EVIDENCE.

Prove the charge before the magistrate, the warrant, and that A. B. was in custody in gaol under the warrant that defendant aided A. B. in an attempt to escape, by delivering to him files, etc. or as may be charged that the offence was within one year next before the prosecution (a). Arch. 8 ed.

555.

Prec. of Indict. Id.

OBSERVATIONS.

This statute does not extend to cases where an actual escape is made (b). It is not an offence within the act, where the commitment is on suspicion of felony, as it extends only to cases where the offence is clearly and plainly expressed in the warrant, or where the prisoner stands convicted of it (c). It is within this statute to deliver instruments to a convicted prisoner to facilitate his escape, though pardoned on condition of transportation, and though the party delivering the instruments did not know of what specific offence the prisoner was convicted (d). As to the delivery of instruments, see the offence under 4 Geo. iv. c. 64, s. 43, infra. Since the 4 Geo. iv. c. 64, the provisions of this statute, as to aiding escapes from any gaol, are in practice limited to "the Royal Hospital of Bethlehem and prison of Bridewell, the King's Bench and Fleet Prison, the prison of the Marshalsea or Palace Courts, the General Penitentiary at Millbank, and the Penitentiary at Gloucester;" all of these being, by the 76th section of 4 Geo. iv. c. 64, excluded from the enactments of that act.

EXTORTION-(See titles LARCENY, ROBBERY, THREATS.)

FACTORS and AGENTS.-(See title EMBEZZLEMENT.)

EVIDENCE.

OBSERVATIONS.

Fleet Prisons, or to the prison of the Marshalsea or Palace Courts, the General Penitentiary at Millbank, nor to the Penitentiary at Gloucester; nor to ships or vessels provided for the reception and employment of convicts sentenced to transportation." As to these, therefore, the offence is regulated and punished by 16 Geo. ii. c. 31, ss. 1, 2; see ante, p. 100.

Prove that the defendant fills the office in question (showing that he acted as such officer is sufficient)—that he exacted the money as a fee due to him, as stated in the indictment. Rosc. Cr. Ev. 2 ed. 753; Arch. 8 ed.

575.

Prec. of Indict. Arch. Id.; Matt. C. L. 457.

Extortion is defined as the taking of money by an officer under colour of office, where none at all is due, or not so much is due, or where it is not yet due (a); as for a public officer to refuse to perform the duties of his office until his fees are paid (b); for a miller or ferryman to take more toll than is due by custom (c); or for the farmer of a market to take money for the use of stalls where he had erected such a number of stalls that the market-people had not room to sell their wares (d); and where a collector of posthorse duties fraudulently demanded and took a promissory note for 5l., as and for duties, it was held extortion though he paid it over to his employer (e). To persuade another to extort money from a person whereby money is actually extorted, is an indictable offence (f). A sheriff cannot be indicted for extortion by his officer (g); but he may be sued for it (h). If several are concerned, they may be indicted jointly; for in this offence there are no accessaries, all are principals (i). The indictment must allege the time of the offence (k); and a sum which the defendant received (1); but it is not material to prove the exact sum as laid (m). Where nothing was due, that fact ought to be averred; and where anything was due, the sum that might have been lawfully taken must be expressed (n). By 31 Eliz. c. 5, s. 4, actions or informations for extortion may be laid in any county; and it is said this applies to indictments (0).

(h) Woodgate v. Knatchbull, 2 T. R. 148.

(i) Atkinson's case, 2 Ld. Raym. 1248; 1 Salk. 382; Loggen's case, 1 Str. 75; Com. Dig. Extor. (C). (k) 4 Mod. 101, 103.

(1) 4 Burr. 2471; 2 Leach, 794.

(m) 1 Ld. Raym. 149; though not laid under a videlicit, R. v. Gilham, 6 T. R. 265; 1 Esp. 285. (n) 2 Leon. 268; Com. Dig. Extor. (C).

(0) 1 Hawk. c. 68, s. 6.

FALSE IMPRISONMENT.-(See title ASSAULT, ante, p. 26.)

EVIDENCE.

OBSERVATIONS.

Prove that the person personated was a seaman, or, etc., on board the ship, or, etc., as may be stated in the indictment—that he might be supposed to be entitled to the wages, or, etc., attempted to be obtained that the defendant personated or assumed the name and character of the person named in the indictment. Rosc. Cr. Ev. 2 ed. 415; Arch. 8 ed. 397.

The offence of falsely personating another for the purpose of fraud, is a misdemeanour at common law, and punishable as such (a). Where more than one are concerned, it is more usual to proceed as for a conspiracy (b). Upon a prosecution under the statute, there must be some evidence to show that there was some person of the name and character assumed, entitled, or primâ facie might be supposed to be entitled, to the wages, or etc. sought to be obtained (c). The offence is the same though the personated party be dead (d); and though the wages have been paid (e); and although it appears that no such pension was actually existing as that sought to be obtained (ƒ). All who aid and abet in the offence are principals (g).

Prec. of Indict. Arch. 396; Matt. C. L. 522.

(a) 2 East, P. C. 1010; 2 Russ. 479.

(b) See Dupee's case, 2 East, P. C. 1010.

(c) Brown's case, 2 East, P. C. 1007; Tannet's case, R. & R. 351.

Prove the personation, and endeavour to transfer or receive money, as stated in the indictment. Rosc. Cr. Ev. 2 ed. 487; Arch. 8 ed. 398.

Prec. of Indict. Arch. 397.

Prove the pendency of the action, by producing the writ or an examined copy-that the defendant became bail in the name of the party mentioned in the indictment, by producing the bail-piece—the identity of the defendant as the person who became bail-and call the party personated to show that he did not consent, and was not privy to the defendant becoming bail in his name. Rosc. Cr. Ev. 2 ed. 416; Arch. 8 ed. 399. Prec. of Indict. Arch. Id.

(d) Martin's case, R. & R. 324.

(e) Cramp's case,

R. & R. 327.

(f) Pringle's case, 2Mood, C.C. 127, indicted under 7 Geo. iv. c. 16, s. 38.

(g) Pott's case, R. & R. 353.

See Parr's case, 1 Leach, 434; 2 East, P. C. 1005; decided under the former statute, 31 Geo. 3, c. 22.