was libelled as a breach of the peace, the accused, PROFANITY. The punishment of profanity would probably not PUNISHMENT. be extended beyond fine or imprisonment. GAMBLING AND BETTING OFFENCES. HOUSE. The statutes against gambling-houses do not apply KEEPING GAMING to Scotland (2). But it is an offence at common law to open and keep open a common gaming-house, where games of chance are commonly played for money, and for profit to the keeper of the house (3). The punishment is arbitrary. Persons using premises for betting purposes or per- BETTING-HOUSES, mitting others so to use their premises, may be imprisoned for a period not exceeding six months, with or without labour (4). PUNISHMENT. Such persons or those Receiving money acting for them, receiving money or other valuable thing as deposits on bets on horse-races, and other sports, or giving on receipt of such money or valuable thing an acknowledgment note, security, or draft, entitling the person receiving it to payment of money or any valuable thing on a betting contingency, may be imprisoned for a period not exceeding three months, with or without hard labour (5) for bets. betting-house Placarding or advertising premises for betting Advertising or to induce persons to come to a house for betting purposes or inviting persons to a house for such purposes, is an offence, punishable by imprison BETTING-HOUSES. ment not exceeding two months, with or without hard labour (1). Advertising betting advice. Sharpers. Sending, exhibiting, or publishing any letter, circular, telegram, placard, handbill, card, or advertisement, making it appear that a person will on application give information or advice as to a bet similar to those above referred to, or to induce people to apply at a betting-house for information or advice on such a matter, or inviting to take part in such, is punishable by imprisonment not exceeding two months, with or without hard labour (2). Chain-droppers, thimblers, loaded dice-players, cardsharpers, and similar persons found in any public place, or grounds open to the public, or public conveyance, with implements in their possession for their business, or who in any such place or conveyance exhibit such implements to induce others to engage in games, or by any such fraudulent device, cozen and cheat, or attempt to cozen and cheat, are liable to two months' imprisonment, and to be ordered to restore any property got by the offence, and on failure to restore, to two months' additional imprisonment (3). 1 Act 16 and 17 Vict. c. 119, § 7. 3 Act 32 and 33 3 referring to Act 16 and 17 Vict., CORRUPT CONDUCT BY PUBLIC OFFICIALS. It is scarcely necessary to say anything on the CORRUPTION. crimes of bribe-taking or wilful oppression by judges Judges. or magistrates, such offences being now only matter of history (1). Inferior officials, such as clerks, fiscals, Inferior macers, &c., are punishable for taking bribes (2), or for taking advantage of their office to act oppressively under colour of law.* officials. The punishment is arbitrary, being generally im- PUNISHMENT. prisonment or fine, or both, to which it is competent to add a sentence of deprivation of office and of infamy (3). PERJURY. false. PERJURY. explicit. Perjury is the judicial affirmation of falsehood upon REQUISITES IN oath, or affirmation equivalent to oath. First, the falsehood must be explicit and irreconcilable with truth (4). Mere omission cannot found a charge of perjury (5). There must be either explicit denial of Falsehood what is true, or explicit assertion of what is The prosecutor must assert that the accused certain things, knowing them to be false, and ing an opposite series of facts was the truth. He cannot found on two contradictory depositions, and simply 1457, c. 76.-1469, c. 26.-1540, c. 104. 1 Hume i. 407, 408, and case of Fife there. 2 Hume i. 408. 3 Hume i. 407, referring to certain old statutes 1579, c. 93.-1424, c. 45.-1427, c. 107.-1449, c. 17. swore Prosecutor must know- the true facts. 4 Hume i. 366, and case of M'Killop there.-Alison i. 465, 466. -More ii. 408, 409. 5 Hume i. 367.