The Express.
London, England, 1861-01-21 00:00:00

BUILDING TIMM

This was a conviction under the Combination Act, fath of
George I V., uip. 129, Wore Mr. Verne, the police snagts-
trate. The infornuition charged the defendant with ends*.
vowing by threats to force Philip Anley to limit the ile•
acription el his workmen ; and the point reserved for the
consideration of the court was whether what loosed be-
tween the convicted workman and bin master enameled in
point of law to It threat. The threat alleged was embodied
in a dneument handed to Mr. Miley by the defendant on
behalf of tlo enact. in Mr. Anley'a employment, and which
net out a r,,olution some to by the men. The resolution
was as follow, !---" Resolved that Mr. Anley he given to
understsoil that unlace, the men who are working under the
declaration he dia.:barged. and that a definite answer be
given to us Icy I lihuer.tirun to that effect, we mile work
1 inaronliately." It might be that these words did
not neceuarily &mould to a threat without 11 re-
I terrace to the accompanying circumstance. ; but having
• regard to the circumstances, the magistrate held a threat
hail been sent, within the terms of the trd Rectum of the
art. That se.tion enacts that "if any person shall, by
S'iokll47l, to the pm-sin or pngs.rtc of another. ..r by threats
or intimidation, or by molesting, or in any way obstructing
another, force, or endeavour to force, any manufacturer or
person carrying on :lIIV trade or business to make may alter-
. *tine in his flask of rezulating, managing. or carrying on
1 sinch manufacture, trade, or business, or to limit the
number of hi. apprentices., or the number or description .4
his journeymen, workmen, or servanta," Le.
Mr. Sleigh appeared on behalf of the appellant, the man
Waleby ; Mr. H. tliffard, in support of the conviction.
After a protracted argument,
Their lordships delivered judgment seriatim, to the effect
that the conviction must be upheld. This was clearly idi
attempt to coerce a master by • threat of doing something
which was likely to operate to his injury. It was not the
own of one man going to hi'. master and saying, if you
don't discharge so and so or such and such persons I must
leave you. but it was the joint declaration of nevem! }emon
placing before their master an alternative that must work
injuriously tor him. In the first instance the court were
inclined to doubt whether the common declaration amounted
to anything more than a regulating of their own interests
by the men ; but inasmuch as it purported to drive others
out of employment the combination in question clearly
amounted to a conspiracy, and therefor« to an illegal pro.
reeding. It was a well known rule of law that what one
man might do a number of men could not do ; std accord-
ing to the facts stated in the case the magistrate lad abun-
dant evidence beb.re him from which he might conclude
that the threat used was a threat to carry out an illegal
oombinatioo, and that the defendant was liable to be in.
dieted at 0(111111100 law.
Conviction upheld accordingly.

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL—JAN. 19.
Bete., the Lord Chief Justice Cockburn, Justices Wight-
man, Williams sal Keating, and Mr. Rama Bramwell.)

THE 41:1111 r. NWT 11411,11 C.

This was • ease from the Central Criminal Court, re-
served for the opinion of this court upon the finding of the
jury. The Keener was indicted foe stealing • IW. Hank of
England note. In the serried onset he wee charged with re.
cLrLv2j the Dote, knowing it to have bees stolen. It aµthat the prosecutor treat to the prisoner's shop to
M''..sltis hair cut, haring in hie greetreat pocket two 101.
Dote.. He trek off hie coat, and laid it, folded up, on • chair !
whilst his hair was being cut. In the following morning be
returned to the prisoner's shop and informed him that he
bad lost one of the notes, and offered 3/. reward for it. The
primmer denied any knowledge of the oote, but it wu sub's-
inestly traced into his possession. He accounted for
having held it by stating that be had given gold for it on
the day it was lost.
The jury found the prisoner eSoi/re, but recommended
him to mercy pfk tin ground that it was Dot primed that ,
the pnrecut r had dropped the Dote in the prisoner's shop,
Of that the priaser had found it there.
Upon this 'lading the prisoner's moosel conteuded that
if the jury believed the prisoner (mad the note elsewhere.,
thßonfltnt:dr7nit him.
i judge then put several questions to the
jury, and in y they mid, test that there was no evi-
dence to prove that the note wis dropped by the prosecutor
in the prisoner's shop. and that the poisoner found it
there secondly, that the prisoner, at the time he found the
note, did net know nor had reasonable manes of knowing
who the owner was ; thirdly, that after having acquired •
knowledge of the owner of the note he converted it to his
own Dan ; fourthly, that the prisoner when he picked op the
Dote intended to apply it to his own use, and so deprived
the owner of it : and fifthly, that the prisoner at the time he
picked op the note believed the owner could be toned. The
leaned judge then directed a verdict of guilty to be entered,
and reserved the question whether upon such finding the
prisoner woe properly convicted. The prisoner was now in
poi awaiting the decision of the court.
Mr. Sleigh, on heholf of the prisoner, contended that in
accordance with the principles laid down in all the recent
masa of conviction. the conviction must be quashed. To
convict in cases of larceny two ingredients must be clearly
made en. t —fire. that the finder, at the time he found the
property, inteteled to appropriate it to his own use and,
secondly, that be had at the time the menus of knowing
who was the owner.

The Chief Justice said the prisoner knew who wu the
owner of the note before he coererted it to his own use.
Mr. Sleigh said that, iu order to convict the prisoner, it
was necessary to show that there was the knowledge nr the
means of ascertaining, co-existent with the fact of finding
who was the owner of the nate.

The court were unanimously of opinion that upon the
fact. as stated in the rase the. prisoner was properly con•
Tiara
Conviction affinneiL