Akron daily Democrat. [volume] (Akron, Ohio) 1892-1902, 1902-01-11
SOME LEGAL FREAKS
CURIOUS TWISTS THAT OBTAIN IN
ENGLISH CRIMINAL LAW.

n FGTbOu maY nc VI
Though He swears to the Truth-No
such Onense ms Tfespass - Points
About Forgery.
In no branch Of the law as It 10 dis
pensed In Great Britain ale such curl
GUS points, to be found or greater
number of anomalies to be met with
than in the criminal branch thereof.
1t may be news to some people, for
instance, to know that there are mum.
Der Of things In existence which can.
not be stolen, such as q corpse, animals
fere Datur9--.. e., animals wild In
state Of nature with certain excep-
tions created by statute)-soil of the
earth, etc. To attempt to steal nothing
would appear on Che face Of it to b0
| an impossibility, much less crime,
but man indicted for attempting to
pick lady's pocket which was subse-
quently found to be empty was found
guilty Of an attempt to commit theft"
though, in fact, there vas nothing In
the pocket to cteal
Any one lucky envugh 20 pick up a
sovereign lying in the road will be glad
W hear that, IL at the time Of finding
| It he had no reasonable means Of dis
covering the owner Of II. and also II be
did not Mt the same time conceive the
Idea of appropriating 1t to himself he
will not be guilty Of stealing IL he
keeps his lucky fnd, even II the right
full owner discovers and claims 1t.
Most people walking in the country
must have noticed on numerous occa-
sions boards or placars1s posted up in
woods, fields, etc, notifying in large
letters that "trespassers will be prose-
cuted." but few are aware that such
notices are utterly useless and no one
need feel the least alNrm thereat, there
being no such offense known in crimi-
nal law as such trespass, and a per-
son could never be prosecuted for such
an offense. They are in fact, In the
words Of that eminent jurist, Sir Fred
erick Pollock, In his well known work.
"Pollock on Torts," wooden false
hood"
1t is common fallacy to imagine
that the crime Of forgery consists in
signing another's name. though in fact
committing forgery consists In making
and uttering any false instrument in
writing with attempt to defraud; thus
It may be forgery to omit a word
7 from document, and it will be mat
ter Of considerable surprise to many to
learn that 1t La possible for person to
forge his or her own name. A person,
however, who fraudd lently inserts an
others name on picture, thereby SELL
ing 1t as the work of some other artist,
is not guilty of forgery, as a picture ia
not an 'instrument In writing"
The crime of perjury also does not
quite "ht In" with the generally ac-
cepted idea, which IL that If person,
after being sworn on oath to speak the
truth, swears falsely, he Ia guilty of
such offense. This Ia correct with the
important qualification that the fact
the witness has sworn to must be ma
terlal to the case. Thus, II witness
on being duly sswun gave false ad-
dress ON being asked where he lived,
this, though untrue, would not amount
to perjury, az the place where the wit
ness lived would be quite immaterial.
That person may be guilty of per-
jury though speaking the truth may
seem curious anomaly, but such new
ertheless Is the fact, as the test of per-
jury is not whether person is speak
ing what he believes to be the truth;
SO, IL a witness, for instance, on being
asked, what colored tie was the pris-
oner wearing when you met him?" re-
piled red" when In fact he did not
really notice, he would be guilty OF
perjury, even though the prisoner was
!, in reality wearing a red tie when the
witness met him.
Numerous other instances Of crimes
which present similar curious points to
the above might be given. and. In pass
ing. persons taking out insurances
against burglary might note that this
crime can only be committed between
the hours of q p. m. and @ a. M; that
breaking into house by means Of an
open door or window is not burglary
although entering a house by sliding
down the chimney IL.
We must not conclude this article
, atively recent case In which a man moi
, possessing the means to pay entered q
, restaurant, where he ordered and ate q
q good dinner. AS, however. he was un
, able to pay for the same he was giver
: In charge and subsequently indicted
) for obtaining goods by false pre-
lenses" The case resulted In the pris
! oner's acquittal on the ground that III
had not been guilty Of any false pre-
lenses.
This individual therefore had goot
meal on the cheap, but we should mo-
ndvise any enterpris.ng reader to emu
late his example, as. although he coult
not indeed be prosecuted for obtainln,
goods by false pretenses, 1t seems tina
he will still be criminally liable unde
the bankruptcy act for obtaining credi
: by fraudulent means.--London Bits
Averting q Panic.
l On one asion John Philip SousR b,