Odger's English Common Law

370 FALSE PRETENCES AND OTHER FRAUD.
the prisoner has obtained possession of the goods or money,
the prosecution will fail, for it is essential to prove that the
goods or money were handed over on the faith of the false
pretence charged. Thus, where the prisoner gave a false
name and address, but did so after the goods had been
delivered to him, it was held that he could not be convicted
of obtaining the goods by means of the false name and
address, which were the only pretences set out in the
indictment. 1
Again, the prisoner cannot be convicted of the full offence
of obtaining goods by false pretences, but only of an attempt
to do so, where the prosecutor parts with the goods not in
consequence of the false pretence, but from motives of charity
or for some other reason independent of the false pretence
charged. 2
Lastly, the prosecutor must be induced by the prisoner's
false pretences to part with some chattel, money or valuable
security. If, in spite of the prisoner's fraudulent repre-
sentations, the prosecutor does not part with anything, the
prisoner can be convicted only of an attempt. The prose-
cutor must intend to part not only with possession of the
goods, but with his whole property or other interest in them.
This is the main distinction between larceny and false pre-
tences. In larceny the owner of the thing stolen has no inten-
tion of parting with his property. In false pretences, on the
other hand, the owner has the intention of divesting himself
of his property; he parts with his goods voluntarily, being
induced to do so by the prisoner's fraudulent statements.
It does not matter whether in law the property in them
actually passes or not ; it is enough if the owner intends to
part with his whole interest in the goods and expects never
to have them returned to him.
" If a person through the fraudulent representations of another delivers
him a chattel intending to pass the property in it, the latter cannot be
indicted for larceny, but only for obtaining the chattel under false
pretences." 3 " On the authorities it is settled law that if the owner of
1 B. v. Jones (1884), 16 Cox, 476.
' JR. v. Light (1915), 84 L. J. K. B. 866.
3 Per ParVe. B., in Pouell v. Boyland (1851), 6 Exch. 70 ; and see R. v. Adams
(1812), R. & R. 225.