ing fact, but a mere promise of defendant which he failed to perform. (a)

It was suggested that the conviction in this case might be sustained under the (then) Con. Stats. C., c. 99, s. 62, as the facts appearing on the trial would warrant a conviction of larceny, and consequently under that section the conviction ought to stand, but, per Richards, C. J. (b) "I am by no means certain that this section is not intended to apply to those cases only where the false pretences shewn on the trial amount to larceny, and when, but for this provision, the misdemeanor would be merged in the felony, and the prisoner might claim to be acquitted on that ground," and he added that without expressly deciding this point the charge of larceny could not be sustained, on the facts proved at the trial, and that the conviction, therefore, failed on both grounds,

A false representation by a married man,—whereby a single woman is induced to part with her money to him, -that he is a single man; that he will furnish a house with the money and marry the woman is sufficient to support a conviction for obtaining money under false pretence; for, although the two last statements are mere false promises to do something in future, and as such are insufficient, the pretence of being a single man is a pretence of an essential fact. (c) One false fact by which the money is obtained is sufficient to support the indictment, although it may be united with false promises which would not of themselves do so. (d)

Not only is it necessary that there be a false pretence of an existing fact, but the prosecutor must be induced to part with his property in consequence of the false pre

(a) Reg. v. Bertles, 13 U. C. C. P. 607.

(b) Ib. 610.

(c) Reg. v. Jennison, 9 U. C. L. J. 83; 6 L. T. Reps. N. S. 256; 31 L. J. (M. C.) 146.

(d) Ib.; Reg. v. Lee, 23, U. C. Q. B. 340, per Hagarty, J.

tence; it must be the motive operating in his mind and inducing him to part with the money. If the money is parted with from a desire to secure the conviction of the prisoner, it will not be an obtaining by false pretences. (a)

On an indictment for obtaining money by false pretences it appeared that G., the prisoner, and another were in a boat on the Bay, at Toronto, and the prosecutor, M., agreed with them to take him to meet a steamer, the prisoner's companion saying the charge would be 75c. at the steamer. The prosecutor, according to his own account, took out a $2 bill, saying he would get it changed. Prisoner said "I'll change it," and on the prosecutor asking him if he had change, said "I think I have," after which the prosecutor handed him the bill, and he shoved off with it. There was no evidence to shew what was the motive operating in the prosecutor's mind, inducing him to part with the money; it was, therefore, held a conviction for obtaining the money by false pretences could not be sustained. The Court considered that, although this was a false pretence of an existing fact, namely, that the prisoner had change, yet there was nothing to shew that the prosecutor was induced to part with his money by means of the false pretence, which they held necessary. (b)

Where the defendant and one C. represented to the prosecutor that they each owned a lot of land, and were men of means, which was false, and thereby induced the prosecutor to sell his horses to them, taking a note made by the defendant and endorsed by C., but, on the latter afterwards repudiating his liability on the note, the prosecutor went to the defendant the next day, and entered

(a) Reg. v. Mills. 29 L. T. Reps. 114, Dears. & B. 205; 26 L. J. (M. C.) 79; Reg. v. Gemmell, 26 U. C. Q. B. 315, per Hagarty, J. See also Reg. v. Dale, 7 C. & P. 352; Reg. v. Roebuck, Dears. & B. 24; 25 L. J. (M. C.) 101.

(5) Reg. v. Gemmell, 26 U. C. Q. B. 312.

into an agreement in writing with him, that the latter should pay $149 for the horses, or return them within a month :-Held, that this evidence, in conjunction with the writing, repelled the idea that the prosecutor parted with his property in consequence of any false pretence set up by defendant and concurred in by C. That the property was parted with under the agreement in writing, and the defendant could not be held liable when the prosecutor consented to the property passing from him, under quite a different arrangement from that out of which the false pretence arose. (a)

An indictment for obtaining from A. $1200 by false pretences, is not supported by proof of obtaining A.'s promissory note for that sum, which A. afterwards paid before maturity, inasmuch as it was an engagement or promise to pay at a future date, and, though remotely, the payment arose from the false pretence; yet immediately and directly it was made, because the prosecutor desired to retire his note, and did so before it became due, and, though the false pretences, on which the note was obtained, might be said to be continuing, they were not according to the evidence, made or renewed when the note was paid. (b)

The crime of obtaining goods by false pretences is complete, although, at the time when the prisoner made the pretence and obtained the goods, he intended to pay for them, when it should be in his power to do so. (c)

A person who, by falsely representing himself to be another person, induces another to enter into a contract with him for board and lodging, and is supplied, accordingly, with various articles of food, cannot be indicted for obtaining goods by false pretences, the obtaining of

(a) Reg. v. Connor, 14 U. C. C. P. 529.

