Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n bishop_n church_n time_n 3,239 5 3.7702 3 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A31129 The Case of the charter of London stated shewing, I. What a corporation is, II. Whether a corporation may be forfeited, III. Whether the mayor, commonalty, and citizens have done any act in their common council, whereby to forfeit their corporation and franchises. 1683 (1683) Wing C1026; ESTC R20678 20,199 19

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

and adjudged to be good T. 43. Ch. B R. Enter Wood Hawksel Rolls Abr. Tit. Prerog l. 2. Fol. 198. The Isle of Guernsey for Eight Years was discharged of all manner of Tolls Exactions and Customs Rot. Parl. 14. R. 2. n. 30. Tenants in Ancient Demesnes are free and quit of all Tolls in Fairs and Markets for all things concerning Husbandry and Sustenance Inst Part 4. Fol. 269. 21 E. 4.59 Some Franchises may be Forfeited 1. By a Non-User Some 2. By a Refuser And others 3. By an Abuser or Mis-user 1. By Non-User as those Franchises which are pro bono publico and therefore if one hath a Leet to keep and never keep it or a Clerk of a Market who never attends his Office these by Non-user are Forfeited The Non-user of a Fair or Market is no cause of Forfeiture 2 H. 7. Fol. 11. But the Non-pursuit or Arresting of Felons by him that hath the Franchise it may cause a Forfeiture 3 E. 1. c. 9. 39 H. 6.33 34. 2. Refuser The Abbot of Crowland had a Gaol wherein divers Men were Imprisoned and because he refused to deliver them but detained some of them who were Acquitted of Felony after their Fees paid the King seized the Gaol for ever 20 E. 4.6 The King granted to the Abbot of St. Albans to have a Gaol-delivery and divers Persons were Committed to the Gaol for Felony and because the Abbot would not be at Cost to make Deliverance he detained them in Prison long time without making Lawful Deliverance the Abbot had for that cause Forfeited his Franchise and that the same might be seized into the Kings Hands 8 H. 4.18 20 E. 4.6 Brok. Tit. Forfeiture Inst Part. 2. Fol. 43. 3. Abuser or Mis-user If a Corporation hath Franchises and Abuse or Mis-use them they may be Forfeited Inst Part 1. Fol. 183. The same Law if they take for Murage more than they ought to take by their Grant West 1. c. 31. The Duke of Norfolk had the Office of Marischal of the Kings Bench he made a Deputy who permitted the Prisoners to escape adjudged that it was a Forfeiture of the Office But if the Duke had made a Grant for Life to J.S. and he had permitted the Prisoners to escape this had been no Forfeiture but for the Life of J. S. For in the Case of the Deputy the Duke did remain Marischal and so Respondeat Superior but in the other Case J.S. was Marischal for his Life and so shall Forfeit only his own Interest 39 H. 6.33 34. Where an Office is granted to a Man and he mis-use or do not his Office this is a cause of Forfeiture of it Ibid. When the Lord of a Franchise refuse to do a thing according to the Grant of the Franchise or doth a thing against his Franchise or mis-use his Franchise by himself or Deputy or non-use his Franchise in all these Cases the Franchise shall be seized For when the King grants a Franchise there is a Condition in Law that he should do Right to all Parties concerned if not the Franchise shall be seized 20 E. 4. Fol. 5 6. When one Franchise is incident to another of Common Right then the Forfeiture of the one is the Forfeiture of the other as the Abuser of the Court of Pye Powders may cause the Forfeiture of the Fair. So when the Franchises are one of them Subordinate to another but otherwise when they are Absolute or by several Titles or Patents H. 17. Jac. B R. If one hath a Fair or Market for one day and he keep it another day as when a Grant or Prescription be for Wednesday and he keep it on Thursday it 's a cause of Forfeiture So when a Fair or Market is Granted to one for one day in the Week and he keep it two days but in the last Case the Forfeiture shall be only of that he hath Usurped Cok. Lib. 9. Fol. 50.22 Ass 34. Old n. b. Fol. 157. If a Man keeps a Fair or Market two days and being Questioned by the King for it and claims both days by the Kings Grant and it 's afterwards found that he hath Right but to one day by Prescription and to another by Patent and the first is found against him this will be no Forfeiture of the last Lib. 9. Fol. 50. In some Cases for the Abuser of a Franchise one shall be Fined only and not Forfeit his Franchise So for the Usurping of a Franchise where none is or of more than is due but to take less than is due is no cause of Forfeiture Broke Tit. Forfeiture n. 37. 14 H. 3. The Arch Bishop of Dublin was Fined Three Hundred Marks for that he did dis-forest a Forest of the Church 2 H. 4.3 Lib. 11. Lyfords Case By an Ancient Record in the Time of William the Conquerour it doth appear that the end of Erecting of Corporations and making and establishing of Cities and Towns Corporate was 1. Ad Consuetudines Regni jus commune dignitates Coronae Conservand for the conservation of the Dignities and Preheminencies of the Crown and the Laws of the Land 2. Ad tuitionem gentium Populorum Regni for Defence of the Kings Subjects and for keeping the Kings Peace in time of sudden Uproars 3. Ad defensionem Regni for Defence of the Realm against outward and inward Hostility If a Corporation may be Forfeited A Corporation may be Forfeited Corporations are called Liberties Franchises as it doth appear by the Writ of Non omittas propter aliquam libertatem Regist 82. f. n. b. 74. a. and by that Name have been ousted By the Surrender of all Franchises and Liberties a Corporation is gone Cokes Entries Fol. 527. Palm Rep. Fol. 493. Cives London petunt quod Rex velit its concedere prestinum statum scilicet Majororem antiquas libertates Rex non habet inde Consilium quia sunt in bono statu ut sibi videtur hac vice statum non mutabit Inter les Petitions de Parliament 18 E. 3.1 The Citizens of London Petition the King that he would be pleased to grant to them their former state that is to say their Mayor and Ancient Liberties The King gave them this Answer That he was not Advised to it because they were in a good state and condition as it seemed to him at pro hac vice he would not alter or change The City of Norwich and the Liberties thereof seized into the Kings Hands for Burning of the Cathedral Church there but afterwards upon their Petition and Paying a great Fine their Liberties were restored to them 13 E. 1. Rot. Fin. m. 10. Quia Homines de Southampton verberaverunt vulneraverunt usque ad morrem Gilb. Canon qui exequahatur praeceptum Regis in dic●a villa pro transgressione villae Capta fuit villa ista in manum Regis finem fecerunt sirmam suam exaltaverunt ad 20 l. per Annum Rolls Abridgm Part 2. Tit. P●erog