OBSERVATIONS.

The practice of what is called ringing the changes" was held an uttering under the former statute, and is so under the present (a). Proof of guilty knowledge will of course be by circumstantial evidence, as that the prisoner had on the same day, or at some other time, uttered base money of the

same description, to the same or to a different person, or had other pieces of base money about him when he uttered the counterfeit money in question (b). Where several are charged with an uttering it, must appear either that they were all present or so near to the party actually uttering, as to be able to afford aid and assistance (c). Knowingly giving a base coin in charity is not an uttering within the statute (d). Where a woman indicted for uttering counterfeit coin was accompanied by her husband each time to the door of the shop, but he did not go in, it was thought a case of coercion (e); see post, p. 69.

(a) 15 Geo. ii. c. 28; Frank's case, 2 Leach, 644.

(b) Per Thompson, B.; in Whiley's case, 2 Leach, 983; Bell's case, 1 Camp. 325; see also Har. rison's case, 2 Lew. C. C. 118. As to proof of guilty knowledge, see Rosc. Cr. Ev. 2 ed. 85; Arch. 8 ed. 107.

(c) See Soare's case, R. & R. 25; 2 East, P. C. 974; Davis' case, R. & R. 113; Manner's case, 7 C. & P. 801.

(d) Page's case, 8 C. & P. 122.

(e) Conolly's case,2 Lew. C. C. 229, per Bayley, J.

Prove the offence of uttering, as supra. - that at the same time the prisoner had about him one or more pieces of the counterfeit money mentioned in the indictment. Rosc. Cr. Ev. 2 ed. 352; Arch. 8 ed. 505.

See supra, as to the proof of uttering, etc. The statute does not require that an intent to pass the coin found upon the prisoner should be proved. The interpretation clause of the statute explains what shall be the nature of the possession required (a). In all cases where one of two persons in company utter counterfeit coin, and other counterfeit coin is found on the other, both are guilty of the aggravated offence, if acting in concert, and both knowing of the possession (b).

Prec. of Indict. Arch. 505; Matt. C. L. 445.

(a) 2 Wm. iv. c. 34, s. 21, set out Rosc. Cr. Ev. 2 ed. 361; Arch. 8 ed. 494; see post, p. 69, and Rogers' case, 2 Lew. C. C. 119, 297: 2 Mood. C. C. 85.

(b) Gerish's case, 2 M. & Rob.

219; Rogers' case, 2 Mood. C. C. 85; see the cases upon the repealed statute, 15 Geo. ii. c. 28, s. 3; Else's case, R. & R. 142; Skerret's case, 2 C. & P. 417; Rosc. Cr. Ev. 2 ed. 353.

OFFENCE.

PUNISHMENT.

COIN OF THE REALM-continued.

Uttering counterfeit gold or silver coin TWICE on the same day, or WITHIN TEN DAYS. (M). 2 Wm. IV. c. 34, ss. 7, 19. (After a previous conviction, see post, infra).

Imprisonment for not more than two years, with or without hard labour, and with or without solitary confinement; the latter qualified by 1 Vict. c. 90, s. 5, ante, p. 3.

[Where two separate utterings on the same day were charged in two counts, one judgment of Two years imprisonment was held bad. Robinson's case, 1 Mood. C. C. 413. See observ. p. 69].

Uttering counterfeit gold or silver coin AFTER A PREVIOUS CONVICTION. (F).

2 Wm. IV. c. 34, ss. 7, 19.

Transportation for LIFE or for any term not less than SEVEN years; or imprisonment not exceeding FOUR years with or without hard labour, and with or without solitary confinement; the latter qualified by 1 Vict. c. 90, s. 5, ante, p. 3.

Having in possession THREE OR MORE pieces of counterfeit gold or silver coin. (M).

2 Wm. IV. c. 34, ss. 8, 19. (After a previous conviction, see next precedent.)

Imprisonment for not more than THREE years, with or without hard labour, and with or without solitary confinement; the latter qualified by 1 Vict. c. 90, s. 5, ante, p. 3.

EVIDENCE.

Prove the two offences as directed (ante, p. 67)—that they were committed on the same day, or within the space of ten days, as may be charged. Arch. 8 ed. 506.

Prec. of Indict. Arch. 506; Matt. C. L. 445.

OBSERVATIONS.

See observations, ante, p. 67, as to what is an uttering, etc. The double uttering must be charged in one count of the indictment. R. v. Tandy, 2 Leach, 835; see R. v. Martin, 2 Leach, 293; 1 Russ. 82.

Prove the previous conviction-the identity of the prisoner-the subsequent offence as may be charged, see supra and ante, p. 67. Arch. 8 ed. 507. Prec. of Indict. Arch. Id.; Matt. C. L. 446.

A second offence after a conviction for any of the misdemeanours respectively mentioned in the three preceding cases, is felony. The mode of proving the previous conviction is directed by section 9 of the statute, which enacts "that a copy of the previous indictment and conviction, purporting to be signed and certified as a true copy by the clerk of the Court or other officer having the custody of the records of the Court where the offender was first convicted, or by the deputy of such clerk or officer, shall be sufficient evidence of the previous conviction without proof of the signature or official character of the person appearing to have signed the same.” A conviction under the old law cannot be joined with an offence under the new statute (a). The previous conviction must be stated with a prout patet per recordum (b); and the second offence must be charged to have been committed feloniously.

(a) Arch. 8 ed. 507.

Prove the possession of three or more pieces of false gold or silver coin-the guilty knowledge the intent to utter or put off the same. Rosc. Cr. Ev. 2 ed. 355; Arch. 8 ed. 508. Prec. of Indict. Matt. C. L. 446.

Arch. 508;

(b) Turner's case, 1 Mood. C. C. 47.

The nature of the possession required is explained by the interpretation clause of the act, section 21, by which, if the prisoner have them "in his personal custody or possession, or knowingly and wilfully have them in any dwelling-house or other building, lodging, apartment, field, or other place, open or enclosed, either for his own use or benefit or for that of another," it is sufficient. Possession by a confederate was held a possession by the prisoner, where it appeared that on the apprehension of the latter in company of the confederate, two bad shillings were found upon the prisoner, and sixteen on the confederate (a). As to the proof of guilty know

(a) Rogers' case, 2 Lew. C. C. 119, 297; 2 Mood. C. C. 85;

see also Gerish's case, 2 M. & Rob. 219.

OFFENCE.

COIN OF THE REALM-continued.

PUNISHMENT.

Transportation for LIFE or for any term not less than SEVEN years; or imprisonment for not more than FOUR years, with or without hard labour, and with or without solitary confinement; qualified by 1 Vict. c. 90, s. 5, ante, p. 3.

Transportation for any term not exceeding SEVEN years, or imprisonment for not more than Two years; with or without hard labour, and with or without solitary confinement; the latter qualified by 1 Vict. c. 90, s. 5 ante, p. 3.

Same as for last offence.

Imprisonment for not more than ONE year, with or without hard labour, and with or without solitary confinement; the latter qualified by 1 Vict. c. 90, s. 5, ante, p. 3.

Transportation for not more than SEVEN years.

(A) The offence of counterfeiting foreign coin of copper, or of any metal of less value than silver, not ordered by proclamation to be current here, is of so unlikely occurrence, that it is deemed sufficient to notice, that by 43 Geo. iii. c. 139, s. 3, such offence is to be deemed a misdemeanour and breach of the peace, and to be punished for the first offence with imprisonment not exceeding ONE year, and for the second offence with transportation for SEVEN years. The evidence will be similar to that directed supra, and the indictments also may be readily framed from the precedents referred to.