The Treason Act 1351 (25 Edw. 3 Stat. 5. c. 2) is an Act of the Parliament of England wherethrough, according to William Blackstone, common law treason offences were enumerated and no new offences were, by statute, created.[1] It is one of the earliest English statutes still in force, although it has been very significantly amended.[2][3] It was extended to Ireland in 1495[4] and to Scotland in 1708.[5] The Act was passed at Westminster in the Hilary term of 1351, in the 25th year of the reign of Edward III and was entitled "A Declaration which Offences shall be adjudged Treason". It was passed to clarify precisely what was treason, as the definition under common law had been expanded rapidly by the courts until its scope was controversially wide. The Act was last used to prosecute William Joyce in 1945 for collaborating with Germany in World War II.
The Act is still in force in the United Kingdom. It is also still in force in some former British colonies, including New South Wales.[6][7] Like other laws of the time, it was written in Norman French.
they have adopted the very words of the Statute of Treason of Edward the Third; and thus by implication, in order to cut off at once all chances of arbitrary constructions, they have recognized the well-settled interpretation of these phrases in the administration of criminal law, which has prevailed for ages.[8]
Origin
Until 1351 treason was defined by the common law. The king's judges gradually expanded the scope of treason under the pretext that any "assortment of royal power", by which was meant doing anything which only the king (or his officers) could legally do, was considered treason – even hunting deer in the king's forests.[9]: 307 When in 1348, Sir John Gerberge of Royston was convicted of treason for falsely imprisoning William de Boletisford and taking his horse, until he paid him £90[10] (approximately equivalent to £70,000 in 2021), the barons compelled Edward III to agree to an Act of Parliament to restrict the definition of treason to definite limits.[9]: 307
Joseph Story wrote: "This statute has ever since remained the pole star of English jurisprudence upon this subject."[11] Although some of the treason statutes enacted between 1352 and 1640 lost their importance over time, notably those of Henry VIII regarding his supremacy, 25 Edw 3 was the law in force cited by judges during the reign of Charles I.[12] When Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford was charged with High Treason his attorney argued "the statute ever makes the Treason", insisting Strafford had not committed Treason by the statute 25 Edw. 3. Despite an accusation of common law treason,[13] since Treason by statute could not be proven, the House of Commons passed a Bill of Attainder against Stafford, and the earl was executed, over the objections of the king.[14]
Content
The Act distinguished two varieties of treason: high treason and petty treason (or petit treason), the first being disloyalty to the Sovereign, and the second being disloyalty to a subject. The practical distinction was the consequence of being convicted: for a high treason, the penalty was death by hanging, drawing and quartering (for a man) or drawing and burning (for a woman), and the traitor's property would escheat to the Crown; in the case of a petty treason the penalty was drawing and hanging without quartering, or burning without drawing; and property escheated only to the traitor's immediate lord.
A person was guilty of high treason under the Act if they:
"compassed or imagined" (i.e. planned; the original Norman French is "fait compasser ou ymaginer") the death of the king, his wife or his eldest son and heir (following the coming into force of the Succession to the Crown Act 2013 on 26 March 2015,[16] this has effect as if the reference were to the eldest child and heir);[17]
violated the king's companion, the king's eldest daughter if she was unmarried or the wife of the king's eldest son and heir (following the coming into force of the Succession to the Crown Act 2013, this has effect as if the reference were to the eldest son only if he is also the heir[17]);
levied war against the king in his realm;
adhered to the king's enemies in his realm, giving them aid and comfort in his realm or elsewhere;
The penalty for counterfeiting coins was the same as for petty treason.[24] The offence had previously been called petty treason, before the Act elevated it to high treason.[25]
Under the Act petty treason was the murder of one's lawful superior: that is if a servant killed his master or his master's wife, a wife killed her husband or a clergyman killed his prelate. This offence was abolished in 1828.
The Act originally envisaged that further forms of treason would arise that would not be covered by the Act, so it legislated for this possibility. The words from "et pr ceo q plusurs auts cases de semblable treson" onwards have been translated as:
And because that many other like Cases of Treason may happen in Time to come, which a Man cannot think nor declare at this present Time; it is accorded, That if any other Case, supposed Treason, which is not above specified, doth happen before any Justices, the Justices shall tarry without any going to Judgement of the Treason till the Cause be shewed and declared before the King and his Parliament, whether it ought to be judged Treason or other Felony.
The Act in Scotland
Following the union of England and Scotland by the Acts of Union 1707, Scotland continued to have its own treason laws until the Treason Act 1708 abolished Scottish treason law and extended English treason law to Scotland. This Act also made it treason to counterfeit the Great Seal of Scotland,[26] and to kill the Scottish Lords of Session and Lords of Justiciary[27] (in addition to forging the British – formerly English – seal, and killing English judges). However while in England and Ireland forgery of the seal of Great Britain ceased to be treason under the Forgery Act 1861, this Act did not apply to Scotland. Also, forging the Scottish seal is still treason in Scotland,[28] but has not been treason in England or Ireland since 1861.[29]
Although the first kind of treason is described as "compassing", the offence does not consist of purely thinking. A subsequent clause which requires that an "overt act" must also be proven has been held by judges to apply to all kinds of treason.[9]: 308
Adhering to "enemies" does not include adhering to rebels or pirates.[9]: 308
During the trial of Roger Casement, who in 1916 was accused of collaborating with Germany during World War I, the defence argued that the Act applied only to activities carried out on British soil, while Casement had committed the acts of collaboration outside Britain. However, closer reading of the originally unpunctuated medieval document allowed for a broader interpretation, leading to the accusation by his supporters that Casement was "hanged by a comma". The court decided that a comma should be read in the text, crucially widening the sense so that "in the realm or elsewhere" meant where acts were done and not just where the "King's enemies" might be.[30][31]
Repeals
The clauses about forgery and counterfeiting were repealed in 1830 and 1832. The clause beginning "et pr ceo q plusurs" was repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act 1948. The clause beginning "Et si per cas" (clarifying that robbery and kidnapping were not treason) was repealed by the Criminal Law Act 1967 and the Criminal Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1967.
^The citation of this Act by this short title was authorised by section 1 of, and Schedule 1 to, the Short Titles Act 1896. Due to the repeal of those provisions, it is now authorised by section 19(2) of the Interpretation Act 1978.
^These words are printed against this Act in the second column of Schedule 1 to the Short Titles Act 1896, which is headed "Title".
^Blackstone, William; Stewart, James (1839). The Rights of Persons, According to the Text of Blackstone: Incorporating the Alterations Down to the Present Time. p. 77. Statutes also are either declaratory of the common law, or remedial of some defects therein. Declaratory, where the old custom of the kingdom is almost fallen into disuse, or become disputable; in which case the parliament has thought proper, in perpetuum rei testimonium, and for avoiding all doubts and difficulties, to declare what common law is and ever hath been. Thus the statute of treasons, 25 Edw. III cap. 2 doth not make any new species of treasons; but only, for the benefit of the subject, declares and enumerates those several kinds of offence, which before were treason at common law.
^Hast, Adele (1972). "State Treason Trials During the Puritan Revolution, 1640-1660". The Historical Journal. 15 (1). doi:10.1017/S0018246X00001837.
^"endeavoring to subvert the fundamental laws and government of the realm of England and Ireland; and instead thereof to introduce a tyrannical government against law is Treason by the common law; that Treasons at the common law are not taken away by the statute of 25 Edw. 3"
