house of him the said A. B. being a crime punishable by law with death, with the view and intent to extort and gain money from the said J. W. being the person so threatened to be accused, and which said letter is of the. tenor following, that is to say,

86

"Salford, August 29, 1803. Sir-The purport of this letter is to inform you, that last Saturday evening I was informed that you and J. M. hired a man to set the house on fire where I lived, in Church-street, which was done by your and J. M.'s order; now, sir, if you and J. M. do not come and give me ample satisfaction, your malicious actions shall be made known to the whole town.

A. B."

against the form of the statute, &c. and against the peace,

&c.

(Second count charges the defendant with sending a letter, threatening to accuse the said J. W. of having hired a man to set fire to the house of him the said A. B. being a crime punishable by law with pillory.)

183. For sending a threatening letter with a fictitious name subscribed thereto, demanding (c), &c.

(Commencement as in pr. 1.) Knowingly, unlawfully, and feloniously did send a certain letter in writing,

(c) Upon the stat. 9 G. 1. the king's subject or subjects, c. 22. see note, p. 439.

The stat. 27 G. 2. c. 15. extending the stat. 9 G. 1. c. 22. enacts, that if any person or persons shall knowingly send* any letter without any name subscribed theretof, or signed with a fictitious name or names, letter or letters, threatening to kill or murder any of

or to burn their houses, outhouses, barns, stacks of corn and grain, hay or straw, though no money or venison nor other valuable thing shall be demanded in or by such letter or letters, or shall forcibly rescue any person being lawfully in custody of any officer or other person for the

* Neither the writing nor the carrying of a threatening letter is within the statute. Hammond's case, Leach, 499. Robinson's case, Leach, 869. A letter to which initials are subscribed is within the statute. Leach,

989.

signed with a fictitious name, (or without any name subscribed thereto, according to the fact,) that is to say, with the name of P. C. directed to D. H., I. M., and B. T., by the names and descriptions of Messrs. H., M., and T. London, demanding (d) money (e), and which said letter is of the tenor following (f), that is to say,

"Manchester, March 31, 1812. "Mr. H. if you are not acquainted of your partner's, I. M.'s, transactions in Manchester, I will inform you; upwards of nine years since, he wanted to get J. M. a school-master, out of his house, that he might build his warehouse, which has lately been burnt, but could not remove him as soon as he wanted; the following plan he pursued: about 11 years since, my brother left Ireland and came to England, got into bad company, spent all his money, he and his companions took bad ways; my brother, wanting money, was prevailed on to set J. M.'s house on fire, which he did, for the reward of 20 guineas; about nine years since, my brother came home, and soon after fell ill, he desired we would send for our priest and another person, to take down, in writing, his confession; he then, in the presence of my father, myself, and brothers, confessed that he was hired to set the place on fire, the day before he tore the lock off the school-door, but was surprised when he came in the night to find the door fast,—but he got an iron crow and forced the door open,-he then went in, pulled the door after him, and then completed his infernal work; that being done, the next thing was to transport my brother to Ireland, accordingly a person was appointed, he went with him to Liverpool, and then saw him set sail for Ire,

land in the packet; my brother, after this confession, received the eucharist, and in less than 48 hours died; this, sir, is his confession on oath, and after his death we have all bound ourselves to be revenged, and have sought and completed our revenge, as you now find, by the same place in a neap of rubbish; after this was completed, I went back to Ireland, to acquaint my father and brothers what was done; we have again, a second time, mutually sworn to each other never to cease until you have made J. M.'s loss good in a double fold; if you choose to do this immediately we will forbear, if not, evil will be always at your peace.

P. C." against the form of the statute, &c. and against the peace, &c.

Second count, describing the letter as demanding a certain valuable thing, that is to say, double the loss sustained by the said J. M. by a fire in the same letter mentioned and referred to, and which said last-mentioned letter is of the tenor following, that is to say.

Third count-double the loss by the same letter pretended to have been sustained, &c.

OFFENCES RELATING TO OFFICE.

184. Information against a MAGISTRATE (g) for discharg ing a person out of custody, who had been committed for seducing manufacturers into foreign service.

(Commencement as in pr. 1.)

