EMBRACERY (from the O. Fr. embraseour, an embracer, i.e. one who excites or instigates, literally one who sets on

See also:

• FIRE (in O. Eng. f j'r; the word is common to West German languages, cf. Dutch vuur, Ger. Feuer; the pre-Teutonic form is seen in Sanskrit pu, pavaka, and Gr. irup; the ultimate origin is usually taken to be a root meaning to purify, cf. Lat. purus)

fire, from embraser, to kindle a fire; " embrace," i.e. to hold or clasp in the arms, is from O. Fr. em-bracer,

See also:

• LAT

Lat.'in and bracchia, arms)  , in law, the attempting to influence a juryman corruptly to give his verdict in favour of one side or the other in a trial, by promise, persuasions, en-treaties, money, entertainments and the like . It is an offence both at common law and by statute, and punishable by fine and imprisonment . As a statutory offence it dates back to 136o . The offence is complete, FIG. i.—Fragment of a linen robe, found in the tomb of Tethmosis (Thothmes) IV. at Thebes, whether any verdict has been given and now in the Cairo Museum . The cartouche has the name of Amenophis (Amenhotep) II. or not, and whether the verdict is in (c 15th century B.C.) . accordance with the weight of evidence or otherwise . The person making the attempt, and any juryman who consents, are equally punishable . The false verdict of a jury, whether occasioned by embracery or otherwise, was formerly considered criminal, and jurors were severely punished, being proceeded against by writ of attaint (q.v.) . The Juries Act of 1825, in abolishing writs of attaint, made a special exemption as regards jurors guilty of embracery (§ 61) . Prosecution for the offence has been so extremely rare that when a case occurred in 1891 (R. v . Baker, 113, Cent . Crim .

Ct . Sess . Pap . 374) it was stated that no precedent could be found for the

indictment . The defendant was fined f,200, afterwards reduced to loo .