By s. 3, the district situated within the limits of the jurisdiction thereinbefore established is to be deemed one county for all purposes of venue, local description, trial, judgment, and execution not therein specially provided for; and in all indictments and presentments the venue laid in the margin shall be "Central Criminal Court, to wit," and all offences and material facts are to be laid to have been ccmmitted and averred to have taken place "within the jurisdiction of the said court;" and see also 9 & 10 Vict. c. 24.

Where an indictment for misdemeanor was preferred at the Central Criminal Court, and the marginal venue was " Central Criminal Court, to wit," and in the body of the indictment the facts were stated to have taken place "at the parish of St. Mary, Lambeth, Surrey, within the jurisdiction of the said court," and the indictment was removed by certiorari, it was held that the trial must be at the assizes for Surrey. R. v. Connop, 4 A. & E. 942, 31 E. C. L. See also, as to the venue of the Central Criminal Court, R. v. Gregory, 1 Cox, C. C. 198; 14 L. J., M. C. 82.

An indictment for misdemeanor found at the Central Criminal Court had in the margin the words, "Central Criminal Court," and stated that M. A., "late of the parish of St. Stephen, Coleman-street, in the city of London, and within the jurisdiction of the said court, laborer," intending, etc., on etc., "at the parish aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction," etc., unlawfully, etc.; alleging the offence without further statement of venue. The indictment was removed by certiorari and tried in London, and the defendant was convicted. On motion in arrest of judgment; semble, that the venue assigned to the material fact appeared sufficiently to be in the city of London; and *it was held, assuming this to be otherwise, that the defect was [*260 only want of a proper or perfect venue, and was cured by the 7 Geo. 4, c. 64, s. 20, for that the indictment showed jurisdiction in the court at nisi prius to try the case in London. R. v. Albert, 5 Q. B. 37, 48 E. C. L. An indictment was laid in the Central Criminal Court, the venue in the margin being, "Central Criminal Court, to wit," and the material facts being laid only as having taken place within the jurisdiction of the said court." The defendant having removed it by certiorari, was tried at nisi prius in Middlesex and found guilty. The Court of Queen's Bench arrested the judgment, the description of place not being made sufficient by the 4 & 5 Will. 4, c.' 36, s. 3, in cases not tried at the Central Criminal Court, and the defect not being cured by the 7 Geo. 4, c. 64, s. 20 (repealed), the Nisi Prius Court not appearing "by the indictment," " to have had jurisdiction over the offence." The court refused after verdict to enter a suggestion for a trial in Middlesex, nunc pro tunc. And semble, such an application would not be granted at any period. An indictment preferred in the Central Criminal Court should, with a view to the possibility of its removal, contain, besides the statutory venue, a venue of the county where the offence really took place. And if that has not been done, it should be made a condition of the removal by certiorari that the defendant consent to the insertion. R. v. Stowell, 5 Q.

And it is very doubtful indeed whether the costs of a prosecutor, not bound over to prosecute, can be granted; R. v. Jeyes, 3 A. & E. 416, 30 E. C. L.; from which it would seem they cannot; and see R. v. Butterwick, supra, p. 241. But if the prosecutor's name be included in a subpoena, they may. R. v. Sheering, 7 C. & P. 440, 32 E. C. L. In the case of misdemeanors not provided for by statute, if the defendant submits to a verdict on an understanding that he shall not be brought up for judgment, the prosecutor is not, without a special agreement, entitled to costs. R. v. Rawson, 9 B. & C. 598, 17 E. C. L. As to the payment of costs on indictments removed into the Court of Queen's Bench by certiorari, see Corner's Cr. Pr.

As to costs upon postponement of trial, see ante, p. 241.

Costs of the accused By the 30 & 31 Vict. c. 35, s. 2, provision is made for the payment by the prosecutor of the costs of the accused in the case of certain vexatious indictments where he is acquitted. And by ss. 3, 5, witnesses for the accused may be allowed their expenses whenever they give material evidence in his favor (except as to character) in the opinion of the justice, and have been bound over by him. See the statute in the Appendix. As to the expenses at Winter Assizes, where the prisoner is tried in a different county to that in which he was apprehended, see Orders in Council, *23d October, 1876. Weekly Notes, L. R., Nov. 4, 1876, passed under 39 & 40 Vict. c. 57.

*245]

Mode of payment by the treasurer of the county, etc. By the 7 Geo. 4, c. 64, s. 24, "Every order for payment to any prosecutor or other person as aforesaid shall be forthwith made out and delivered by the proper officer of the court unto such prosecutor, or other person, upon being paid for the same the sum of one shilling for the prosecutor, and sixpence for each other person, and no more, and except in the cases thereinafter provided for, shall be made upon the treasurer of the county, riding or division in which the offence shall have been committed, or shall be supposed to have been committed, who is thereby authorized and required, upon the sight of every such order, forthwith to pay to the person named therein, or to any one duly authorized to receive the same on his or her behalf, the money in such order mentioned, and shall be allowed the same in his accounts."

The Central Criminal Court Act, 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 36, enacts (s. 12) that "it shall be lawful for any two of the said justices and judges of oyer and terminer and of gaol delivery, to order and direct the costs and expenses of prosecutors and witnesses, in all cases where prosecutors and witnesses may be by law entitled thereto, to be paid by the treasurer of the county in which the offence of any person prosecuted would have been tried but for this act; and that every such treasurer or some known agent shall attend the said justices and judges of oyer and terminer and gaol delivery during the sitting of the court to pay all such orders."

