Can a Corpse be Stolen ?

Auckland Star, Volume XXIV, Issue 250, 21 October 1893, Page 2 (Supplement)

Can a Corpse be Stolen ?

A Victorian Case,

Ik the Court of General Sessions, Melbourne, before Judge Chomley and a jury of 12, John Mullins was placed on his trial for having broken into a house at Warrandyte and taken away the dead body of John Chatty, a Chinaman.

Mr Walsh, Q.C., appeared for the Crown and Mr Field Barretb for bhe defence. The case for bhe Crown was that on September 15th a Chinaman named John Chatty died ab Warrandyte, and the local constable was placed in charge of the dead body. On September 16th a number of Europeans were in the house, and some beer drinking was going on. Prisoner was there amongsb bhe resb rather labe in bhe evening. The consbabla had handed over bhe custody of tha body to another man. Ab the request of the prisoner he was shown the dead body. He bhen wenb away. Two men were lefb in bhe cottage, and between 10.30 and 11 ab nighb they lay down and wenb to sleep in a room adjoining the room in which was the body of the Chinaman. The latter room had a door opening into a little street ab bhe back. Ab about midnight a hammering was heard like bhab which would bo made by a person breaking inbo a house, and shortly after 12 prieoner was seen carrying away the body of tbe Chinaman. The body was found early nexb morning under a culverb aboub 60 yards away from bhe house where ib had been lying. The offence was one ab common law as being againsb public decency. A dead body under ordinary circumsbances could nob be made bho subjecb of larceny, and hence the pnsoner was charged with having broken into a house and taken away a dead body. Ab bhe conclusion of bhe Crown Prosecubor 8 opening address, Mr Barrett asked for his Honor's direction as to whether any offence had been disclosed. So far as he had been able to find on reference to the law books, all the cases at common law which were referred to had been cases in which bodies had been interred and were removed from cemeteries or parish churches. • He could not find any case which was on all fours with this. If it were an offence to remove a dead body under any circumstances, ib would be equally an offence bo touch a dead body or to remove it from one room to another without tho permission of the proper authorities. It did not seem that there was any proper custodian of this body, from whom anyone could obtain permission to remove it. Ib was said bhab some consbable had placed somebody else in charge, bub where was bhe aubhoriby ;of the constable to do thab? Mr Walsh said that the case was a very uncommor. one, and ib was impossible bo geb one precisely on all fours wibh it. At the same time there was no doubb bhab taking a body was a, misdemeanour ab common law. In ' Russell on Crimes' ib was laid down thab ib was an offence againsb decency bo bake a person's dead body with intention to steal it or dispose of it. Ib waa equally an offence against decency to take or carry off a dead body and throw ib on a road. It this caße ib was taken oub of a house, and the house had been broken into. In East's Pleas of tha Crown ib was stated thab bhere could be no properby in a dead corpse, and bhorefore stealing was no felony, bub a high misdemeanour. ~ Hia Honor said before he could decide whebher ib was a misdemeanour ab common law he would have to hear the evidence in debail. , ~.j.„j The accused was afterwards acquitbea.