§ 393. The Coventry Act-The modern English statute.— The act of 22, 23 Charles II, is commonly known as the Coventry Act. This name was given to it owing to the fact that it was occasioned by an assault on Sir John Coventry in the street, and slitting his nose by persons who lay in wait for him for that purpose, in revenge, as was supposed, for some obnoxious words uttered by him in parliament, in which he had reflected upon the profligacy of the king. This act provides "that if any person or persons shall, on purpose and of malice aforethought, by lying in wait, unlawfully cut out or disable the tongue, put out an eye, slit the nose, cut off a nose or lip, or cut off or disable any limb or member of any subject, with intention in so doing to maim or disfigure him in any of the manners before mentioned; that then the person or persons so offending, their counsellors, aiders, and abettors, knowing of and privy to the offense as aforesaid, shall be declared to be felons, and suffer death as in cases of felony without benefit of clergy." § 394. American statutes.—In most of the states statutes have been enacted extending the scope of mayhem as it existed at the ancient common law. Many of these statutes are modeled, in a large measure at least, upon the Coventry Act. They provide, very generally, that mayhem shall include disfiguring a person, by putting out his eye, biting off his ear, slitting his nose, 10 etc., as well as to injure him in such a way as to render him less able to fight or defend himself. Breaking the skull is generally considered not mayhem under our statutes.11 71 East P. C. 394. For a definition of Mayhem as understood in England today, see the Offenses Against the Person Act, 24 & 25 Vict., ch. 100. 8 Chick V. State, 7 Humph. (Tenn.) 161; State v. Ma Foo (Baker), 110 Mo. 7, 19 S. W. 222, 33 Am. St. 414. See also State v. Johnson, 58 Ohio St. 417, 51 N. E. 40, 65 Am. St. 769n. 9 State v. Skidmore, 87 N. Car. 509; Godfrey v. People, 63 N. Y. 207; People v. Golden, 62 Cal. 542. 10 State v. Mairs, 1 N. J. L. 518. 11 Foster v. People, 50 N. Y. 598, Derby's Cases 324. 8395. Injury to genital organs.-Castration constitutes mayhem, even at common law,12 and it has been held mayhem to commit this offense upon a slave.13 Malicious injury to the genital organs of a female was not mayhem at the old common law; but in some states it is made mayhem by statute.14 § 396. Means used to inflict the injury.-Under most statutes the means employed to inflict the injury is immaterial. Thus, it may constitute mayhem to put out another's eye by throwing corrosive acid into it;15 or to disable another's arm by shooting it;16 or to bite off another's nose, where the statute makes it mayhem to "cut off the nose of another";17 or to disable another by kicking him.18 It has been held, however, under an English statute, that biting off the end of a person's nose, or biting off a joint from a person's finger, is not mayhem; that to constitute mayhem the injury must be done by means of an instrument.19 § 397. Nature of the criminal intent involved-Presumption-Premeditation.-To constitute mayhem the injury must be inflicted wilfully and maliciously.20 A general criminal intent is not sufficient. Under some statutes a specific United States V. Scroggins, Hempst. (U. S.) 478. 124 Bl. Comm. 206. See also People v. Schoedde, 126 Cal. 373, 58 Pac. 859; State v. Sheldon, 54 Mont. 185, 169 Pac. 37; Henry v. State, 125 Ark. 237, 188 S. W. 539. 13 Worley v. State, 11 Humph. (Tenn.) 172; Eskridge v. State, 25 Ala. 30. 14 Kitchens v. State, 80 Ga. 810, 812, 7 S. E. 209. See also Moore v. State, 3 Pin. (Wis.) 373, 4 Chand. 168; Rex v. Cox, Russ. & R. 362. 15 State v. Ma Foo (Baker), 110 Mo. 7, 19 S. W. 222, 33 Am. St. 414. See also Lee v. State (Tex. Cr.), 148 S. W. 567, 40 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1132. 16 Baker v. State, 4 Ark. 56; 19 Rex v. Harris, 7 Car. & P. 446, 32 E. C. L. 700. 