A troublesome and angry woman, who, by brawling and wrangling among her neighbors, breaks the public peace, increases discord, and becomes a nuisance to the neighborhood.1 At common law, a common scold is a public nuisance. The sentence was that she be placed in a trebucket, castigatory, or cucking-stool, that is, in AngloSaxon, the scolding stool.2 The offense is now punishable, if at all, by fine, or by fine and imprisonment. In 1824 a woman was convicted of this offense in the city of Philadelphia, and the sentence was, as at common law, that she "be placed in a ducking or cucking-stool, and be plunged three times in the water." This sentence was reversed by the supreme court, which decided that the old common-law punishment had not been adopted in Pennsylvania. The court also said that the punishment was introduced at a time when women were subjected to degradation as slaves; that authorities differ as to what the original Scienter. With knowledge, knowingly; punishment was, and how, therefore, it was to be exethe fact of knowledge. In the Latin forms of pleadings, the emphatic word used to charge knowledge in a defendant. Has also designated the clause in a declaration or indictment which alleges such knowledge. The intention of the accused must be alleged in every part of the description of the crime where it is necessary to constitute an offense. It is necessary to allege and prove a scienter where there is injury by a domestic animal of mischievous propensity.4 The possession of other counterfeit paper by the accused at the time of passing a counterfeit note is evidence of the scienter. The scienter may be proved inductively by collateral facts, and from previous offenses. Scilicet. From scire licet, as one may know or learn : to wit; that is to say, namely. Abbreviated sct., sc., ss. On reviving judgments, see generally 94 Am. Dec. 222-46 (1888), cases; on making representative a defendant to suit abated by death, Porlevant v. Pendleton, 23 Miss. 36-37 (1851), cases; recognizances, United States v. Stevens, 16 F. R. 105 (1883), cases, State v. Dowd, 43 N. H. 455 (1862); order for alimony, Chestnut v. Chestnut, 77 111. 349 (1875), cases; liens, Winder v. Coldwell, 14 How. 443 (1852). 2 As to patent for an invention, see Stearns v. Barrett, 1 Mas. 164 (1816); United States v. Rell Telephone Co., 128 U. S. 360, 369, 371 (1888). cuted upon offenders, if executed at all.3 In 1866 the same court, in reviewing the record in another case, said that the law has been considered settled since the decision in the James Case; that the penal code of 1860 did not abolish the offense; and that, as to the unreasonableness of punishing women alone for a too free use of the tongue "it is enough to say that the common law, which is the expressed wisdom of ages, adjudges that it is not unreasonable. Argument drawn from the indelicacy or unreasonableness of such a prosecution should be addressed, therefore, to the legislature." See PUNISHMENT, Cruel.