02.04.2013 Views

Odger's English Common Law

Odger's English Common Law

Odger's English Common Law

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

ROUT AND RIOT AT COMMON LAW. 163<br />

same as that for an unlawful assembly, except that by virtue<br />

of the Hard Labour Act, 1822, 1<br />

rioters may be sentenced to<br />

imprisonment with hard labour.<br />

"A riot is a disturbance of the peace by three persons at<br />

the least, who, with intent to help one another against any<br />

person who opposes them in the execution of some enterprise<br />

or other, actually execute that enterprise in a violent and<br />

turbulent manner to the alarm of the people." 2<br />

It is not<br />

necessary to constitute this crime that personal violence should<br />

have been committed, or that a house should have been pulled<br />

down or a fence demolished, provided some act has been done<br />

towards the accomplishment of the common purpose and that<br />

by that act reasonable persons have been put in terror. It is<br />

sufficient if one person of ordinary firmness and courage be<br />

in fact terrified. 3<br />

In a well-known case it was held "that there are* five<br />

necessary elements of a riot :<br />

—<br />

(i.) number of persons, three at least<br />

(ii.) common purpose ;<br />

(iii.) execution or inception of the common purpose ;<br />

(iv.) an intent to help one another by force if necessary<br />

against any person who may oppose them in the execution<br />

of their common purpose<br />

;<br />

(v.) force or violence not merely used in demolishing,<br />

but displayed in such a manner as to alarm at least one<br />

person of reasonable firmness and courage." 4<br />

In that case a number of youths were congregated together at nine<br />

o'clock at night in a road in a low neighbourhood, shouting and using<br />

rougli language. In this road was a house with a yard. Some of the<br />

youths stood with their backs against the wall of this yard, and others ran<br />

against them or against the wall with their hands extended. After they<br />

had been doing this for a quarter of an hour, about twelve feet of the wall<br />

collapsed. As soon as it fell the caretaker of the house came out, and the<br />

youths at once ran away in different directions. Such conduct was held<br />

not to constitute a riot ; for there was no evidence of any intention on<br />

their part to help one another by force, if necessary, against any person<br />

1 3 Geo. IV., c. 114.<br />

s Per Charles, J., in R. v. Cunninghame Graham (1888), 16 Cox, at p. 427.<br />

> It. v. Langford (1842), Car. & M. 602.<br />

* Per cur. in Field v. Receiver of Metropolitan Police, [1907] 2 K. B. at p. 860.<br />

11—2<br />

;

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!