On coroners / a paper by E. M. Harwood.

  • Harwood, E.B.
Date:
[1885]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: On coroners / a paper by E. M. Harwood. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    8/24 (page 4)
    witness, and compel his attendance (under 6th and 7th William TV., cap. 89), if he require an opinion of a medical man ; but this is not often necessary, nor is it incumbent upon a jury to ascertain in many cases the precise and actual complaint or injury which caused the death, provided it be satisfactorily shown that the death was due to some natural or unavoid- able cause. The authority of the Coroner was judicial and ministerial ; judicial where one came to a violent death, and to take and enter appeals of murder, to pronounce judgment iipon outla-\vries, to enquire of lands and goods, escapes of murderers, treasure trove, deodands, &c. These have now been abolished by difl'erent Acts of Parliament, except as to deaths. The ministerial power was, and still is, where the Coroner executes the King's writs on exception to the sheriff, as by his being a iJarty to a suit, kin to either of the parties, or on default of the sheriff. The judicial authority of Coroners also formerly extended to arsons, rape, prison-breach and housebreaking, and it was so laid down by Hawkins in his Pleas of the Crown, who contended that their power in those cases, and which was conferred on them by the express words of the statute, De officio Coronatoris, 4th Edward I., was never expressly taken from them. The question, however, has been disposed of by Regina i>. Herford (6 Jurist N.S., 750), in which an attempt was made to establish the authority of Coroners to hold inquisitions in case of fire. Cockbum, C. J., in delivering judgment, said : We have the authority of three of the greatest ^^Tite^s who have expounded and illustrated the law of England, for saying that the office of Coroner, with reference to felonies, is limited to cases of homicide on the view of the body. Lord Coke and Lord Hale, in clear and distinct terms, lay down that as law, and it is adopted by Comyns in his D'ujest withovit the expression of any doubt on his part. These three authorities are sufficient, in the absence of statutory enactments to the contrary, to establish any proposition of law. Jer\ns, in his work on Coroners, says that where a custom prevails, as in Northumberland, a Coroner may enquire of all felonies, citing 35th Henry VI., pi. 27. I think it is a debatable question as to whether it was advisable to ' limit the authority of Coroners as to cases of arson, when we hear of so many incendiary fires, and others of a very suspicious character, occurring. At any rate, it is certain that before this case was decided, it was a com- mon practice to hold inquisitions in cases of arson ; for the affidavit of the Coroner of Manchester, against whom a prohibition was sought against proceeding further in an enquiry he had partially held as to a fire, stated that inquests had been held in similar cases at York and Pontefract, at Rotherham in 1848, at Lincoln and Reading, at Nottingham in 1857, at Bedford, at Flint in 1858, at Denbigh, Anglesea and Exeter, and in London by Mr. Payne, and in Middlesex by Mr. Humphries, and that all these inquisitions had been held, not by virtue of a custom, but under the Com- mon Law. Cockburn, C. J., however, in his judgment, said, As to the importance to the public that Coroners should have this jurisdiction, there are two opinions. I express none. Some of the Coroners in modern times have exercised the jurisdiction and some have not. If they are to exercise it in this or other felonies, after the disuse of it for five or six centuries, let it be given to them by the Legislature, and not revived by this Court.