would give all of them notice. If they do abscond, any number of pieces of paper would be of no use.

PLATT, B.—I think that the statute has been complied with.

WILLIAMS, J.-I agree with my Lord Campbell.

The appellant occupies and is assessed in the said rate in respect of meadow land in his occupation in the said parish; and such appellant is assessed, as are the several other occupiers of property included in the said rate, in proportion to the net annual value of their respective occupa

WILLES, J.-I think the conviction ought to be affirmed. Under section 251. the notice to be given to a man in prison need not be in writing. The provision The provision that the notice may be served personally does not, I think, limit the effect of the following words of the section as to the other modes of service. It appears to me that notice in writing has been duly left in this case at the place of business.

Conviction quashed.

1855. HANSON . THE LOCAL BOARD

Nov. 14. S OF HEALTH, EPSOM.

Public Health Act, 11 & 12 Vict. c. 63. s. 117-District conterminous with Parish -Power of Local Board to make Highway Rate.

Where the district for which a local board of health is appointed under the 11 & 12 Vict. c. 63. is conterminous with a single parish, the local board have power to make a highway rate under the 5 & 6 Will. 4. c. 50. for the repairs of the highways in the district, and are not bound to raise money for that purpose by a general district

rate.

Notice of appeal having been duly given against a highway rate made on the 22nd of October 1855, by the local board of health for the district of Epsom, as surveyors of the highways of the parish of Epsom, which is co-extensive with the said district, and which rate was made under the powers of the General Highway Act, 5 & 6 Will. 4. c. 50. and of the Public Health Act, 1848, by consent and by order of Jervis, C.J., the following CASE was stated for the opinion of the Court of Queen's Bench, pursuant to the 12 & 13 Vict. c. 45. s. 11.

way Act, 5 & 6 Will. 4. c. 50. s. 27. In the said parish is the town of Epsom, in which are two miles in length of highway, mainly consisting of streets, and the rest of the parish surrounding the said town is a thinly-peopled agricultural district, and contains twenty-eight miles in length of public highway, hitherto repairable and repaired by the surveyor of highways of the said parish, at the expense of the ratepayers assessed to the highway rate of such parish. The area of the town part of the said parish consists of about 350 acres, the area of the said agricultural part of the said parish consists of about 4,040 acres. From the time when the local board of health for Epsom was established under the Public Health Act, down to the present time, there have been no monies carried to the district fund account under the provisions of the Public Health Act, 1848, and at the time when the rate appealed against was made, it was necessary to make a rate for the repair of the highways of the said parish and district.

The appellant contends, that the said local board of health had no power, as surveyors of highways, to make any such rate, but were bound to make a general district rate under the 88th section of the Public Health Act, and that the appellant, as an occupier of meadow land in the said parish, ought, in respect thereof, to have been assessed, not, as he is by the rate in question, on the net annual value of such meadow land, but in the proportion of one-fourth part only of such net annual value. If the Court should be of opinion that the local board of health had no power to levy such rate for repairing the highways of the said parish, but were bound to levy a rate under section 88. of the Public Health Act, 1848, assessing all occupiers of land used as arable, meadow, or pasture ground only, or as woodlands, &c., in the proportion of one-fourth part only of the net annual value thereof, in such

case the said rate was to be quashed; otherwise the same was to be confirmed.

Pashley, for the respondents. The The question is whether, where the district created under the Public Health Act (11 & 12 Vict. c. 63.) is co-extensive with an existing parish, the expense of repairing the highways is to be defrayed out of a general district rate made under that act, or whether the power of levying a rate under the Highway Act (5 & 6 Will. 4. c. 50.) does not still remain. Section 87. is what is relied upon by the appellant. It provides that the local board may make general district rates "for defraying such expenses as are charged upon that rate by this act, and such other expenses of executing this act in any district as are not provided for by any other rate, or defrayed out of the said District Fund Account." Now, the expense of maintaining the highways is not specifically charged upon the general district rate by this act; and the case finds that there is no district fund account out of which it can be defrayed. The only other alternative is, whether this is an expense 66 provided for by any other rate," and it is clear that the 5 & 6 Will. 4. c. 50. s. 27. does specifically provide the highway rate for this purpose. Section 117. of the Public Health Act makes the local boards surveyors of highways for the districts, and invests them with all the powers and authorities of such surveyors. This must include the power of levying a highway rate.

