All which said forfeitures shall be half to the king, and half to 32 H. 8. c. 13. him that shall sue; and the justices in sessions, and stewards of Penalties. leets, may inquire thereof; and the stewards shall certify his presentments to the next sessions. VI. Putting scabbed horses on commons. By 32 H. 8. c. 13. § 9. no person shall have, or put to pasture, any horse, gelding, or mare, infected with scab or mange, in any common, or common fields; on pain of 10s., which offence shall be inquirable in the leet, as other common annoyances be, and the forfeitures shall be to the lord of the leet. Fo day of in the year of our Lord Or if the offence amount to burglary, then the warrant may FORASMUCH as A. I. of — in the county of yeoman, hath this day made information and complaint upon oath before me J. P. esquire, one of his majesty's justices of the peace for the said county, that in the night of yesterday the stable of him the said A. I. adjoining to the dwelling-house of him the said A. I. at aforesaid was feloniously and burglariously broke open, and one black mare the property of him the said A. I. feloniously and burglariously stolen, taken, and carried away from thence; and that he hath just cause to suspect and doth suspect that A. O. late of in the county aforesaid, labourer, the said felony and burglary did commit: These are therefore to command you forthwith to apprehend him the said A. O. and bring him before me to answer to the said information and complaint, and to be further dealt with according to law. Herein fail you not. Given under my hand and seal the in the year of our Lord day of Forms of Conviction prescribed by 26 G. 3. c. 71. C A. B. is convicted on the oath of A. W. inspector of houses and F. G. BE D. day of in the year E it remembered, that on this wilfully made, or caused to be made [as the case may be] a false the day and year above written. E. day of BE 13 G. 2. c. 19. No person to enter a horse unless it be his bwn property. Horse Races. [13 G. 2. c. 19.-24 G. 3. c. 31. BY the 13 G. 2. c. 19. whereas the great number of horse races for small plates or prizes have contributed very much to the encouragement of idleness, and impoverishment of many of the meaner sort of people, and the breed of strong and useful horses hath been much prejudiced thereby, it is enacted, that no person shall enter, start, or run any horse, mare, or gelding, for any prize, unless the same shall be bona fide his own property; on pain of forfeiting the same, or the value thereof. Nor shall any one person enter and start more than one horse, &c. for one and the same prize; on pain that every such horse, &c. (other than that which was first entered) shall be forfeited, or the value thereof. All sums of money paid for entrance shall go to the second best horse. No plate, prize, sum of money, or other thing, shall be run for or advertised or proclaimed to be run for by any horse, &c., unless such plate, &c. be of the real and intrinsic value of 501. or upwards: And if any person shall enter, start, or run, any horse, &c. for any such plate, &c. under the value of 501., or shall make, print, advertise, or publish any advertisement or notice of any such prize under the value of 50l., every such person so entering, starting, or running such horse, &c. shall forfeit 2001., and every maker, printer or publisher, advertiser or proclaimer of such advertiseinent, shall forfeit 1007. 13 G. 2. c. 19. more than No prize to be less than 5øl. And no person shall start or run any match for any sum of No match to be money or other thing, unless it be at Newmarket or Black Ham- for less than gol. bleton, or unless such sum or other thing be of the real and intrin sic value of 501. or upwards; on pain of 2001. By § 4. every race run for any prize, plate, or sum of money shall be begun and ended in the same way. In the case of Johnson v. Bann, 4 T. R. 1, it was decided that a wager on the event of a horse race for a smaller sum than 501. is illegal, all such races being expressly prohibited by stat. 13 G. 2. c. 19. § 2. In the case of Bidmead v. Gale, E. 9 G. 3. 4 Burr. 2432. 1 Blac. Rep. 671. S. C. it was agreed between plaintiff and defendant, that each should start his mare, and that if either should refuse, he should forfeit 251. to the other, but the plaintiff was to pay the defendant 51. before hand, as a consideration to induce him to make the match. The defendant afterwards refusing to run the match, the plaintiff brought an action against him for 25l. Perrot B., before whom the cause was tried, considered this as a match for 501.; and on a motion in arrest of judgment, the court of K. B. were of the same opinion. The aforesaid penalties to be recovered in the courts at Westminster, or at the assizes, and be disposed of, half to him that shall sue, and half to the poor of the parish where the offence shall be committed. Betting, losing, winning, cheating, and the like, at horse races, are within the statutes of gaming, for which see the title Saming, ante p. 582. For Duty on Horses, &c. See Tarts. Vol. V. A wager on a horse race under 501. A match for 251. a side, is How far protected by law. Burglary and felony.. Breaking open doors to appre hend offenders. House. See Burglary. Vol. I. MAN's home or habitation is so far protected by the law, that if A any person attempt to break open a house in the night time and is killed in such attempt, the slayer shall be acquitted and discharged. And so tender is the law in respect of the immunity of a man's house, that it will never suffer it to be violated with impunity. Hence in part arises the animadversion of the law upon eaves-droppers, nuisances, and incendiaries; and to this principle it must be assigned, that a man may assemble people together lawfully (at least if they do not exceed eleven) without danger of raising a riot, rout, or unlawful assembly, in order to protect and defend his house; which