TABLE OF CRIMINAL LAW CASES. REPORTED IN PART I. OF VOL. XXI. BATCHELOR (app.) v. STURLEY (resp.): Metropolis-By-law—Litter in street-Repugnancy in statute BULLEN (app.) v. WARD (resp.): page 35 Sunday observance-Carrying on ordinary business on SundayCooking and selling of food to poor persons Cookshop Exemption Sunday Observance Act, 1677 (29 Car. 2, c. 7), ss. 1, 3 28 Ex parte Novis: Motor-car-Conviction-Right of appeal-" Fine" exceeding 20s.— Inclusion of costs in word" fine "Motor Car Act, 1903 (3 Edw. 7, c. 36), s. 11 (2) ... FOWLER (app.) v. CRIPPS (resp.): Merchandise marks False trade description -Soda crystals LAIRD (app.) v. DOBELL AND ANOTHER (resps.): Feeding stuff-Sale-Causing or permitting invoice to be given— Invoice false in material particular-Not giving invoice stating name-Fertilisers and Feeding Stuffs Act, 1893 (56 & 57 Vict. LOWERY (app.) v. HALLARD (resp.): Sale of food and drugs-Brandy -Division of sample-Portion MOORE (app.) v. LEWIS (resp.): Revenue Carriage-Licence - Exemption 33 52 66 Revenue Act, 1888 (51 & 52 Vict. c. 8), s. 4 (3) 60 PARKINSON (app.) v. MCNAIR (resp.): Sale of food and drugs-Margarine-" Parcel "-Margarine Act, 1887 (50 & 51 Vict. c. 29), 8. 6 42 REX . BRAILSFORD AND MCCULLOCH : Conspiracy-Conspiring to do an act tending to public mischief— Combination to procure passport in name of one person to be used by another person-Indictable misdemeanour 16 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued). Motor-car-Owner-Refusal by owner to give name and address of driver-Conviction of owner-Omission in conviction of allegation that driver had committed an offence-Validity of conviction- Motor Car Act, 1903 (3 Edw. 7, c. 36), s. 1, sub-s. 3-Motor Cars REX v. JOHN MCDONALD : ... page Larceny-Sale of goods in bulk-Fraud-Conspiracy-Fraudulent conspiracy with servant of vendor-Delivery of quantity greater Statute-Interpretation-Intention of statute-Suppression of words Amending statute Salmon river - Poisoning - Malicious THIELBAR (app.) v. CRAIGEN (resp.) : Cruelty to animals-Causing animal to be cruelly ill-treated-Per- Weights and measures-Prosecution by inspector-Consent of local authority-Weights and Measures Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 49), 8. 25-Weights and Measures Act, 1904 (4 Edw. 7, c. 28), s. 14 Sale of Food and Drugs Acts-Adulteration-Proceedings instituted by inspector of nuisances of non-quarter sessions borough-Right 37 REPORTS OF Criminal Law Cases. KING'S BENCH DIVISION. Thursday, April 6, 1905. (Before Lord ALVERSTONE, C.J., KENNEDY and RIDLEY, JJ.) REX v. HANKEY AND ANOTHER (Justices). (a) 6. Motor-car-Owner-Refusal by owner to give name and address of driver-Conviction of owner-Omission in conviction of allegation that driver had committed an offence-Validity of conviction-Motor Car Act, 1903 (3 Edw. 7, c. 36), s. 1, sub. 3 -Motor Cars (Use and Construction) Order, 1904, art. 4, r. The conviction of the owner of a motor-car under sub-sect. 3 of sect. 1 of the Motor Car Act, 1903, for refusing to give the name and address of the driver of his motor-car, must allege that an offence had been committed by the driver, and if the conviction does not contain an allegation to that effect, it is bad and may be quashed; but it is not a condition precedent to such conviction that the driver should first have been asked to give his name and address, or have given a false name and address. A conviction of the owner of a motor-car under sub-sect. 3, "for that he, being the owner of a certain motor-car which was then being driven on the highway, did unlawfully after due notice had been given to him, refuse to give the name and address of the driver who was then and there driving the same, such name and address being required in order that proceedings might be taken against him under sect. 1 of the Motor Car Act, 1903, and rule 6, art. 4, of Statutory Rules and Orders, 1904," is bad for not sufficiently alleging that an offence had been committed by the driver. RULE calling on two justices of the peace for the county of Berks to show cause why a writ of certiorari should not VOL. XXI. REX v. HANKEY AND 1905. issue to remove into the High Court a certain record of a conviction by the justices, of the 9th day of August, 1904, whereby the Earl of Craven was convicted for that he, being on the 2nd (JUSTICES). day of July, 1904, the owner of a certain motor-car, No. A C 143, which was then being driven upon the highway at Twyford, Berks, did unlawfully on the 4th day of August, 1904, after due notice had been given to him, refuse to give the name and address of the person who was then and there driving the same, such and address name and address being required in order that proceedings Refusal by might be taken against him under sect. 1 of the Motor Car owner to give Act, 1903, and rule 6 of art. 4 of the Statutory Rules and Orders, -Conviction 1904. Motor Car Act, 1903 Driver's name -Insuffi ciency Essential averment 3 Edw. 7, The rule was obtained at the instance of the Earl of Craven, and upon the following grounds: (1) That the conviction was bad on the face of it, because it did not allege c. 36, s. 1 (3). that the driver had committed an offence under sect. 1 of the Motor Car Act, 1903, and did not allege that the driver had refused to give his name or address or had given a false name or address; and (2) that the justices had no jurisdiction to convict in the absence of evidence to the above effect. The information against the Earl of Craven was laid by a superintendent of police, and the summons, dated the 5th day of August and received on the 6th day of August, was "for that you on the 2nd day of July, 1904, being then the owner of a certain motor-car, No. A C 143, which was then being driven upon the highway at Twyford, Berks, did unlawfully on the 4th day of August, 1904, after due notice had been given to you, refuse to give the name and address of the person who was then and there driving the same in order that proceedings might be taken against him under sect. 1 of the Motor Car Act, 1903, and rule 6 of art. 4 of the Statutory Rules and Orders, 1904, No. 315, contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided"; and the summons required the defendant to attend before the Court at Wokingham on the 9th day of August. The information was laid upon the following depositions: Mr. Remnant, M.P., said that on the 2nd day of July, 1904, he signalled to defendant's motor-car just outside Twyford, on the Bath road; he held up his hand, but no notice was taken, and the motor-car did not stop; he was driving a new horse, and the horse shied on one side; the chauffeur was riding between the driver's legs on the car; and two other deponents corroborated this statement. The superintendent of police deposed that he received a complaint respecting this car, No. A C 143, and made application for the name and address of the driver; he produced a certificate of registration and also notice with declaration of service taken before a commissioner for oaths served on the defendant; and said that he had not received the name and |