APPENDIX TO CHRONICLE. 



311 



before the magistrates of the bo- 

 rough of Liverpool, at the quarter 

 sessions, and who was sentenced 

 to an imprisonment of three 

 months. A verdict was taken for 

 the prosecution at the assizes, 

 subject to the opinion of the court, 

 upon a special case. This spe- 

 cial case set out various facts — 

 that the magistrates for the bo- 

 rough of Liverpool had from 

 time iiiimemoiial holden quarter 

 sessions of the peace, that until 

 1S09 they had been in the prac- 

 tice of granting warrants for the 

 conmiitment of offenders to the 

 house of correction of the county 

 at Preston, and that this power 

 was first disputed in the year 

 1809 ; that the borough of Liver- 

 pool had immediately contributed 

 to the county rate for the main- 

 tenance and repair of the house of 

 correction ; and that Its propor- 

 tion, which in 1809 was only 801. 

 had since been augmented to 3001. 

 annually. The question was, 

 whether the justices of the quar- 

 ter sesions of Liverpool had au- 

 thority to commit persons found 

 guilty of petty larceny to the 

 house of correction of the county, 

 or whether they ought to be im- 

 prisoned in the gaol of the bo- 

 rough. 



Mr. Richardson, who was in 

 support of the verdict,, contend- 

 ed, that if any difficulty upon the 

 subject previously existed, it had 

 been removed by tiie stat. 53d 

 Geo. HI. c. 162. The question 

 had been argued in 1811, but the 

 court had not come to any deci- 

 sion, though two doubts were 

 mentioned by their Lordships : 

 First, Whether a court of session 

 couhl commit to a county house 

 of correction for the specific crime 

 of petty larceny ? Second, Whe- 



ther, supposing it had the power, 

 it could commit for any term less 

 than six months, and exceeding 

 two years. These questions both 

 originated in the terms of the act 

 6 Anne c. 6., which referred only 

 to clergiable larcenies, and point- 

 ed out a limited period of confine- 

 ment. It was followed by 6 

 Geo. I. c. 19., which authorised 

 commitment to a place of confine- 

 ment in the county for vagrancy 

 and " other small offeuce.s," 

 among which, he argued, petty 

 larceny ought to be included. 

 The 15 Geo. H. was the next ma- 

 terial statute : it gave power to 

 justices of liberties, and corpora- 

 tions contributing to the covmty 

 rates, to commit to country gaols 

 generally; and the 52 Geo. III. 

 c. 44. enabled them to commit of- 

 fenders, if they thought fit, to some 

 place of confinement where the 

 prisoners were kept to hard 

 labour. He relied, however, 

 upon the 53 Geo. HL c. 1G2, 

 which gave any judge or jus- 

 tices authority, for gi'and or 

 petty larceny, to commit prisoners 

 to any lawful or convenient place j 

 which words were to be restrain- 

 ed to the county in which the 

 crime was perpetrated. 



Mr. Williams, on the other 

 side, went through the various 

 acts of parliament, contending 

 that none of them gave the power 

 here claimed, which could not ex- 

 ist without some positive enact- 

 ment. The only act which gave 

 authority to commit to the house 

 of correction, eo nomine, was the 

 6 Anne c. 6, which, it was ad- 

 mitted, did not apply to the of- 

 fence of petty larceny : the 6 

 Geo. L c. 19, was equally out of 

 the question, because it related 



merely 