[COLERIDGE, J.-That clause enables the old surveyors of highways to collect arrears of former rates, and obliges them to hand over the surplus to the local board.]

That is a special provision necessary to meet a state of things immediately consequent upon the change of body, but it in no way affects the right of the local board to make such a rate. The part of the 117th section which enacts that the inhabitants of the district shall not be liable to the payment of the highway rate in respect of roads in the parish situate beyond the district, cannot apply to a case like this, where there is no part of the parish beyond the district. The case of Elmer v. the Norwich Local Board of Health (1)

(1) 3 El. & B. 517; s. c. 23 Law J. Rep. (N.s.) Q.B. 203.

is distinguishable, because there the district included several parishes and parts of parishes.

J. Brown, contrà.-Section 117. only transfers to the local board the powers and authorities of surveyors of highways under the laws relating to highways, so far as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of the Public Health Act. The reasons given in Elmer v. the Norwich Local Board of Health shew that the making a highway rate is inconsistent with those provisions. Many material differences may be suggested between such a highway rate and a general district rate levied under the Public Health Act. The highway rate is imposed by the 5 & 6 Will. 4. c. 50. s. 27. upon the full value of all property rateable to the relief of the poor, as well as upon woods, mines, quarries of stone and other hereditaments usually rated to the highways; whereas, by the 11 & 12 Vict. c. 63. s. 88, the district rates are to be assessed only upon a fourth of the net annual value of arable, meadow or pasture lands, &c.

[COLERIDGE, J.-That difference may be very reasonable in rates for sewering, paving, and the like, of which the town part of the district receives a greater benefit than the agricultural part; but there is no reason for making the distinction in respect of the maintenance of the highways.]

Section 89. gives a discretionary power of dividing the district, and assessing any part separately for any of the purposes of the act; therefore, a district rate may be so laid as to give a fair apportionment of the expenses. It is not to be supposed that the legislature intended that the power of making highway rates should continue, when section 87. has provided for levying a district rate for the purpose of defraying the same expenses.

[COLERIDGE, J.-What, then, is the meaning of the last proviso to section 117, that highway rates made by the local board need not be allowed or signed?]

That is explained, in The Queen v. the Trustees of the Worthing, &c. Roads (2), to apply to cases where a highway rate

(2) 3 El. & B. 1008; s. c. 23 Law J. Rep. (N.s.) M.C. 187.

may have to be levied for the purpose of raising money for contribution towards the repair of a turnpike-road.

[LORD CAMPBELL, C.J.-The late Mr. Lawes's opinion, there referred to, is in favour of the power of the local board to make a highway rate.]

Pashley was not called upon to reply.

LORD CAMPBELL, C.J.-The question is, whether the local board of health may make a general highway rate for the whole parish, not whether they have or have not power to make a general district rate for the same purpose. By section 117. the local board has all the powers and duties before given to or imposed upon surveyors of highways, who clearly could have made a general rate for the repair of the highways in the parish. Then, is there anything to shew that such a rate would be inconsistent with the provisions of the Public Health Act? I see no such inconsistency here, where the district and parish are conterminous. Therefore, the power to make a district rate does not take away the power of making a highway rate. I cannot think that the legislature would have shifted the burthen and liability to highway rates without expressly saying so. The Norwich and Worthing cases do not apply to the case of a district like the present. In both of those cases the district included several parishes.