-Alison i. 466. * Vide 174. aver and prove REQUISITES IN PERJURY. Pretended nonrecollection may infer perjury. Must be wilful. No perjury by oath of opinion, origin. assert that one or other of them was false. He must Second, the falsehood must be absolutely affirmed (2). If the accused's statement, to the best of his recollection, have been in reference to matters about which his memory may be doubtful, he cannot be convicted. of perjury. But, on the other hand, a person may commit perjury by saying, "I don't recollect," "I "can't say," when the fact is so recent that he must remember it, or when it can be proved that he did remember it (3). Third, the statement must be wilful and corrupt (4). There is no perjury where the oath is to opinion or unless of corrupt belief only, as in the case of oaths of calumny, or oaths in law-burrows (5). But there may be cases where the corrupt origin of a pretended opinion may infer perjury. If a person depone to the justice of a debt on a bill forged by himself, to obtain a meditatione fuga warrant, or if a professional man take a bribe to give false evidence on matters of opinion, it cannot be doubted that these facts, if they could be proved, would make a deposition to matters of opinion infer perjury (6). The oath must be formal. And formally administered. Fourth, the perjury must be upon a formal oath, or affirmation recognised as equivalent thereto (7). No irregular asseverations will suffice. Nor is it perjury unless the oath have been administered in the proper legal form applicable to the proceeding in which the Written deposi falsehood is committed (8). If the forms require the sary where pro- oath to be in writing, it must be taken down and authenticated duly; but in a proceeding in which tions only neces cedure requires such. 1 Hume i. 372.-Alison i. 476. gomery there.-Alison i. 467. 4 Hume i. 368.-Alison i. 467, 463. 5 Hume i. 368, 369.-Alison i. 468. More ii. 410. 6 Hume i. 375.-Alison i. 468, 469. More ii. 410. 7 Hume i. 369, 370. 8 Hume i. 371.-Alison i. 474, PERJURY. what is sworn does not require to be written, the false REQUISITES IN swearer may still be tried for perjury (1). qualified person Fifth, the oath or affirmation must be emitted be- Oath before fore a person duly qualified to receive it, and in a civil in proper judicial or criminal judicial proceeding (2). Oaths before proceeding. ecclesiastical courts, and affidavits before magistrates, do not warrant prosecution for perjury (3). But, with these exceptions, every oath taken in accordance with and by appointment of law, and having the requirements specified in the previous and following paragraphs, will found a charge of perjury (4). And it is not a good answer to the charge that there was some informality in the proceedings of a technical kind (5). But the person before whom the oath is alleged to have been taken must have been truly present. Where it appeared that the Sheriff had not being present been present during the whole of the examination of time. a bankrupt, and had been absent during the reading over of a considerable portion of the deposition, it was left to the jury to say whether the oath was taken with sufficient attention to the safeguards required by 1 Felix Monaghan, H.C., Jan. 29th and March 15th 1844 : 2 Broun 82 and 131.-Margaret Gallocher or Boyle and others, Glasgow, Oct. 6th 1859; 3 Irv. 440 (Indictment). -Rob. Maxwell, H.C., Jan. 31st 1865; 5 Irv. 65 and 37 S. J. 211. 2 Hume i. 370.-Alison i. 470, 471.-Nathan M'Lachlan, H.C., July 17th 1837; 1 Swin. 528 and Bell's Notes 94.-John Barr, H.C., Jan. 23d 1839; 2 Swin. 282 and Bell's Notes 94. 3 Hume i. 370, 371.-Alison i. 471. More ii. 409.-See also John Speirs and others, H. C., March 25th 1836; 1 Swin. 163 and Bell's Notes 95.-Professor More (ii. 409) inclines to the opinion that where an ecclesiastical court is investigating a purely civil matter, false swear- 4 Hume i. 372, 373, and case of 5 Will. Richardson, Dumfries, Sept. 7th or 8th 1872; 2 Couper 321 and 45 S. J. 3 and 10 S. L. R. 15.-Couper gives 8th Sept., S. J. and S. L. R. give 7th Sept as the date. Magistrate not during whole |