powers, and authorities whatsoever, of, belonging, or in anywise apper- 7 & 8 Geo. IV. taining to the said commissioners, shall and may be held, used, occupied, c. lxxv. possessed, and enjoyed by the said commissioners in such and the same manner in all respects as if this act had not been made; anything herein contained to the contrary thereof in anywise notwithstanding." ferries. Sect. 99. Provided "that nothing in this act contained shall extend to Saving existing prejudice or affect the rights and privileges to which the owner or owners of any ferry or ferries over or across the said river Thames, within the limits of this act, are now entitled to by law." Sect. 100. Provided "that nothing in this act contained shall extend Saving powers of to interfere with, lessen, or abridge the rights and privileges of any comdock companies. pany of proprietors of any docks or canals within the limits of this act, or any of their officers, with respect to the navigation in the said docks or canals respectively, or in any wise relating thereto." ton and above. Sect. 101. Nothing in this act contained (except the provisions for Saving western compelling the names of the barge or craft, and the name and place of barges, and men employed in abode of the owner, to be painted and preserved thereon as aforesaid) them, and in shall extend to any western barges; and that all flat-bottomed boats and ferries at Kingsbarges navigated from the town of Kingston in the county of Surrey, or any place or places beyond the said town, shall be deemed western barges, and shall and may be navigated on the said river of Thames as far as London Bridge; and that nothing in this act shall extend to any ferry-boats worked or rowed at any ferry or ferries over or across the said river at or between the said town of Kingston and any place or places between the same and New Windsor aforesaid; and no person or persons navigating such western barges or ferry-boats as last aforesaid, shall in respect thereof be subject or liable to any penalties or forfeitures imposed by this act, or by any rules or by-laws to be made as aforesaid (except as aforesaid)." freemen or ap Sect. 102. "Nothing in this act contained shall prevent any person or Any persons and persons from keeping and using and rowing by their servants, any lighter their servants, if or lighters, or other large craft, for carrying their own goods, provided prentices, may use such servants be freemen, or apprentices to freemen or to the widows of lighters; freemen of the said company." Sect. 103. Provided "that, if such person or persons shall carry, or but not let them cause to be carried, in his or their lighter or lighters, or other large craft, out for hire, or permit others to any passenger or passengers for hire, or any goods, wares, or merchan- row them, not dizes for hire, or otherwise than their own as aforesaid, or shall row in or being freemen or navigate, or permit or suffer any person or persons to row in, navigate, apprentices. or work any such vessel or vessels, who is not a freeman, or an apprentice to a freeman, or to a widow of a freeman of the said company, he and they shall for any such offence forfeit and pay any sum of money not exceeding 107." Sect. 104. "Nothing in this act contained shall prevent any owner or Owners of layowners, proprietors, or lessees of laystalls, from carrying off the soil from stalls, market gardeners, &c., the said laystalls in such lighters or vessels, and by such persons as have may use boats as hitherto been accustomed; or any owner or owners, or proprietors of heretofore; chalk hoys, from bringing chalk in such hoys or vessels, and by such persons as have hitherto been accustomed; or any gardener from bringing to the markets of the cities of London and Westminster, and the places adjacent, their own fruit, herbs, roots, and other produce of their gardens, or soil and dung, in their boats, and by their own servants, as they have formerly been accustomed; or any fisherman from using his own boat or boats for the purpose of his business; nor any ballastman from using any vessel for digging, getting, and carrying any ballast; and that no person employed, or working, or navigating any lighters, hoys, ressels, or other craft, for any of the purposes aforesaid, shall be subject to any of the penalties or forfeitures imposed by this act, or by any rules or by-laws made or to be made as aforesaid, except as hereinafter is mentioned." Sect. 105. Provided, "that if any such owner or owners, proprietors, but to be subject 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. lxxv. to a penalty if they carry pas sengers or goods for hire. court of aldermen extended to all boats and vessels. Public acts. Further provi lessees, or gardeners, fishermen, ballastmen, or his or their servants, shall carry, in any such lighters, vessels, or boats, any passenger or passengers, or any kind of goods, wares, or merchandize, for hire, or other than for and on their own account, he and they shall for every such offence forfei: and pay any sum not exceeding 10l." Sect. 106. Provided, "that the powers given by this act to the said Court of mayor and aldermen to make rules and by-laws, to be allowed as aforesaid, shall extend, and are hereby extended, and may be applied to the government and regulation of the western barges, ferries, and lighters boats, and vessels of woodmongers and owners of laystalls, chalk hoys gardeners, fishermen, and ballastmen, and all other lighters, boats, and vessels in the said river, within the limits of this act, although otherwis exempted from the provisions of this act." Sect. 107 makes it a public act. The 2 & 3 Vict. c. 47, (The Metropolitan Police Act,) contains regula sions as to offen- tions as to the Thames police and for the prevention of offences on the river. See title " Police," Vol. V. ces, &c. on the Thames. men, &c. Disputes about By the 2 & 3 Vict. c. 71, s. 37, all differences, complaints, and dispute wages of barge. which shall happen between any bargemen, lightermen, watermen, bal lastmen, (except Trinity ballastmen), coal-whippers, coal-porters, sailors lumpers, riggers, shipwrights, caulkers, or other labourers who work fo hire in or upon the Thames, or the docks, creeks, wharfs, quays, or place adjacent, not being in the city of London or the liberties thereof, and th owners, masters, or commanders of vessels, or their agents, on the sai river, or the docks or creeks thereunto adjoining, or the owners, wharf ingers, or occupiers of such wharfs or quays, or their agents, or other employers, respecting wages or money due to such labourers for work o - loss of time, whether the same persons be employed for any certain time or in any other manner, may be heard by any of the said magistrates and every such magistrate is empowered to examine upon oath any such labourer, or any other witness or witnesses, touching any such complaint or dispute, and to make such order for payment of so much wages of money to such labourer as to the magistrate shall seem just, provided that the sum ordered do not exceed 5l., besides costs. See "Police." Theatre. See " Players," Vol. V. "Conspiracy," Vol. I. "Dis orderly House," Vol. I. Theft. See "Larceny," Vol. III. Theftbote. See "Felony," Vol. II. 249 Threats. As to challenges to fight, see “Challenge," Vol. I. As to the offence of threatening with intent to steal, see Assault," Vol. I. As to the obtaining of money, &c. by threatening to accuse another of an infamous crime, see "Robbery," Vol. V. burn, or destroy By the 4 Geo. IV. c. 54, s. 3, which repeals the 9 Geo. I. c. 22, and 30 Threatening let(eo. II. c. 24, so far as the same relate to this offence, it is enacted, "that, ters to murder or from and after the passing of this act, if any person shall knowingly and property. wilfully send or deliver any letter or writing, with or without any name or signature subscribed thereto, or with a fictitious name or signature, [demanding money or other valuable thing, or] threatening to kill or murder any of his Majesty's subjects, or to burn or destroy his or their houses, outcses, barns, stacks of corn or grain, hay or straw, [or shall knowingly nd wilfully send or deliver any such letter or writing, threatening to acuse any of his Majesty's subjects of any crime punishable by law with death, transportation, or pillory, or of any infamous crime, with a view or Intent to extort or gain money, security for money, goods or chattels, wares or merchandize, from the person or persons so threatened], or shall proeure, counsel, aid, or abet the commission of the said offences, or any of them, [or shall forcibly rescue any person being lawfully in custody of any officer or other person for any of the said offences,] every person so offend- Punishment for. ng, being thereof lawfully convicted, shall be adjudged guilty of felony, and shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be transported beyond the seas for life, or for such term not less than seven years, as the court shall adjudge, or to be imprisoned only, or to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour in the common gaol or house of correction, for any term not exceeding seven years." The parts of this enactment between brackets, relating to threats to extort money, &c., are repealed by the 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 27, and re-enacted by the 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 29, s. 8, post, 252. If the convict be already under sentence of transportation or imprisonment, this sentence may commence after the expiration of the former sentence. (7&8 Geo. IV. c. 28, s. 10, ante, "Malicious Injuries to Property,” Vol. III.) By the 5 & 6 Vict. c. 38, s. 1, this offence cannot be tried at the Not triable at sessions. Shall knowingly and wilfully.]