284
CRIMINAL
labour is limited to two years. The punishment for summary offences is imprisonment with or without hard labour, or a fine, or both, subject to limitations which as a rule do not allow imprisonment exceeding six months. When the punishment may exceed three months’ imprisonment, the accused has a .right to demand that the offence shall be tried by a jury as a misdemeanour and not summarily. In the case of treason and murder the court has no discretion as to the punishment awarded, and in most other cases some limitation is imposed by statute on the length of penal servitude or imprisonment with hard labour which may be imposed. But the maximum in every case is so high that, save in treason and murder, the court has a very large discretion as to the punishment to be imposed, and is not as a general rule limited, outside the offences of treason and murder, in its discretion as regards the minimum of punishment which it can award. Together with the mitigation of punishment since 1832, laws have been passed for getting rid of the technicalities which formerly led to the improper acquittal of criminals. Indeed the looseness of pleading in criminal cases is carried almost too far; for while there is no danger in such looseness when times are quiet and when law is administered by the judges of the High Court in England. Yet when crimes of a certain character are committed in times of great political excitement and the law is administered by an inferior judiciary, there may be some danger of injustice if the strictness of pleading and procedure is too much relaxed. The punishments which may be imposed summarily are as follows:— (a) In the case of adults pleading guilty to offences involving property worth over 40s., imprisonment not exceeding 6 months, without the option of a fine. (b) In the case of adults where the offence affects property not worth over 40s., imprisonment not over 3 months, or fine not exceeding £20. (c) In the case of young persons, imprisonment not over 3 months, or fine not exceeding £10. (d) In the case of children, imprisonment not over 1 month, or fine not exceeding 40s. If the offence is trifling, the accused may be discharged without punishment, and under the First Offenders Act (1887) the justices have a discretionary power to forego punishment. The justices have also the power, under the Reformatory Schools Act and the Industrial Schools Act, to commit youthful offenders to one or other of these institutions,—in the case of a previous conviction, the Industrial School; in the case of a first offence, the Reformatory (see Industrial Schools). Crime is in England treated locally; the responsibility for the suppression of it is local. Formerly each township was responsible for the suppression of crime “ View of within its own boundaries. The “ view of frank tr n k f . ,, pledge ” which gave effect to this has long since P e ’ disappeared, but the system of each township having a headborough or constable still survives in a few places. In each county the sheriff was, and in law still is, responsible for the peace of the county, and he had control of the county jail, in which he lodged the prisoners he arrested as suspected of crime. In ancient times the freeholders of the county sat, with the sheriff presiding, to inquire into and punish the crime in the county. The Sheriff’s Criminal Court, being superseded by the Assizes and Quarter Sessions, was long ago abolished, but the tribunal at the Assizes for the trial of crimes is still furnished by the freeholders of the county, acting as jurymen under the direction of the judge. The jury must come from the vicinage or neighbourhood. The judges, who used to be
LAW
sent on a commission of jail delivery and “ oyer and terminer” from Westminster, are now from the Royal Courts of Justice, and not from Westminster. In olden days, and even now in theory, the Grand Jury inquire of their own knowledge, by the oath of good and lawful men of the neighbourhood, into the crime of the county, but in practice the charges against the accused persons are always submitted to an officer known as the Clerk of the Crown. The Grand Jury is first instructed as to their inquisition by a charge from the judge, as regards the indictment concerning which they are called upon to examine, whether there is a primd facie case to send for trial to the ordinary jury. The Grand Jury must consist of not less than twelve, not more than twentythree, good and lawful men of the county. But any person who prefers an indictment is entitled to put it forward, provided he submits to be bound over to prosecute and to be liable to costs in case his prosecution fails. Such cases are very rare. As a rule, in the big towns a solicitor is specially appointed to direct criminal prosecutions; in the rural districts it may be the person injured, it may be the magistrates’ clerk, it may be a policeman who is bound over to prosecute. The Clerk of the Crown puts the charges into proper shape, and lays them before the Grand Jury. The charges are then called Bills, and if the Grand Jury considers that there is no primd facie case, the foreman endorses the Bill with the words “no true case,” and then presents it to the judge. The jury are then said to have ignored the Bill, and if the person charged is in custody he is released, yet liable to be tried on better evidence. When an indictment is found by the Grand Jury (twelve at least must concur), the person charged is brought before the court, the indictment is read to him, he is asked whether he is guilty or not guilty; if he pleads guilty, he is then sentenced by the court; if he pleads not guilty, a petty jury of twelve is formed out of the number of jurors who have been summoned by the sheriff to attend the court. He is tried by these jurors in open court; he can, if he choose, have counsel P™^ure to defend him, by cross-examining the witnesses, pe^eyu/y. by calling witnesses of his own, and by addressing the jury. The judge then sums up the case to the jury, and they acquit or convict him. If he is acquitted, he is discharged from custody; if convicted, the judge awards the sentence. From such acquittal or conviction, properly speaking there is no appeal in criminal trials. The verdict of the jury is final. Any considerable defect or informality in the procedure may be taken before the King’s Bench by Writ of Error, but such cases are not now of frequent occurrence. And if any question of law arises at the trial, the judge may reserve it for the opinion of the court for the consideration of Crown Cases Reserved, by whom the conviction may be either quashed or confirmed. The question of criminal appeal has been, and still is, a matter of great controversy. On the Continent of Europe, and even in India, appeal is allowed in criminal cases on the facts as well as on the law of the case. In England an appeal on questions of law arising at the trial is allowed, as stated above, but the procedure is intricate and technical, whilst no provision whatever is made for Crimiaal questioning the decision of the jury on matters appeai. of fact. The verdict of a jury, however unsatisfactory, cannot be reversed, and the only remedy is founded on the prerogative of pardon inherent in the Crown, which is exercised, as a matter of fact, by the Home Secretary. Various proposals have been made, the most practical being that a new trial shall be granted (1) when the verdict is obviously against the evidence, (2) when new
