The Queen v Mary Miller

JurisdictionIreland
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeal
Judgment Date18 Jan 1853

Crim. Appeal.

THE QUEEN
and
MARY MILLER.

Regina v. Oddy 2 Denn. Cr. Cas. 264; S. C., 20 Law Jour., Magis. Cas., 198.

The Queen v. Hill 1 Denn. Cr. Cas. 453; S. C., 3 Cox, Cr. Cas., 533.

The queen v. Wiley 2 Denn. Cr. Cas. 37; S. C., 4 Cox, Cr. Cas., 412.

Regina v. ParrinUNK 2 M. & R. 346.

144 COMMON LAW REPORTS. H. T. 1854. Cris. Appeal. M. T. 1853. Nov. 22. THE QUEEN v. MARY MILLER. H. T. 1854. Jan. 18. on the trial of Tam was a case reserved for the opinion of this Court, by the an indictment Assistant-Barrister of the East Riding of the county of Cork. with stealing The case stated that Ellen Connors and Mary Miller were tried goods, and M. M. with at the last General Court of Quarter Sessions for the East Riding of having receiv ed them, the county of Cork, holden at Fermoy, on a charge, in one count of the knowing them to have been indictment, with stealing, and in another with receiving, five pieces stolen, the evidence given of cotton, knowing them to have been stolen. From the evidence was, that E. C. came into the it appeared that the prosecutor and his shopman missed at various shop of M. M. behind the times, between the 1st of January and 22nd of July, a number of counter, where roduced pieces of printed cotton ; and they identified the five pieces p M. M. then was; that M. as part of the missing goods. None of these had been sold by the M. called her servant, and prosecutors, because if sold, the labels on them would have been directed her to go and pawn removed, and the folds altered. Ellen Connors used frequently to the goods, E. C. then visit the shop of the prosecutors, sometimes three or four times a holding the goods in her day, with a basket and shawl, and on some occasions got patterns ; hand, and give the proceeds sometimes bought a yard, sometimes a few yards, but never bought to E. C. ; that a whole piece. The pieces produced at the trial were proved to the servant took the goods from E. C., have been pawned in Fermoy, in the months of April and June in went and the present year, and three of, these pieces were pawned by Ellen pawned them, and handed Connors ; another piece of pink cotton bad been pawned by a per the proceeds to E. C. in her son named Margaret Geary, who was examined by the Crown, and mistress' shop, and in the pre- proved, that in June she was in the employment of Mary Miller, sence of the mistress.- who kept a public-house in Fermoy ; that whilst there, she got the Held, that such evidence piece from Ellen Connors, who had come into the shop, and went sustained the indictment behind the counter where Mary Miller was, who called Geary into against M.M. ; the receiving of the goods by her servant, and by her direction, being equivalent to the actual receipt by herself, and that possession of the goods need not be a manual possession. * Coram LEFROY, C. J., MONAHAN, C. J., TORRENS, J., BILL, J., and JACKSON, J. COMMON LAW REPORTS. 145 the shop; and Ellen Connors then having the piece of pink cotton H. T. 1854. in her hand, her mistress desired the witness to pawn the piece of CriAppeal...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT