CONSPIRACY (OR conspiracic, conspiratic, from Lat. conspirarc, to conspire, from corn-, together spirarc, to breathe). As a criminal offense this has been judicially defined as "a com bination by two or more persons, by some con certed action, to accomplish an unlawful purpose, or to accomplish a purpose not in itself unlawful, by unlawful means." It will be' observed that the gist of this offense is in the agreement or con federation of the conspirators; an overt act pur suant to the agreement is not necessary to the completion of the crime, although, in most cases of conspiracy, such acts are performed. This doctrine of the common law has been changed by Federal legislation and by statutes in many of the United States. Under such legislation, the commission of an overt act to effect the ob ject of the conspiracy is essential to consum mate the crime; but as soon as that act is done the offense of conspiracy is complete, and is not in any way affected by the nature or results of the act, even though the act be such that it could not possibly accomplish the conspirator's intention.
When a conspiracy has been entered into, the conspirators become so related legally that the acts or statements of any of them in reference to the common purpose are admissible against all—each is the authorized agent of all. This rule often induces the public prosecutor to have persons indicted for a conspiracy, even when their confederation has resulted in the commis sion of other crimes, such as treason or murder.
Some of the more important common-la• con spiracies were those to commit treason or sedi tion, to murder, to cheat and defraud, and to maliciously injure another. They were mis demeanors only. Statutory conspiracies, that is, acts declared by legislation to be punishable as conspiracies. have been raised to the rank of felonies, in some instances.
Whether conspiracy is a civil wrong of itself is a question upon which judges and writers differ. There is eminent authority for the view that it is a distinct tort—an actionable wrong, without respect to the consequences of the acts done pursuant to the confederation. The pre 'ailing view at present, however, both in Eng laud and in the United States, is that the gist of the civil cause of action is the actual damage dune to the plaintiff, not the agreement or con federation against him.
Consult: Wright, Lou- of Criminal Conspira cies (London, 18i3; Philadelphia, 1887) ; Bishop, New Commentaries on the Criminal Law (Bos ton, 1900) ; and Commentaries on the Non-Con tract Law (Boston); also consult the Encyclo pedia of the Lazes of England (London, 1897).