J., said that the second confession was not receivable, it being impossible to say that it was not induced by the promise which the constable made to the prisoner in the morning. Meynell's case, 2 Lewin, C. C. 122.

The prisoner, who was indicted for murder, worked at a colliery, and some suspicion having fallen upon him, the overlooker charged him with the murder. The prisoner denied having been near the place. Presently the overlooker called his attention to certain statements made by his wife

(a) Eng. Com, L. Rep. xxiv. 338. (b) Id. xxiv. 444