ROSE (App.) v. FROGLEY (Resp.): Licensing Acts-Death of licence-holder-Minority of heir- ROYAL COLLEGE OF VETERINARY SURGEONS v. ROBINSON: surgeon Qualification "Veterinary forge" - Veterinary Surgeons Act, 1881 RYLEY (App.) v. BROWN (Resp.): Practice-Res judicata-Dismissal of charge on first hearing SPURLING (App.) v. BANTOFT (Resp.): Market-Penalty for selling tollable articles outside market- STARCY U. THE CHILWORTH GUNPOWDER MANUFACTURING COMPANY: PAGE 685 477 79 372 55 STOKES, Inspector of Mines (App.) v. CHECKLAND (Resp.): STUBBS V. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS: WESTMORE (App.) v. PAINE (Resp.): Justice of the peace-Appeal-Special case-Service of appli- WHITEHURST (App.) v. FINCHER (Resp.): 1 244 Gaming-Illegal betting-Room "open, kept, or used" for WINDHILL LOCAL BOARD OF HEALTH V. VINT: Compounding misdemeanour-Compromise of indictment for WYATT (App.) v. GEMS (Resp.): Specific Nuisance-Projection from buildings-Metropolis-Articles in ... PAGE 41 679 APPENDIX. INLAND REVENUE REGULATION ACT, 1890 (53 & 54 Vict. c. 21) REPORTS OF Criminal Law Cases. QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION. February 10 and 13, 1890. (Before CAVE and SMITH, JJ.) STUBBS V. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS. (a) Private prosecution-Charge dismissed-Prosecutor bound overBill preferred by prosecutor-True bill-Case undertaken by Public Prosecutor-Acquittal-Costs of defendants-22 & 23 Vict. c. 17-30 & 31 Vict. c. 35, s. 2-42 & 43 Vict. c. 22, s. 7. It is provided by 30 & 31 Vict. c. 35, s. 2, that when an indictment is preferred under 22 & 23 Vict. c. 17, and the person accused is acquitted, the court may order the prosecutor or other person by or at whose instance such indictment shall have been preferred to pay the costs of the accused person. 42 & 43 Vict. c. 22, s. 7, enacts that, if any person is bound over to prosecute, or has given security for costs, he shall, upon the Director of Public Prosecutions undertaking the case, be released from such obligation, and the Director of Public Prosecutions shall be liable to costs in lieu of such person. Where a person, who was bound over to prosecute a charge under 22 & 23 Vict. c. 17, preferred a bill of indictment and a true bill was found, the Director of Public Prosecutions undertook the case, and the accused were acquitted. An order was made that the Director of Public Prosecutions should pay the costs of the persons acquitted. Held, that the order was bad. THE following case was agreed to by the parties for the purpose of raising the questions therein for the opinion of the 1. At all the times hereinafter referred to the defendant was (a) Reported by W. H. HORSFALL, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. VOL. XVII. B |