—Proof of a prisoner's delivering a threat- Knowingly and ening letter sealed up, to a person to carry to the post-office, will afford wilfully. prima facie evidence of his knowledge of its contents. (R. v. Girdwood, 2 East, P. C. 1120; 1 Leach, 142, S. C.) Evidence of prior and subsequent letters between the prisoner and the party threatened may be received, to explain the intention of that on which the indictment is framed. (2 Leach, 749.) A prisoner was indicted for sending a threatening letter; the only evidence against him was his own statement that he never should have written it but for W. G.-It was held, not sufficient. (R. v. Howe, 7 C. & P. 268.) 1. To murder, or to destroy, &c. Property. Send or deliver.]-Dropping a letter in a man's way, that he may pick it up, is a sending it to him. (R. v. Wagstaff, R. & R. C. C. R. 398.) In Lloyd's case (2 East's P. C. 1122), the letter was dropped in a vestryroom, frequented by the prosecutor every Sunday morning, where it was What a sending picked up by the sexton, and given to the prosecutor; and Mr. Justice Yates had no doubt but this was a sending, within the act. or delivery. Nature of the So, in Jepson and Springett's case (Id. post, 251,) the letter was thrown into the prosecutor's yard, from whence it was taken up by the prosecutor's servant, and delivered to him. And it was a sending within the 27 Geo. II. c. 15, though the party sa the prisoner drop the letter, if the prisoner did not think the party knew him, and intended he should not. (R. v. Wagstaff, R. & R. C. C. 398.) So, where the prosecutor, having received such a letter, traced it to woman who was in the habit of going of errands for the prisoners in Newgate, and she proved that she received it from the defendant, then prisoner in Newgate, to put in the post office, and the servant of the pos office proved that the letter in question was brought to the office by th last witness, and forwarded in the regular course; this was holden sufficien evidence, not only of the sending by the defendant, but that he also knew its contents. (R. v. Girdwood, 2 East's P. C. 1120; 1 Leach, 142, S. C. To have brought the offence within 27 Geo. II. c. 15, the letter mus have been sent to the person threatened, and so stated in the indictment but the twelve judges intimated, that if a letter threatening A. is sent B., and the prisoner intended that he should deliver it to A., and he doe so deliver it, this is a sending it by the prisoner to A., and may be charge as such. (R. v. Paddle, R. & R. C. C. R. 484; R. v. Dunkley, R. & M C. C. 90. See R. v. Howe, 7 C. & P. 268, supra.) A delivery of a letter was not within the former statutes upon the sub ject, (R. v. Hammond, 2 East's P. C. 1119; 2 Leach, 499, S. C.) but nov a delivery of the letter, with the knowledge of its contents, is within th express terms of the present statute. Any Letter or Writing with or without any Name or Signature subscribe letter or writing. thereto, or with a fictitious Name or Signature.]-By the wording of the prior statutes, 9 Geo. I. and 27 Geo. II., it was no offence if the defendan did not conceal himself. Therefore, sending a threatening letter withou any name subscribed to it, demanding money, was not an offence within the 27 Geo. II. c. 15, [nor is it, it should seem, under the new act,] if the contents of the letter clearly show who was the writer, and that he could have no intention to conceal himself. It was the same in effect as if the party had put his name to it. (Heming's case, Warwick Sum. Ass. 1799, 2 East's P. C. 1116; 1 Leach, 445, n., S. C.)] Nature of the threat. In the case of Michael Robinson, who was indicted on these two statutes for sending a letter without any name subscribed thereto, to the prosecutor, demanding a certain valuable thing, viz. a bank note, it appeared that the letter was signed R. R. It was objected (among other things) that this was not within the statutes, because the letter had a name subscribed to it; but all the judges were of opinion that there was no weight in this objection. (2 East's P. C. 1110; 2 Leach, 749, S. C. And see R. v. Wegstaff, R. & R. C. C. 398.) By the express terms of the present act, "any letter or writing with or without a name or signature subscribed thereto, or with a fictitious name or signature," is within the act; and a letter with a real name or signature, would be considered to come within the meaning of the present statute. Sending a letter to A. B., threatening to burn a house of which he is owner, but let by him to and occupied by a tenant, is not an offence within the statute. Reg. v. Burridge, 2 M. & Rob. 296. In R. v. Haine (6 C. & P. 105), Bolland, B., ordered the letter to be deposited in the hands of the clerk of the peace, in order that the defendant's witnesses might inspect it before the trial. Threatening to burn Houses, &c.]