Neither of the ideas stated in the preceding section will bear examination. The first - that imprisonment is not sufficiently imminent is based on early common-law definitions of duress which are generally obsolete. It may be classed with the idea that a battery cannot amount to duress unless it is so severe as to threaten life or mayhem. Everyone knows that threat of a well-founded prosecution, which is likely to end in imprisonment, is often quite sufficient to put even a brave man in fear. Moreover, the argument goes too far, for if sound, threats of prosecution without cause could likewise not be duress; and certainly most courts would agree that threats of an ill-founded prosecution may be duress.47 The second argument that a well-founded prosecution is "lawful" has already been examined.48 If the argument is unsound where there is actual imprisonment it is equally unsound where it is only threatened.