As to the purpose

As to the purpose

As to the purpose of the offender this is clearly defined by the law itself. The offender must have aimed at procuring or frustrating the doing by the public officer of an act appertaining to his office. Here lies the formal element of this crime. The law wants to guarantee the freedom of action of all public officers: but its special protection extends only to acts belonging to the public office entrusted to that officer. Consequently, if the act which the public officer was compelled to do or to omit does not fall within his powers or duties qua public officer, this crime does not arise.

The definition of “public officer” above quoted which the law itself gives for the purpose of this crime must be carefully noted. It limits the meaning of that expression to those persons who are truly depositaries of the public force or authority. In the Project of 1842, the words “public officer” in this context were defined as including not only the constituted authorities, civil and military, but also all such persons as exercise of any public office or function whatsoever under the authority of the Government. This definition appeared to Jameson “to admit a dangerous latitude of construction and to go considerably beyond the limits of this class of offences whether on grounds of principle or policy. The office of a professor in a Lyceum or University, he remarked, or of a schoolmaster, is a public office under the authority of the Government. Is a college row, or the insubordination of a few riotous youths to be punished with two or three years' imprisonment? As if it were the same as resistance to the officers of justice or violence against a judge? An appraiser or auctioneer, a notary public, a licensed surgeon may all be included under this sweeping denomination, and acts of the most venial kind, nay, it may be perfectly legal, might thus be tortured into crimes. This dangerous vagueness of the law must be corrected. It was obviously not intended by the learned Commissioners. Their model, the Neapolitan and French Codes, properly restrict the offence to the obstruction of officers of the public administrations, judicial or ministerial. It is so limited in the law of England” . With a view to remedying the defect, Jameson suggested an amendment of the definition, and Section 91 now reads as reworded by him.

“De tale definizione”, wrote the late lamented Prof. Randon, “si ricava che per pubblico ufficiale si hanno da intendere quelle persone che sono rivestite di pubbliche funzioni. Per bene intendere adunque il concetto di pubblico ufficiale giova formarsi il concetto