(b) Reg. v Brady, 26 U. C. Q. B. 13.

(c) Reg. v. Naylor, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 4; 35 L. J. (M. C.) 61.

the goods being too remotely connected with the false representation. (a)

A conviction for obtaining a chattel by false pretences is good, although the chattel is not in existence at the time the pretence is made, provided the subsequent delivery of the chattel is directly connected with the false pretence, and whether or not there is such a direct connection is a question for the jury. (b) The test is the continuance of the pretence down to the time of delivery, and the direct connection between the pretence and delivery. (c)

The word" obtain " in the 32 & 33 Vic., c. 21, s. 93, does not mean obtain the loan of, but obtain the property in, any chattel, and, to constitute an obtaining by false pretences, it is essential that there should be an intention to deprive the owner wholly of the property in the chattel, and an obtaining by false pretences the use of a chattel for a limited time only, without an intention to deprive the owner wholly of the chattel, is not an obtaining by false pretences within the Statute. (d)

The term "valuable security," used in the Statute, means a valuable security to the person who parts with it on the false pretence, and the inducing a person to execute a mortgage on his property, it not appearing that the paper on which it was drawn belonged to the prosecutor, is, therefore, not obtaining from him a valuable security within the meaning of the Act. (e)

Upon an indictment for obtaining money by false pretences in change for a bank-note, it was proved that the note was one of a private bank, which had paid a divi

(a) Reg. v. Gardner, 2 U. C. L. J. 139; Dears. & B. 40; 25 L. J. (M. C.) 100. See, however, comments on this case in Reg. v. Martin, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 56, infra.

(b) Reg. v. Martin, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 56; 36 L. J. (M. C.) 20.

(e) Ib. 60, per Bovill, C. J.

(d) Reg. v. Kilham, L R. 1 C. C. R. 261; 39 L. J. (M. C.) 109. (e) Reg. v. Brady, 26 U. C. Q. B. 13.

dend of 2s. 4d. in the pound, and no longer existed : and that a neighbouring bank would not change it :—Held, that the above was not evidence from which it could be inferred that the note was of no value whatever, (a)

It is not necessary that the pretence should be in words; the conduct and acts of the party will be sufficient without any verbal representation.

An indictment alleged that the prisoner was in the employ of V., as a hewer of coals, and was entitled to 5d. for every tub filled by him, and that, by unlawfully placing a token upon a tub of coals, he falsely pretended that he had filled it, whereby he obtained 5d. The pris oner having been convicted-Held, that, as there was evidence the prisoner had acted the false pretence, the conviction was right. (b)

Where, on an indictment for attempting to obtain money by certain false pretences, the evidence shewed that the defendant had contracted to deliver loaves of a specified weight to any poor persons bringing a ticket from the relieving officer, and that the duty of the defendant was to return these tickets at the end of each week, together with a written statement of the number of loaves delivered by him to the paupers, whereupon he would be credited for that amount in the relieving officer's book, and the money would be paid at the time stipulated in the contract. The defendant, having delivered loaves of less than the specified weight, returned the tickets, and obtained credit in account for the loaves so delivered, but, before the time for the payment of the money arrived, the fraud was discovered :-Held that this was a case within the Statute against false pretences, because the defendant had been guilty of a fraudulent

(a) Reg. v. Evans, 6 U. C. L. J. 262; Bell, 187; 29 L. J. (M. C.) 20. (b) Reg. v. Hunter, 16 W. R. 343; 10 Cox. 642; and see Reg. v. Carter; Ib. 648.