The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-01-26 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

oAll 11% HOLNE,s.

1 .
:
U ..

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, WzormiNsTra.
SATURDAY, JAN. SI.

At the sitting et the Court, the Aveongto-G1 ftenst. rose,
and moved fur judgment upon Jolla fielder, convicted of keeping
.i.i unlawful gaming-house.
The Loan Cuts, JUSTICE mid, that this case had been tried
before him. It has an indictment against the defendant for keep.
tog an unlawful gaming-house; the first count setting forth. that
the said house was situate in the parish of St. James, Westminster,
out the evklence proving the parish to be differently sitnatcd, the
defendant was acquitted upon the first count, and afterwards rim.
sired on the second count, which merely charged. hint with keep-
ing and maintaining such a lionse. nut describing its parochial site.
.1n arrest of judgment was loosed fur the latter omission, and the
• aestion now was, was the 2d count sufficiently laid, without the
P irochial nomination, so as to maintain the conviction had there-
upon
The ATTORISZY.GEWZR Ai was heard in liniment of the con-
ch doe. He said be was aware of the dictum of 3lr. Justice Bul-
let, that a precise local description of the place where the offence
Iraq alleged to have been committed, ought to be given, but he was
also prepared to contend, that upon the fair analogy of other cant...,
it was unnecessary to insert in the indictment the local situation of
the !muse where the gaming was carried on, provided that house
MU within the town. Was it imperative, he would ask, in prose-
.mticrs for keeping a brothel, that the exact locality should he es-
peeved ? It was quite clear that the place must be specifically de-
s:abed in an action for trrimeas ; so again it must in charges for
steolinikin c dwelling-house under the value of 40s.
The LORD CIIIEE JUST I( E—Thcre can be no doubt, the local
der ription is.necroary in such cues, where the trespass is alleged
to have been violauon of the security of a dwelling.
Mr. LITTLRDALE said, that he was with the Attorney-General
in support of the conviction. In all these cases, where the local
itescripuon was necessary, it was on account of the infringement
upon the rights of things, as would be found in the Cresol Circuit
Comps/dm, and Mr. Starkie's book.
The 1.010 CHIEF JUSTICE—But would it not be taken for
granted in a writ or neer, from the reading of this indictment, that
the house was situated in a particular parish ?
MT. LITTLEDALC said, that he was prepared to annelid, that
the Ince= description was no more a necessary ingredient in indict-
ments than in civil actions; and then, ter the reason he had already
.nven, namely, the infringement upon things. In charges of as-
'ULU, of mortice, libels, &c. the same rule held.
Mr Justice BAYLER—But those are transitory offerers, which
may happen.anywhere. The question here is--is this alleged to
be a local raistee, which triunes a local habitation? 'floc charge
is fin keepiag *common gaming •• mom," not. I believe, a house.
(This was tiara to. he the case on reference to the indictment.)
(The LOUD Cllis'T Joliette r be defendant cannot have jndg.
rtmt. unless you satisfy the I uurt upon these two points. first,
mould the indictment be good without the statement of the place t
and is it .net a fact, that this indictment dues not contain such
statement?
Mr. LITTLYDAIR embed, whether a man might not be fairly
considered as the keeper of aga R. house, be furnishing it with
dire and cards for smanlawful purpose, although he never entered
the parish in which the business was actually conducted? He
nesse agnin enforce the analogy of certain civil actions not re-
(Prating the local description. Leerything which was to be con-
sldered as transitory in civil actions, was equally so in criminal.
The Loan('titer Jo IT ler —Are you not laying down tee
I-mad a proposition ? In one of the cases you coed, viz. libel*,
Mee may be tried anywhere In the county.
Pe. LITT etosta insisted that the role of law was, that the
• description of place was net necessary, until they came to
a lota action. Thaquestion at present was.--was this the kind of
local action that required such a description? Was it necessary.
after proof of the gaining in a certain room, to describe the actual
loeslite of the place?
Alr;Justice BEST-11'as there not some case in point on the
Ilnrne ircuit. where an act was said to have been committed at
Kingston, and the proof showed it to have been done on some
wharf of the river ?
The Loan ttr Jos-rice—ls there not another indictment
ageing the same person, which is free from all objection, mid on
which he has been found guilty ? Why not proceed to judgment
upon that, and waive the present argument?
Mr. ADOLPHUS, who was for the defendant, admitted that
them was another indictment, but he submitted whistle, it ought
✓aw to be poised, after remaining inoperative so long as seven
slues? _ _ .

