CHRISTIE AND ANOTHER
V.
LEACHINSKY
VISCOUNT SIMON(reading the lead judgment) My Lords, I agree with Scott L.J. that the main issue raised is of great importance and requires careful examination, for it concerns the liberty of the subject and the extent of the powers of the police to arrest without warrant. There can be no doubt that the Liverpool Corporation Act, 1921, did not authorize this arrest at all. The Act does not use the term “unlawful possession,” though this is the customary phrase used in connexion with an infringement of the Act. The phrase is, in fact, somewhat misleading. The following provisions are included in part II. of the Act: “507 (1.) Any person brought before any court of summary jurisdiction charged with having in his possession anything which there is reasonable ground to believe or suspect has been stolen and (sic.) who does not account to the satisfaction of the court for his possession of the same shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding five pounds or in the discretion of the court to i…