(g) No information will be granted by the court against magistrates for a mere error in judgment, R. v. Cox, 2 Burr. 785. R. v. Bulmer and Baines, 2 Burr. 1162.; but if it appear that the magistrates have been partially, maliciously, or

That on, &c. at, &c. E. F.

corruptly influenced in the exercise of their discretion, and have consequently abused the trust reposed in them, they are liable to prosecution by indictment, information, or even possibly by action, if the malice be very gross and injuri

esquire, then and still being one of the justices (h) * of our said lord the king, assigned to keep the peace of our said lord the king, in and for the county aforesaid, and also to hear and determine divers felonies, trespasses, and other misdemeanors, within the said county committed,** did make his warrant in writing, under his hand and seal, bearing date the day and year aforesaid, directed to the keeper of, &c. (as in the warrant,) reciting, that M. W. had been brought before him the said A. B. by W. P. headborough, and charged upon the oath of I. D. with seducing L. M., N. O., &c. natives of this kingdom, and manufacturers in glass, to go into foreign service, wherefore he the said A. B. esquire, being such justice, did charge and order the said keeper of, &c. to receive him the said M. W. into the custody of him the said keeper of, &c. then sent to him the said keeper, together with the said warrant, for want of sureties, and him the said M. W. safely to keep in his custody, until he the said M. W. should be discharged by due course of law, which said warrant, afterwards, to wit, on the day and year aforesaid, at, &c. was delivered to the said keeper of, &c. in due form of law to be executed, together with the said M. W. by virtue of which said warrant, the said keeper of, &c. kept and detained the said M. W. in his custody, in the said gaol, for the cause in the said warrant above specified. and the said further giveth the court here to understand and be informed, that whilst the said M. W. was kept in the said gaol, in the custody aforesaid, for the cause aforesaid, to wit, on, &c. at, &c. one A. B. late of, &c. esquire, then and still being one of the justices, &c. well knowing the premises, but devising, designing, contriving, and intending to pervert the course of justice, and to acquire private lucre and gain, did, on, &c. with force and arms, at, &c. under colour of divers false pretences and informations, unlawfully, wilfully, and corruptly, procure the said M. W. to be discharged,

R. v.

ous. R. v. Young and Pitts, 1 Burr. 556. R. v. Holland and another, 1 T. R. 692. Filewood and another, East, 26 G. 3.

(h) It is sufficient, in an indictment against any officer, to aver that being such, &c. did the act, see p. 151, 152, R. v. Holland, 5 T. R. 623,

and to escape and go at large from and out of the custody of the said keeper of, &c. in which he the said M. W. was so confined as aforesaid, for the cause aforesaid, without taking sufficient sureties for the personal appearance of the said M. W. at the then next general gaol delivery to be holden for the said county, to answer the aforesaid complaint against the said M. W. and by then and there knowingly taking insufficient sureties for the personal appearance of the said M. W. at the then next general goal delivery to be holden for the said. county, and also without any notice being first given to the prosecutor of the said M. W. or to E. F. esquire, who had so committed the said M. W. as aforesaid, for the cause aforesaid, of the intention of any person to become sureties for the personal appearance of the said M. W. as aforesaid, by then and there, to wit, on, &c. at, &c. making a certain warrant in writing, under the hand and seal of him the said A. B. then being such justice as aforesaid, bearing date, &c. directed to the keeper of, &c. by which said last-mentioned warrant, he the said A. B. did require the said keeper of, &c. to discharge out of custody the body of the said M. W. if detained for no other cause than what is expressed in the warrant of commitment of E. F. esquire, meaning the aforesaid warrant of E. F. esquire, dated the then last, on the oath of I. D. &c. (as in the former warrant,) and also in and by the said last-mentioned warrant of him the said A. B. falsely alleging, that he the said A. B. had taken sufficient sureties for the personal appearance of him the said M. W. at the then next general gaol delivery to be holden for the said county, at, &c. whereas, in truth and in fact, the said A. B. did not take sufficient sureties for the personal appearance of him the said W. M. at the then next general gaol delivery for the said county, at, &c. by means whereof, he the said W. M. afterwards, to wit, on, &c. at, &c. was discharged from the said gaol, and then and there did escape and go at large; and also by means whereof, he the said M. W. did not appear at the then next general gaol delivery for the said county, to answer certain indictments, then and there, to wit, on, &c. at, &c. at the said then next general gaol delivery of the said county, preferred against him for the matters of complaint in the said warrant of

day of