Dlr. Justice BATLEY—But whose fault was it that it ratted so
long?
Mr. ADOI rR us replied, That it was difficult to say where the
truth lay, there had been so much corruption on the part of we
• vrtirecutors.
;r.Ltie t.F.D•Lu resumed his argument, and was interrupted by
r. Justice BEST, who said--Suppose the indictment had been
to cause divers people to come together, and game and play. with-
out naming any room, or any house, would that be an indictable
offence ? . . . .

Mr. LiTTLEDALE replied, that an indictment might be so
framed u to embrace such a case.. Gaming parties carried on in
the open air at fairs, by persons moving about with k 0 tables,
and such thing'', were punishable.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY—But the present indictment is not like
the ease or a holi• e which is found to be a nuisance. It is not the
room, in its were character of a room, which gives *Mince ; it is the
use n ode of I'.
111 r Justice oEs. —lt is not necessary to have the house pulled
down ; it is against the innatstan,s that you act.
Mr. RAINE wd, that the offence was nut to the local descrip,
tion, hut in the gaining. That practice might be carried on in a
room, 'bleb was so constructed as to be niovesble. That was, he
understood, now commonly practised, and was a necessary to fol-
low the same parties with successive indictments, while they moved
train parish to parish ?
Mr. Justice BEST—It is their plan that they change the venue,
while they shift the room ?—(A laugh.)
lie. Anoirilus was then heard for the defendant, in arrest of
Judgment ; and he contended that the local description was sn es-
sential and indispensable ingredient, which could not be omitted.
There was the precedent of Mr. Justice Buller's opinion, in favour
of his vies, Of the ease.

.....
The Loan CHIEF JusTtcr said, precedents were like books;
they might be found to suit every view of every question.
Mr. ADOLPHUS admitted that to be the use; he remembered
once having heard a Judge, in illustrating the position, that any
thing might be done by precedent, say that he bad read of an in-
dictment for murder, where the victim was said to have died of
certain mortal sounds, inflicted upon him in such and such a
manner, to which was superadded, that he had also other wound%
inflicted upon his body of which he would have died, had not the
former taken effect.-4A laugh.)
Mr. CHITTY supported the motion in arrest of judgment.
After some further arguments, which consistet: of mutual repe-
tition% of what had been already said by the Counsel, on the sub-
ject of the arrest of judgment.
The Loa, Unity Juscics said, "We shall take time to
consider the objection. Move, Mr. Attorney-General, upon the
other indietmer.t." _ _ _

The AvYnr.trry-Gtwrn AL—Then, my Lord, I move the
tudfment of the Court upon the same defendant for a font= con-
WINN. _ _

•..
Mr. Justice BAYLEY read his notes of the trial. The indict-
ment was brxight in the Easter Term of the 87th year of the late
King (1817). It charged the defendant with causing divers pee-
wees to assemble on the 29th March of the same year, at • certain
common gaming house, for the purpose of playing divers unlawful
games, called hazard, rouge et noir. dm /1/4.c.
The eyidence'consisted of proof that Mr. Fielder officiated as a
partner at the house. No. 9. Bennett-street, St. James-street, and
that upon a computation, 10.0901. used to be staked at play every
night- The place used to be crowded, particularly on opera nights,
and men of rank. as well as idle young men about town, were in
the habit of playing at a variety of unlawful games.
Mr. ADO!. PH us said that be was really unprepared at the mo-
ment to state the objections which he hod to this conviction, as
seven yeses had elapsed since it took place.
After some conversation between the Court and the Attorney-
General, judgment upon Mr. Fielder was postponed to give 3lr.
Adolphus time to consider the case until Thursday next. The de.
tendant to stand committed to the King's Bench prison until that
stay. -
- -