And with respect to places which do not contribute to the payment of any county rate, or which have no fund applicable to similar purposes, it is enacted by the 7 Geo. 4, c. 64, s. 25, "that all sums directed to be paid by virtue of this act, in respect of felonies and of such misdemeanors as aforesaid, committed or supposed to have been committed in such liberties, franchises, cities, towns, and places, shall be paid out of the rate in the nature of a county rate, or out of any fund applicable to similar purposes where there is such a rate or fund, by the treasurer or other officer having the collection or disbursement of such rate or fund; and where there is no such rate or fund in such liberties, franchises, cities, towns, and parishes, shall be paid out of the rate or fund for the relief of the poor of the parish, township, district, or precinct therein, where the offence was committed or supposed to have been committed, by the overseers or other officers having the collection or disbursement of such last-mentioned rate or fund, and the order of the court shall in every such case be directed to such treasurer, overseers, or other officers respectively, instead of the treasurer of the county, riding, or division, as the case may require."

By 45 & 46 Vict. c. 50, s. 169, municipal corporations of a borough having a separate court of quarter sessions shall be liable to pay the costs and expenses attending the prosecution of any felony or of any offence whereof the costs are payable as in the case of a felony when committed or supposed to have been committed in the borough, and the order of the court for the payment thereof shall be directed to the treasurer of the borough."

Rewards for the apprehension of offenders. By the 7 Geo. 4, c. 64, *s. 28, "Where any person shall appear to any court of oyer and terminer, gaol delivery, superior criminal court of a [*246 county palatine, or court of great sessions, to have been active in or towards the apprehension of any person charged with murder, or with feloniously and maliciously shooting at, or attempting to discharge any kind of loaded firearms at any other person, or with stabbing, cutting, or poisoning, or with administering anything to procure the miscarriage of any woman, or with rape, or with burglary, or felonious housebreaking, or with robbery on the person, or with arson, or with horse-stealing, bullock-stealing, or sheep-stealing, or with being accessory before the fact to any of the offences aforesaid, or with receiving any stolen property, knowing the same to have been stolen, every such court is hereby authorized and empowered, in any of the cases aforesaid, to order the sheriff of the county in which the offence shall have been committed to pay to the person or persons who shall appear to the court to have been active in or towards the apprehension of any person charged with any of the said offences, such sum or sums of money as to the court shall seem reasonable, and sufficient to compensate such person or persons for his, her, or their expenses, exertions, and loss of time, in or towards such apprehension; and where any person shall appear to any court of sessions of the

By private persons at common law. At common law all private persons are justified, without a warrant, in apprehending and detaining until they can be carried before a magistrate all persons found committing or attempting to commit a felony. R. v. Hunt, 1 Moo. C. C.

93.1

But in cases of suspicion of felony, and in cases of offences less than felony, a private person has at common law no right to apprehend offenders. Fost. 318. Whether or not a private person may arrest a person who stands indicted for felony, does not appear to be well settled. Lord Hale inclines to the opinion that the protection does not extend to a private person in such case, because a person innocent may be indicted, and because there is another way of bringing him to answer, viz., process of capias to the sheriff, who is a known responsible officer. 2 Hale, P. C. 84. The reasoning of Mr. East, however, is rather in favor of the protection. It may be urged, he observes, that if the fact of the indictment found against the party be known to those who endeavor to arrest him, in order to bring him to justice, it cannot be truly said, that they act upon their own private suspicion or authority, and therefore they ought to have equal protection with the ordinary ministers of the law. At any rate, it is a good cause of arrest by private persons if it may be made without the death of the felon. (Dalton, c. 170, s. 5.) And if the fact of the prisoner's guilt be necessary for their complete justification, the bill of indictment found by the grand jury would (he conceives) for that purpose, be prima facie evidence of the fact, till the contrary should be proved. 1 East, P. C. 300.

Where a breach of the peace is actually being committed any private person may interfere to prevent it, even though no felony be committed or attempted, after proper warning, and calling upon the parties to desist. Fost. 272, 311. And as they may take all necessary measures to end the breach and to prevent its recurrence, they may apprehend and detain any persons taking part in the disturbance. Whether or no, when all danger of any further breach is over, no felony having been committed, they are bound to set at liberty the persons in their custody, or whether they may take them before a magistrate, or give them into the custody of a peace officer, does not appear to have been discussed.

'Kennedy v. State, 107 Ind. 144.

"If any man shall happen to be killed in endeavoring to apprehend any person who shall be charged with any of the offences hereinbefore last mentioned [in sect. 28], it shall be lawful for the court, before whom such person shall be tried, to order the sheriff of the county to pay to the widow of the man so killed, in case he shall have been married, or to his child or children, in case his wife shall be dead, or to his father or mother in case he shall have left neither wife nor child, such sum of money as to the court in its discretion shall seem meet; and the order for payment of such money shall be made out and delivered by the proper officer of the court unto the party entitled to receive the same, or unto some one on his or her behalf, to be named in such order by the direction of the court, and every such order shall be paid by and repaid to the sheriff in the manner hereinbefore mentioned " [in the 29th section].