Ill 



LAI'SK. 



LARCKXY. 



HI 



ad the Rer. Mr. UitohsO. on having the subject submitted to them, 

 reported that the brilliancy of the diamond might be increased by a 

 oarefal rebutting. Messrs. Garrard were entrusted with the work ; 

 1 the service* of M. Coster of Amsterdam, the m.wt highly- 

 itu-r in Europe; Messrs. Maudalay and Field made a 



,^_e. and oonstraeted a revolving apparatua, expreasly 



far the purpose; and the late Duke of Wellington cut the first facet, 

 a* an amateur who took great interest in the matter, a few months 

 before his death in 1858. The proem* of wholly re-shaping the 

 dhsaond occupied several minis, on account of the extreme precautions 

 necessary in dealing with a gem of such enormous value. Elaborate 

 as the arrangements were, the lapidary-work was essentially the same 

 in thi* as m other instance* the friction of a rapidly revolving 

 metal wheel moistened with diamond-powder and water. 



The practical application* of the art will be found illustrated in such 

 articles a* CAMEO; GLASS MAM-FACTI-RE, Gtatt-ayrariiiy ; INT.V.I io 

 and also in some of the mineralogical articles in the NAT. MI-T. Div. 



I.AP8K. rBnmct; LBOACT.] 



LARCKXY (l*lrod*i*m, Latin ; fairm French) is the legal term for 



Thai crime was formerly divided into grand and petty larceny, 

 okbed by the value of the property taken at one and the same 

 It was grand larceny where the value was more than twelve 



MM* ; petty larceny where the value did not exceed that amount : a 

 distinction referable to time* in which twelve pence was more than 

 equivalent to a* many (hillings of the preaent currency. At common 

 Uw the punishment of petty larceny wan whipping or imprisonment ; 

 that of grand larceny wa* death, unions the offender were in n situation 

 to ckim benefit of clergy, of which mode of escaping punishment 

 neither women, nor men who were unable to read, or who hod been 

 twice married, or who had married widows, or who, not being actually 

 ii bad before taken the benefit of clergy, could avail them 



eetve*. [BnsnT or CLEHOT.] 



By 7 & 8 George IV., c. 28, the distinction between grand and petty 

 larceny wa* >^flvl : and larcenies are now distinguished as simple or 

 compound, aometime* called mixed, larceuies. 



I. Simple larceny at common law is committed by wrongfully 

 taking, against the will of the owner, and carrying away the goods of 

 arMrrt*-. with the fraudulent and felonious intent wholly to deprive 

 him of hi* property therein. 



First, there must be a wrongful taking against the will of the owner, 

 which taking may be either actual or constructive. Actual taking 

 again** the will of the owner i* where goods are taken directly cither 

 out of the poeseeaion of their absolute owner, or out of the possession 

 of a bailee, or temporary owner. Constructive taking agaiiutt the will 

 of the owner is either where the possession of goods is obtained from 

 the owner with a preconceived intention on the part of the person to 

 teal them, in which cue the original taking is felonious, or where the 

 owner, without diverting himself of the legal possession of the goods, 

 deliver* them into the hand* of a person who afterwards converts them 

 to hi* own use or to *otne other purpose inconsistent with the con- 

 tinuance of the owner's property therein, in which case such conversion 

 oooatitutea the felonious taking. The doctrine of constructive taking 

 ha* given rise to many nice distinctions. Generally speaking, there can 

 be no larceny where the poeeeesion is voluntarily parted with. Tims, 

 if I lend another my bone for a certain period, and he sells the horse, 

 it i* no larceny, but a civil wrong, for which the only remedy is by 

 Bat where the possession of a hone is obtained on the pre- 



tence only of borrowing, and with the intent to keep or sell him, 

 such parting with the poseeeiion by the owner will not diiniiii-h tin- 

 criminal responsibility of the taker. Larceny is not committed when 

 the possession is obtained in the first instance bona fide without any 

 fraudulent intention. Thus where A save* good* from a house on 

 firs, and takes them home, having at the time an honest intention of 

 } east ring them for the owner, although the next morning A c ..... < Is 

 the goods and denies having had the possession of them, it is a breach 

 of trust, and no felony ; and when goods or money are lost, the con- 

 verting of them by the finder to his own use does not amount to 

 larceny, unles*. at the time of conversion, he knows, or has the mean* 

 of knowing, who is the real owner. Where however the absolute or 

 temporary owner bail* or deliver* goods to another, but retain* the 

 beneficial possession of them, a conversion of the good* by such Kiilcc 

 to his own nas will be larceny. A (errant entrusted with his master's 

 goods, a abepherd with sheep, *c., who embezzles them, is guilty of 

 broray st common law, because in such case* the possession of the 

 errant, Ac , in in law the possession of the master; but a clerk, or 

 errant, receiving money or good* from a third person, and tnisappro- 

 priating the same, U not guilty of larceny, because the goods, ate. 

 never were in the possession of the master. If the owner is, by 

 whatever means, induced willingly to part with his /.n./m-iy in the 

 foods, and not merely with the possession of them, the offence doe* 

 not amount to larceny; as where possession of good* i* obtained 

 under colour of a purchase actually completed, although with an 

 intention of running off without paying fur them, lint ],. 

 owner of a hone on sale allow* his paces to be tried by a person who 

 mounts and rides off with the borne, it is larceny, a* the owner n. \ . ; 

 parted with to* property, nor indeed with the possession, for good* in 

 the |nssenm of UM> owner are in Uw considered M in his possession, 



though used by another. Where A goes to I3's ahup in the name of C, 

 and ask* for a hat which C has ordered, and it is delivered to A, who 

 convert* it to his own use, it is no larceny, because by such delivery 

 9 parted with the property in the hat. Hut if upon A'* asking for the 

 wt, B had delivered two hats for C to choose from, and A had con- 

 verted both or either to hi* own use, the offence would have been 

 arceny, because B parted with the possession only, and not with the 

 iroperty , a* the right of pro|>erty would have remained in B until C bad 

 node his election, and the bare possession was obtained fraudulently, 

 [n eases of thi* description where the property i* parted with, the 

 offender is guilty of the statutable misdemeanor of obtaining money 

 by false pretences. (7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 28, s. 53.) 



