Arrive

To come to a particular place; to reach a particular or certain place.

See cases in Leake, Contr., and in Abb. Diet.; Thompson v. U. S., 1 Brock. 411, Fed. Cas. No. 13,985; Meigs v. Ins. Co., 2 Cush. (Mass.) 439; 8 B. & C. 119; U. S. v. Open Boat, 5 Mas. 132, Fed. Cas. No. 15,967; Harrison v. Vose, 9 How. (U. S.) 372, 13 L. Ed. 179. ARR0GATI0N.

The adoption of a person sui juris.

1 Brown, Civ. Law 119; Dig. 1. 7. 5; Inst. 1. 11. 3.

ARSER IN LE MAIN (Fr. Burning in the hand). The punishment inflicted on those who received the benefit of clergy. Termes de la Ley. ARSON (Lat. ardere, to burn). The ma- 220; Curran's Case, 7 Gratt (Va.) 619; Ritcbey v. State, 7 Blaekf. (Ind.) 108; Mary v. State, 24 Ark. 44, 81 Am. Dec. 60; 1 Leach, Cr. Cas. 218; People v. Fisher, 51 Cal. 319; Young v. Coin., 12 Bush (Ky.) 243; but it is not arson to demolish the house first and then burn the material; Mulligan v. State, 25 Tex. App. 199, 7 S. W. 664, 8 Am. St. Rep. 435. In some states by statute there are degrees of arson. The house, or some part of it, however small, must be consumed by fire; 9 C. & P. 45; Com. v. Van Schaack, 16 Mass. 105; State v. Mitchell, 27 N. C. 350.

— Where the house is simply scorched or smoked and the fire is not communicated to the building; Woolsey v. State, 30 Tex. App. 340, 17 S. W. 546;

— or where parts of a house already detached are burned; Mulligan v. State, 25 Tex. App. 199, 7 S. W. 0(54, 8 Am. St Rep. 435; it is not arson; nor where a house was blown up by dynamite and splinters were torn from, the roof and fired by the explosion; Landers v. State, 39 Tex. Cr. R. 671, 47 S. W. 1008; 12 Ilarv. L. Rev. 433. The question of burning is one of fact for the jury; 1 Mood. Cr. Cas. 39S; Com. v. Betton, 5 Cush. (Mass.) 427. It must be another's house; 1 Bish. Cr. Law § 3S9; but alitor under the N. H. statute; State v. Hurd, 51 N. H. 176; but if a man set fire to his own house with a view to burn his neighbor's, and does so, it is, at least, a great misdemeanor; 1 Hale, PI. Cr. >r>s; W. Jones 351; Bloss v. Tobey, 2 Pick. (Mass.) 325; Erskine v. Com., 8 Gratt. (Va.) 624. See People v. Henderson, 1 Park. Cr. Cas. (N. Y.) 560; People v. Van Blarcum, 2 Johns. (N. Y.) 105; Ritcbey v. State, 7 Blaekf. (Ind.) 168; and under statutes in some states a tenant who sets fire to a house occupied by himself is guilty of the crime; State v. Moore, 61 Mo. 270; People v. Simpson, 50 Cal. 304. If one sets fire to a schoolhouse with the intention of burning an adjoining dwelling, which actually happens, he is guilty of arson; Combs v. Com., 93 Ky. 313, 20 S. W. 221. The house of another must be burned, to constitute arson at common law; but the term "house" comprehends not only the very mansion-house, but all out-houses which are parcel thereof, though not contiguous to it, nor under the same roof, such as the barn, stable, cow-house, sheep-house, dairy-house, mill-house, and the like, being within the curtilage, or same common fence, as the mansion itself; 4 C. & P. 245; State v. Mc Gowan, 20 Conn. 245, 52 Am. Dec. 336; People v. Butler. 16 Johns. (N. Y.) 203; State v. Sandy, 25 N. C. 570; Chapman v. Com., 5 Whart (Pa.) 127, 34 Am. Dec. 565; Stevens v. Com., 4 Leigh (Va.) 683; Com. v. Posey, 4 Call (Va.) 109. 2 Am. Dec. 560; State v. Roper, 88 N. C. 050; Quinn v. People, 71 N. the burning of a barn, though no part of the mansion, if it has corn or hay in it, is ( at common law; l Bale, P. P. 245; Sampson v. Com., 5 (Pa.) 385; contra, Creed v. P< ople, 81 in. ' Massachusetts, the statute i i the dwellini strictly; Com. v. i Cush. (Mass.) 17s. Where a p: fire to his cell, In order to effe t anhold, not arson; People v. Cotteral, Is. Johns. (N. Y.) 115; but sec l Whart Cr. L. ed.) § 829; Luke v. State, 49 Ala. 30, 20 Am. Rep. 269; Willis v. state, 32 Tex. Cr. R. 534, 25 S. W. 123. The burning must have been both malicious and wilful; 1 Bishop, Cr. L. § 259; Maxwell v. State, 68 Miss. 339, 8 South. 540. And generally, if the act is proved to have been done wilfully, it may be inferred to have been done maliciously, unless the contrary is proved; 1 Russ. & R. Cr. Cas. 26. On a charge of arson for setting fire to a mill, an intent to injure or defraud the mill-owners will be conclusively inferred from the wilful act of firing; 2 B. & C. 264. But this doctrine can only arise where the act is wilful, and therefore, if the lire appears to be the result of accident, the party who is the cause of it will not be liable; Jenkins v. State. 53 Ga. 33, 31 Am. Rep. 255; Mc Donald v. People, 47 111. 533. In some states by statute a wife may be guilty of arson by burning a husband's property; Emig v. Daum, 1 Ind. App. 140, 27 N. E. 322. It is a felony at common law, and originally punishable with death; Co. 3d Inst. ;<;; 2 East PI. Cr. 1015; Sampson v. Com., 5 W. & S. (Pa.) 3S5; State v. Seaborn, 15 N. C. 305; but this is otherwise by statute; State v. Bosse, 8 Rich. (S. C.) 27C: Com. v. Posey, 4 Call (Va.) 109, 2 Am. Dec. 560; U. S. v. White, 5 Cra. C. C. 73, Fed. Cas. No. 16,67a If homicide result, the act is murder; State v. Cooper, 13 N. J. L. 361, 25 Am. Dec 1 Bish. Cr. Law 361. It is not an indictable offence at common law to burn one's own house to defraud insurers; 1 Whart. Cr. L. (9tb ed. i $ 843; otherwise in most states by statute: State v. Hurd, 51 N. H. 17<i; Shepherd v. People, 1!> N. Y. 537; People v. Schwartz. 32 Cal. I60i

See Crimes.