he is not permitted to do in any other case. 4 Blac. Com. 223. In the case of burglary, which is breaking and entering a dwellinghouse in the night time with intent to commit felony, it is a capital offence, although no felony be actually committed, for which see title Burglary, Vol. I. p. 393. Where the offence falls short of burglary, it is by several particular statutes made felony without benefit of clergy, to rob any dwelling-house in the day time, any person being therein; or stealing in the day-time to the value of 5s. in any dwelling-house or outhouse thereunto belonging, although no person be therein; or stealing to the value of 40s. in any such dwelling-house or outhouse, although the same be not broken open; or breaking a house in the day time, any person being therein and put in fear, although nothing be stolen; or privately stealing any goods to the value of 5s. in any shop, warehouse, or stable, although it be not broken open nor any person be therein. For all which cases see title Larceny. Vol. III. Concerning the breaking open the doors of an house in order to apprehend offenders, it is to be observed that the law never allows of such extremities but in cases of necessity; and therefore that no one can justify the breaking open another's door to make an arrest, unless he first signify to those in the house the cause of his coming, and request them to give him admittance. 2 Haw. c. 14. § 1. But where a person authorized to arrest another who is sheltered in an house, is denied quietly to enter into it, in order to take him, it seems generally to be agreed that he may justify breaking open Where the king the doors in any case where the king is party, as upon a warrant is party. from a justice of the peace to find sureties for the peace or good behaviour, or for the levying of a forfeiture upon a penal statute, which gives the whole or any part of such forfeiture to the king. 2 Haw. c. 14. § 2. In a civil suit; an officer cannot justify breaking open an outward door or window in order to execute process. If he do, he is a trespasser. But if he find the outer door open, and enter that way, or if the door be opened to him from within, and he enter, he may break open inward doors if he find that necessary, in order to execute his process. Fost. 319. Outward doors or, windows are such as are intended for the secu- 1 Hale 458. rity of the house against persons from without endeavouring to 1 East.P.C. 323. break in. These are protected by the privilege which has been 1 Russ. 747. before mentioned; but if the officer find the outward door open, or it be opened to him from within, he may then break open any inward door if he find that necessary to execute his process. Thus Lee v. Gansel, it has been held that an officer, having entered peaceably at the Cowp. I. outer door of a house was justified in breaking open the door of a lodger who occupied the first and second floors in order to arrest such lodger. But it seems, that if the party against whom the pro- Ratcliffe v. cess is issued be not within the house at the time, the officer can Burton, 3 B. & only justify breaking open inner doors in order to search for him, after having first demanded admittance; though in case the person or the goods of the defendant are contained in the house which the officer has entered, he may break open any door within the house without any further demand. If, however, the house is the house of a stranger and not of the defendant, the officer must be careful to ascertain that the person or the goods [according to the nature of the process] of the defendant are within, before he breaks open any inner door; as if they are not, he will not be justified. P. 223. Per Gibbs J. in ther. 4 Taunt. Cooke v. Birt, Leigh, 6 Taunt. In a case where an outward door was in part open, being divided into two parts, the lower latch of which was closed, and the upper Baker's case, part open, and the officer put his arm over the latch to open the 1 Leach, 112. part which was closed, upon which a struggle ensued between him 1 East's P. C. and a friend of the prisoners, and the officer prevailing, the prisoner shot at and killed him, it was held by the judges to be murder. (a) 323. This personal privilege of an individual, in respect to his outward Fost. 320. door or window, is confined also to cases where the breach of the 5 Rep. 93. house is made in order to arrest the occupier or any of his family, who have their domicile, their ordinary residence there for if a stranger whose ordinary residence is elsewhere upon a pursuit take refuge in the house of another, this is not the castle of such stranger, nor can he claim in it the benefit of sanctuary. But it should be 2 Hale, 103. observed, that in all cases where the doors of strangers are broken Fost. 321. open upon the supposition of the person sought being there, it I East's P. C. must be at the peril of finding him there, unless as it seems where 324. the parties act under the sanction of a magistrate's warrant; and Cooke v. Birt, an officer cannot even enter the house of a stranger, though the door 5 Taunt. 765. be open, for the purpose of taking the goods of a defendant, but at his peril whether the goods be found there or not; and if they be not found there, he is a trespasser. And it has been decided that a Johnson v. sheriff cannot justify breaking the inner doors of the house of a Leigh, 6 Taunt. stranger upon suspicion that a defendant is there, in order to search 246. for such defendant and arrest him on mesne process. For Duty of Houses. See Tares. Vol. V. See Gaol, Sect. XV. (a) It should be observed, that in this case there was proof of a previous resolution in the prisoner to resist the officer, whom he afterwards killed in attempting to attach his goods in his dwelling-house, in order to compel an appearance in the county court, The point reserved related to the legality of the attachment. |