COLERIDGE, J.-I am entirely of the same opinion. The question is not whether the local board may make a district rate, but whether they can make a highway rate. It may well be that, as the district would be sometimes conterminous with the parish, and sometimes not so, the statute has provided two systems for defraying this kind of expense. Under the enacting part of section 117. there can be no doubt that the words are large enough to include the power of making a highway rate. It would then require very clear language indeed in other parts of the act to take that power away. The first proviso in section 117. does to some extent limit that power, but that can only apply in the case of a district not conterminous with a parish, and so does not affect the present case. But then there is

a strong inference to be drawn in favour of the existence of the power from the last proviso to that section, to which the Worthing case gives no answer which satisfies all the circumstances. That case affirms the power of making a highway rate under certain circumstances, and there is nothing to shew that this is not one of the cases in which it remains.

WIGHTMAN, J.-The terms of section 117, and especially those of the second proviso, shew that it was contemplated that the local board might make a highway rate. Where the district is conterminous with the parish, I see nothing inconsistent in their making such a rate for the purpose of repairs of the highways, and a general district rate for all the other purposes authorized by the Public Health Act. In the two cases referred to, no doubt, an inconsistency might occur, because the district comprehended many whole parishes and parts only of others.

Judgment for the respondents.

The following is the substance of a CASE stated by Crompton, J.

The prisoner was convicted, before him, at the Winchester Summer Assizes, 1855, on an indictment charging him with wounding one Taylor, with intent to murder him. The prisoner was posted as a sentry at one post and Taylor as a sentry at an adjoining post. The prisoner, intending to murder one Maloney, and supposing Taylor to be Maloney, shot at and wounded Taylor. The jury found that the prisoner intended to murder Maloney, not knowing

* Coram Jervis, C.J., Parke, B., Wightman, J., Crompton, J. and Willes, J.

The following CASE was stated by the Deputy Recorder of the borough of Birmingham :

The prisoner, W. Jarvis, was tried, before me, at the Quarter Sessions, held on the 26th of June last, upon an indictment charging the prisoner with having in his possession a number of pieces of false and counterfeit coin, to wit, thirteen pieces of false and counterfeit coin, resembling, and apparently intended to resemble and pass for thirteen pieces of the Queen's current silver coin, called "half-crowns," and fourteen pieces of false and counterfeit coin

* Coram Jervis, C. J., Parke, B., Wightman, J., Cresswell, J. and Willes, J.

resembling, and apparently intended to resemble and pass for fourteen pieces of the Queen's current silver coin, called "shillings," knowing the same to be false and counterfeit, and with intent to utter or put off the same. The prisoner was apprehended, at twelve o'clock at night, in a lodging-house at Birmingham, by a policeman, who searched him, and found upon him, in different pockets of his dress, four counterfeit crowns, all electro-plated, of the same date and the same mould, each crown being wrapped in a separate piece of paper; thirteen counterfeit half-crowns, all electroplated, of the same date, and two of the same mould, each half-crown being wrapped in a separate piece of paper, and fourteen counterfeit shillings, all electro-plated, of the same date and the same mould, each shilling being wrapped in a separate piece of paper, and four shillings good money. On his apprehension, and at the police station, the prisoner said that they (meaning the counterfeit coin) had been given him while gambling, and that he did not know them to be counterfeit. Upon these points, it was contended, for the prisoner, that, on the true construction of the act of parliament, 2 Will. 4. c. 34. s. 8, under which the indictment was framed, there was no evidence to go to the jury that the prisoner knew the coin to be false, or counterfeit, or that he intended to utter or put off the same; and a decision of Maule, J., at the Warwick Assizes, 1854, on an indictment, charging a like offence, under the same statute was cited and relied But on the facts proved, the DeputyRecorder told the jury that he thought there was evidence to go to them that the prisoner had the coin in his possession knowing the same to be false and counterfeit, and with intent to utter or put off the same; but that they must be fully satisfied on these points before they could find the prisoner guilty. The jury found the prisoner guilty, and he was sentenced to three years' imprisonment in the gaol at Birmingham, as he was well known as a notorious utterer and putter-off of false coin. The opinion of the Judges was requested, whether the facts above stated justified the conviction of the prisoner in point of law. This case was not argued by counsel.

on.

