Mr. Davies Gilbertrose to move for leave to bring in a bill for the more effectual Recovery of Penalties before Magistrates, and for facilitating the execution of warrants. The hon. gentleman said, that in cases of conviction before a magistrate for certain offences, without entering into the large question, whether it was fit to extend or narrow the summary jurisdiction of magistrates, the bill which he proposed would be confined to the remedying of two defects, which every one, he imagined, would be desirous of seeing removed. The first was, as to those fines which were directed by law to be levied by distress on the goods of the offender. As the law stood, when such a fine was imposed by the magistrate, he had no power to detain the offender till it was seen whether or no he had any goods on which distress might be made; so that in the case of vagrants and others who could remove themselves meanwhile out of the jurisdiction of the magistrate, it was sometimes impracticable to inflict any punishment in the cases which most deserved it. He proposed, therefore, to enable the magistrate, when oath was made that it was believed the offender had no goods and chattels, to detain him until inquiry was made. The second defect was one that had been recently discovered. It had been decided, however, by the courts 213 of law, that when a warrant was directed to a constable, A. B. by name, he might execute it any where within the jurisdiction of the magistrate, but that if it was directed, as most warrants were, to the constable of such a parish or township, not naming him, if, in the execution, he overstepped the boundary of his parish or township but an inch, he was liable to an action of false imprisonment. He proposed, therefore, to amend the law, so as to make it lawful to the constable of a parish described in a warrant, to execute it any where within the jurisdiction of the magistrate issuing it, as if he were named in the warrant.
§ Leave was given to bring in the bill.