Odger's English Common Law

268 HOMICIDE OR CAUSING DEATH.
negligent, or in part contributed to his" own death ; for in this consists a
great distinction between civil and criminal proceedings."
A. determined to commit suicide and therefore bought poison from a
chemist. The chemist asked no questions as to A.'s object in purchasing
the poison. A. took the poison and died. The chemist has not caused
A.'s death.
If a maidservant, who has free control of her actions and is able to take
care of herself, remains in a service where she is starved and badly lodged,
the mistress will not be criminally responsible if death ensues ; it would be
the result of the servant's own folly in remaining there. 1
But it is not always necessary that death should be caused
by an act. Neglect of a legal duty, which the prisoner owes
to the deceased, may be sufficient to render him criminally
responsible for the death. Whenever the law imposes a duty
tending to the preservation of life, or where such a duty has
been undertaken by contract or conduct, omission to perform
the acts required by that duty will be held a cause of death,
if death ensues. It lies on the prosecution to prove that the
death was the result of the omission. 2
Thus, a father is bound to provide food and clothing for his child, and
his omission to do so, or his omission to notify the proper authorities if he
is unable to do -so, will be held a cause of death, if the child dies from
neglect. 3 And where the prisoner persuaded an infirm old woman to live
in his house and failed to provide her with food and fire (which she was
incapable of providing for herself), he was held to have caused her death,
when she died from neglect. 4
So, where any one undertakes the charge of
an imbecile or idiot incapable of looking after himself. 5 A signalman, who
negligently omits to change the points with the result that a fatal collision
ensues, will have caused death ; though if no one be killed, he will
have committed no crime at common law in having merely endangered
human life. 6 The duty must be a legal one. A man commits no crime,
if he abstains from rescuing another from drowning, even though he might
have done so without risk or serious inconvenience "to himself ; he merely
disregards a moral duty. So, if a man omits to supply food or medical
assistance when he is under no legal duty to do so. 7
But, apart from such cases of neglect of duty, it would
seem that the law requires that the death must be caused
i Per Erie, C. J., in B. v. Smith (1885), L. & C. at p. 625.
2 B. v. Morby (1882), 8 Q. B. D. 571.
» H. v. Senior, [1899] 1 Q. B. 283 ; Children Act, 1908, s. 12, post, p. 310.
* B. v. Marriott (1838), 8 C. & P. 425 ; B. v. Instm, [1893] 1 Q. B. 450.
6 B. v. Nicholls (1874), 13 Cox, 75.
6 The offence is, however, covered by statute : see 3 & 4 Vict. c. 97, s. 13, and
24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 34.
1 B. v. Shepherd (1862), 31 L. J. M. C. 102.