JERVIS, C.J.-This case seems to have been reserved upon some unreported decision of my Brother Maule, at Warwick, about which we know nothing. The case states that thirteen counterfeit half-crowns of the same date, and fourteen counterfeit shillings of the same date, and made in the same mould, and all wrapped up in separate pieces of paper, were found upon the prisoner. It was contended that there was no evidence to go to the jury, that he knew them to be false. The jury find that he did know it, and I agree with the jury. The spurious coin is wrapped up in separate pieces of paper to prevent them rubbing against each other. How could he but know that they were false?

PARKE, B.-The supposed decision of my Brother Maule is quite contrary to the cases cited in 1 Russell on Crimes, p. 48, where it is said, "the having a large quantity of counterfeit coin in possession, under suspicious circumstances and unaccounted for, appears to have been considered as evidence of having procured it with intent to utter it as good;" and Fuller's case is referred to (1).

WIGHTMAN, J., CRESSWELL, J., and WILLES, J. concurred.

Conviction affirmed.

[CROWN CASE RESERVED.]

1855. Nov. 24.

}

THE QUEEN v. HENRY JOSEPH
SMITH.

Larceny-Stealing Scrip Certificates of a Foreign Company-Valuable Securities.

A person may be convicted, under the statute 7 & 8 Geo. 4. c. 29. s. 5. if he steal scrip certificates of a foreign railway company, as the statute extends to valuable securities for the shares in the funds of a foreign as well as of a British company.

The following CASE was stated by Mr. Russell Gurney.

"At a general sessions of oyer and terminer and gaol delivery, holden for the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court,

(1) Russ. & R. 308.

Coram Jervis, C.J., Parke, B., Wightman, J., Crompton, J. and Willes, J.

on the 28th day of August last, Hugh Joseph Smith was tried, before me, upon the indictment hereinafter referred to, for stealing ten scrip certificates of a foreign railway company, called the Great Luxembourg Railway Company. The first count charged the prisoner with stealing ten securities for money, to wit, certificates, each entitling the holder thereof to ten half shares of 10l. each in the funds of a certain company called the Great Luxembourg Company. The second count charged him with stealing ten securities for money, to wit, certificates of shares in the funds of the Great Luxembourg Railway Company. The third count charged him with stealing ten securities for money and ten pieces of paper. The theft was proved by satisfactory evidence. The documents themselves were not produced upon the trial, but the annexed was shewn to be a fac-simile (1). Evidence was given that, among dealers in railway stocks and shares upon the Stock Exchange in London, these documents were treated and dealt with under the name of Great Luxembourg Railway shares,' and that they were scrip entitling the holders thereof to receive dividends, and that they passed by delivery as Bank notes. No evidence, however, was given of the existence of any fund out of which such dividends were payable, or of the payment of any dividends, or of the existence of the Great Luxembourg Railway Company. Upon the trial, the following objections were made:-First, that the documents were not within the provisions of the 5th section of the 7 & 8 Geo. 4. c. 29; and, secondly, that, though not within the provisions of

(1) The following is a translation of the terms of one of the scrip certificates :

"Grande Compagnie du Luxembourg.-Certificate to bearer.-The half shares. The holder of this certificate is entitled to ten half shares of 107. each in the Great Luxembourg Company, subject to the statutes of the Société Anonyme, passed at Brussels, on the 11th of September 1846, and sanctioned by Royal decree of the 1st of October 1846, and to all the arrangements which have been made by the company. Interest at the rate of 31. per cent. per annum will be paid on these half shares until the line is opened from Brussels to Namur, after which the dividends will be derived from the surplus which may remain after the payment of preferential charges."

The certificate purported to be signed by two of the directors and secretary.