—A conviction on the now repealed act, 27 Geo. II. c. 15, for sending a letter to the prosecutor, threatening 1. To murder, "to set fire to his mill, and likewise to do all the public injury they were or to destroy, able to him in all his farm and seteres," was held wrong, he not then &c. Property. having any mill to which the threat of burning would apply (having parted with it three years before), and the threat as to the farm, &c. not necessarily implying a burning. John Jepson and George Springt were indicted upon the act now repealed, 27 Geo. II. c. 15, for sending to the prosecutor, Mr. Woodgate, a letter according to the following effect: "March 3rd, 1798. "Mr. Woodgate.-Sir, I am very sorry to acquaint you that we are determined to set your mill on fire, and likewise to do all the public injury that we are able to do you in all your farms and seteres which you are in possession of, without you on next day release that Ann Wood, which you put in confinement. Sir, we mention in a few lines, and we hope, if you have any regard for your wife and family, you will take our meaning without anything further; and if you do not, we will persist as far as we possibly can, so you may lay your hand at your heart, and strive your uttermost ruin. I shall not mention nothing more to you until such time as you find the few lines a fact. With our respect. So no more at this time from me. R. R." It was proved that the letter was in the handwriting of Jepson, and that it was thrown by the other prisoner into Mr. Woodgate's yard, from whence it was taken by a servant of Mr. Woodgate, and delivered to him. Mr. Woodgate swore that he had a share in a mill three years before this letter was written, but had no mill at that time; that he held a farm when the letter was written and came to his hands, and still holds it, with several buildings upon it. It was objected that this was not such a letter as comprehended the offence in the act of parliament, 27 Geo. II. c. 15. At a conference of the judges after conviction, in Michaelmas Term, 1798, (absent Eyre, C. J.,) it was agreed that, the prosecutor having no such property at the time, as the mill which was threatened to be burnt, that part of the letter must be laid out of the question; but as to the rest of it, Lord Kenyon, C. J., and Buller, J., were of opinion that the letter must be understood as also importing a threat to burn the prosecutor's farm-house and buildings; but the other judges not thinking that a necessary construction, the conviction was holden wrong, and a pardon recommended. (2 East, P. C. 1115.) But, in the case of R. v. Girdwood, a letter accusing the prosecutor of having taken away the life of a friend of the writer's who was come to revenge him, was ruled to be evidence to go to the jury, upon a charge of sending a letter threatening to kill and murder the prosecutor. Whether the letter amount to a threat to kill or murder, is a fact to be determined by the jury. (R. v. Girdwood, 2 East's P. C. 1121. And see R.v. Tyler, 1 Moody, C. C. 428; R. v. Tucker, post, 253; R. v. Boucher, 4 C. & P. 563.) Indictment.]—The indictment must set forth the threatening letter, in Indictment for. order that the court may judge whether it falls within the purview of the respective statutes. (Lloyd's case, 1787; 2 East's P. C. 1123. See further “Indictment,” Vol. III.) The party may be tried in the county where the letter was delivered to Venue. the prosecutor, though written by the prisoner, and by him sent, in another county. (Girdwood's case, 2 East's P. C. 1120.) And the offence of sending a threatening letter may be laid in the county where it is delivered by the post. An indictment on the 30 Geo. II. against two defendants for sending a letter to the prosecutor, threatening to accuse him of an unnatural crime, with intent to extort money from him, laid the offence in Middlesex, but the letter was dated from Maidstone in Kent. The sending it was proved by the defendant's confession. It was objected, that as the letter was dated and sent by the post from Maidstone, the fact of the sending, which constituted the offence, was committed in Kent, and the indictment would not lie in Middlesex. But |