Various other statute* have been passed to prevent the defeat of 

 ustice arising from the application of some of these subtle distinctions 

 n particular case*, as the misappropriations and frauds by bankers, 

 iroken, attorneys, and other agents, and also by trustees (7 * 8 

 Geo. IV. c. 29, s. 49; 5 & 6 Viet a 29; 20 & 21 Viet. c. 64); and 

 the embezzlement by clerks and servant*, (748 Geo. IV. 

 s.49). 



Secondly, there must not only be a taking, but also a carrying away, 

 technically called osportution, to constitute which the goods stolen 

 must be actually removed from the position which they before 

 occupied. Entire removal, to however slight a distance, is a sufficient 

 asportation ; as if a thief be detected whilst leading a horse out of a 

 Seld. So where A goes to an inn, and says to the ostler, " Bring out 

 my horse," pointing to B's hone as his own ; whereupon the horse is 

 led out ; but before A can mount, B comes up. So where a guest, 

 with intent to steal goods out of an inn, removes them down stairs ; or 

 a thief, intending to steal plate, takes it out of a chest and lays it upon 

 the floor, or intending to steal a cask from a waggon, removes it from 

 one end of the waggon to the other. But though there must be an 

 actual removal of every part from its previous position, it is not 

 necessary that each portion of the article stolen should be ret 

 from the space which was previously occupied by other portions of 

 that article. Thus where A in raising a bag from the bottom of a 

 coach-boot removes each part of the bag from the space which that 

 specific part occupied, though the whole bag be not removed from 

 every portion of the space which the bag filled in that boot, the 

 importation is complete. So where A has drawn a book about an inch 

 above the top of B's pocket, B puts up his hand, and A drops the book 

 and it falls back into B's pocket, it is larceny. So where a package is, 

 for the purpose of cutting it open and getting at the content?, merely 

 set on end in the place where it had lain, and the thief i 

 1 -ef, i] i- he has effected his purpose, the larceny is complete. But where 

 a severance is necessary before the thief can have the entire control 

 ovi T the article, the exportation is not complete until such severance is 

 effected ; as where goods in a shop are fastened by a string to the 

 counter, or a puree i entangled with keys in the owner's pocket. 



Thirdly, the thing taken must be goods ; and at common law larceny 

 could be committed only in respect of personal goods. Things real, or 

 things annexed to the soil, technically called the reality, or which are 

 connected with the soil and freehold, and which are therefore in legal 

 language, said to savour of the realty, were not subjects of larceny at 

 common law. This rule was observed so strictly, that larceny could 

 not be committed by stealing title-deeds, nor by stealing growing corn, 

 grass, trees, 4c., unless severed from the realty l>y the thief or by the 

 owner, or by a third person, and taken at another time. 



The subject matter of larceny at common law must also have been 

 of things in pottation, as distinguished from things (technically called 

 choses) in action, that is, things which arc of no intrinsic value, but 

 are capable of being made available by action or demand, aa deeds, 

 bonds, bills, notes, and other securities for money, &c. 



The objection founded upon the connection of the thing stolen with 

 the realty is removed by several provisions of 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 29. 

 The stealing of written or printed | :i; liments, beinj.- evidc no 



of title to real estate, is made n misdemeanor p'ini.-hable b\ 

 tion for seven years, or by line or imprisonment, or Ixith. To steal or 

 cut, break, root up, or destroy or damage, with intent to steal, any 

 tree, sapling, or shrub, or any underwood growing in a park, pleasure- 

 ground, garden, orchard, or avenue, or in ground adjoining to a 

 dwelling-house (if the value, or the injury done, exceed one pound), is 

 a felony, and punishable as for simple larceny : so if the trees, &c., In- 

 growing elsewhere, and the value or amount of injury excce 

 pounds. To steal or break, root up, destroy or damage, with intent to 

 St.-:,! the whole or ]irt of any tree, sapling, or shrub, or any under- 

 wood, wheresoever growing, the value of the articles stolen or the 

 injury done being to the amount of a shilling, is punisha' 

 summary conviction by a justice, and for a second offence by imprison- 

 ment and hard labour not exceeding twelve months ; and if any 

 person so twice convicted afterwards commit any of the said off 

 such offender is to be deemed guilty of felony, and is liable to be 

 punished in the same manner as in the case of simple larceny. To 

 r destroy or ;damage with intent to steal, any plant, root, fiuit, 

 or vegetable production, growing in any garden, on-hanl. n 



hothouse, greenhouse, or conservatory, is punishable on sum- 

 mary convicti"ti by Imprisonment for six months; or by fort 

 over and above the value of the articles stolen or the amount of the 

 injury clone, of such sum not exceeding twenty pounds as to the justices 