20 Molette v. State, 49 Ala. 18; Terrell v. State, 86 Tenn. 523, 8 S. W. 212; State v. Girkin, 23 N. Car. 121; State v. Ma Foo (Baker), 110 Mo. 7, 19 S. W. 222, 33 Am. St. 414; State v. Bloedow, 45 Wis. 279; State v. Cody, 18 Ore. 506, 23 Pac. 891, 24 Pac. 895. § 393. The Coventry Act-The modern English statute.The act of 22, 23 Charles II, is commonly known as the Coventry Act. This name was given to it owing to the fact that it was occasioned by an assault on Sir John Coventry in the street, and slitting his nose by persons who lay in wait for him for that purpose, in revenge, as was supposed, for some obnoxious words uttered by him in parliament, in which he had reflected upon the profligacy of the king. This act provides "that if any person or persons shall, on purpose and of malice aforethought, by lying in wait, unlawfully cut out or disable the tongue, put out an eye, slit the nose, cut off a nose or lip, or cut off or disable any limb or member of any subject, with intention in so doing to maim or disfigure him in any of the manners before mentioned; that then the person or persons so offending, their counsellors, aiders, and abettors, knowing of and privy to the offense as aforesaid, shall be declared to be felons, and suffer death as in cases of felony without benefit of clergy. § 394. American statutes.-In most of the states statutes have been enacted extending the scope of mayhem as it existed at the ancient common law. Many of these statutes are modeled, in a large measure at least, upon the Coventry Act. They provide, very generally, that mayhem shall include disfiguring a person, by putting out his eye, biting off his ear, slitting his nose, 10 etc., as well as to injure him in such a way as to render him less able to fight or defend himself. Breaking the skull is generally considered not mayhem under our statutes." 11 71 East P. C. 394. For a definition of Mayhem as understood in England today, see the Offenses Against the Person Act, 24 & 25 Vict., ch. 100. Humph. 8 Chick V. State, 7 (Tenn.) 161; State v. Ma Foo (Baker), 110 Mo. 7, 19 S. W. 222, 33 Am. St. 414. See also State v. Johnson, 58 Ohio St. 417, 51 N. E. 40, 65 Am. St. 769n. 9 State v. Skidmore, 87 N. Car. 509; Godfrey v. People, 63 N. Y. 207; People v. Golden, 62 Cal. 542. 10 State v. Mairs, 1 N. J. L. 518. 11 Foster v. People, 50 N. Y. 598, Derby's Cases 324. § 395. Injury to genital organs.-Castration constitutes mayhem, even at common law, 12 and it has been held mayhem to commit this offense upon a slave.1 13 Malicious injury to the genital organs of a female was not mayhem at the old common law; but in some states it is made mayhem by statute.14 § 396. Means used to inflict the injury.-Under most statutes the means employed to inflict the injury is immaterial. Thus, it may constitute mayhem to put out another's eye by throwing corrosive acid into it; 15 or to disable another's arm by shooting it;16 or to bite off another's nose, where the statute makes it mayhem to "cut off the nose of another";17 or to disable another by kicking him.18 It has been held, however, under an English statute, that biting off the end of a person's nose, or biting off a joint from a person's finger, is not mayhem; that to constitute mayhem the injury must be done by means of an instrument.19 § 397. Nature of the criminal intent involved-Presumption-Premeditation.-To constitute mayhem the injury must be inflicted wilfully and maliciously.20 A general criminal intent is not sufficient. Under some statutes a specific United States V. Scroggins, Hempst. (U. S.) 478. 124 Bl. Comm. 206. See also People v. Schoedde, 126 Cal. 373, 58 Pac. 859; State v. Sheldon, 54 Mont. 185, 169 Pac. 37; Henry v. State, 125 Ark. 237, 188 S. W. 539. 13 Worley v. State, 11 Humph. (Tenn.) 172; Eskridge v. State, 25 Ala. 30. 14 Kitchens v. State, 80 Ga. 810, 812, 7 S. E. 209. See also Moore v. State, 3 Pin. (Wis.) 373, 4 Chand. 168; Rex v. Cox, Russ. & R. 362. 15 State v. Ma Foo (Baker), 110 Mo. 7, 19 S. W. 222, 33 Am. St. 414. See also Lee v. State (Tex. Cr.), 148 S. W. 567, 40 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1132. 16 Baker v. State, 4 Ark. 56; 19 Rex v. Harris, 7 Car. & P. 446, 32 E. C. L. 700. 20 Molette v. State, 49 Ala. 18; Terrell v. State, 86 Tenn. 523, 8 S. W. 212; State v. Girkin, 23 N. Car. 121; State v. Ma Foo (Baker), 110 Mo. 7, 19 S. W. 222, 33 Am. St. 414; State v. Bloedow, 45 Wis. 279; State v. Cody, 18 Ore. 506, 23 Pac. 891, 24 Pac. 895. |