but such onely which are for the better government of the old And also he said plainly that it appears by the Statute of 1 Mariae That the former Statutes shall not be taken by Equity for by these the President and Commons have power to commit a delinquent to Prison and this shall be intended if they shall be taken by Equity that every Gaoler ought to receive him which is so committed But when it is provided by 1 Mariae specially that every Gaoler shall receive such Offenders by this it appears That the former Statute shall not be taken in Equity And so he concluded that Iudgment shall be entred for the Plaintiff which was done accordingly College of Physicians versus Butler Sir William Jones's Reports p. 261. THe President of the College and Comminalty of the faculty of Physick London brought debt against one George Butler The Writ was quòd reddat Domino Regi Praesidenti Collegii ac Comminal ' facultat ' Medicor ' London Qui tam pro Domino Rege quà m pro seipso sequitur 60. li. quas eis debet And the Declaration was in the name of the said President by the said name qui tam pro Domino Rege quà m pro seipso sequitur c. which contained the Charter of H. 8. made Anno Regni sui 10. and confirmed by Act of Parliament Anno Regni sui 14. as it is contained in the Statute of 14 H. 8. and that the said Defendant minimè ponderans the said Statute or the Penalty thereof exercised the faculty of Physick in London although he was not admitted so to do by the President and the College or Comminalty of the faculty of Physick London by the space of 12 months before the said Action brought per quod actio accrevit eidem Domino Regi dicto Praesidenti qui tam pro dicto Domino Rege quam pro seipso sequitur c. ad exigend ' habend ' of the said Defendant pro dicto Domino Rege eodem Praesidente Colleg ' praedict ' 60 li. videlicet 5 li. pro quolibet mense praedict ' 12 Mensium praedict ' Tamen Desendens praedicto Domino Regi Praesidenti non reddidit unde the said President said that he was damnified to the value of 100 li. The Defendant pleaded the Statute of 34 H. 8. whereby liberty is given to every one of the Kings Subjects that hath knowledge and experience of the nature of Herbs Roots Waters or the operation of them by speculation or practice to exercise apply and administer to any external ulcer wound apostumation outward tumor sive morbo alicui alio any Herb Ointment Bath Pultess or Plaster according to the experience and science of the said diseases or other Maladies eisdem consimil or Potion pro calculo Strangury vel febr without any impediment any Statute or other thing to the contrary And saith that he was a Subject and having experience and science by speculation and practice in the nature of Herbs Roots and Waters applied and ministred to divers of the Kings subjects Herbs Ointment Bath Pultess Plasters and Potion to Vlcers Diseases Maladies Strangury and Ague talibus aliis morbis illis consimilibus prout ei bene licuit And to the residue pleaded Not guilty The Plaintiff replied to the first Plea and pleaded the Statute of 1 Mariae whereby the said Charter and the said Act of 14 H. 8. was confirmed in the whole Whereupon the Defendant demurred and shewed for cause of Demurrer that the Replication was a departure from the Declaration And upon Argument in the Common Pleas Iudgment was given by the opinion of all the Iudges for the Plaintiff and thereupon Error was brought in the Kings Bench. Two Errors were assigned the one was the departure the second was because that the Writ was in the name of the King and the President and the Declaration was in the name of the Informer also And after argument at the Bar by Council on both sides the Iudges delivered their opinions The Chief Iustice began and then Jones Whitlock and Crook They all said that Iudgment ought to be affirmed First they agréed that the Writ and Declaration were good and although some Precedents be that upon a penal Law the Writ be to answer the Informer qui tam pro seipso quà m pro Domino Rege sequitur Yet they thought that the most proper and better way of a Writ was to answer the King and Informer for the debt was given to them by moieties therefore it is not so proper to demand all for the Informer and yet to have a several judgment for the King and the Informer for the moieties and so is Partridge and Crokers case in the Comment But when it is by information there it shall be that the Informer informs for the King and himself Another exception was taken to the Writ because it is in the name of the President and not of the College also And also it was contrary in the end of the Declaration where it is said unde actio accrevit to the said King and President for to have 60 li. of the Defendant For the King one Moiety and for the President and College the other Moiety But it was adjudged by the Court that notwithstanding it was good for First although the Incorporation was by the name of President and College notwithstanding the suite is by the Charter given to the President and there may be a Corporation by one name to purchase lands and otherwise yet it shall sue by another name 11 E. 1. a Corporation was by the name of Master Wardens Brothers and Sisters of Rouncevill and by the said Patent it is said they should sue by the name of Master and Wardens of Rouncevill 2. Although that the Action is given by way of suite to the President onely yet the Recovery and money recovered shall be to the President and College therefore the Conclusion for to have the money to the President and College was held good The 3. point was resolved that the Plea in Bar was not good for the liberty given is disjunctive for outward medicines to use Plasters Oyntment Bathes c. and for 3 diseases to wit the Stone Strangury and Agues onely yet they jumble all together that he ministred the Ointments and Potions to all the said Maladies which cannot be for he may not administer a Potion unless to the said 3 diseases and no other 4. It was resolved that it was not any departure but that the Replication was subsequent and pursuant to the Declaration But for the main matter they said nothing to wit whether the Statute of 1 Mariae took away the force of the Statute of 34 H. 8. for they gave their Iudgment upon the Bar by reason it was naught Onely Crook spake to this point and it séemed to him that the Statute of 34 H. 8. is not repealed or avoided by 1 Mariae Butler versus the President of
satisfaction and payment of the same fyne soe imposed upon him for the same offence AND FORASMUCH as Wee are well satisfied in our selfe and hold it most reasonable and requisite that a like care and consideration should bée had and taken of all our good subjects inhabiting or resident in other the Diocesses and parts of this our Realme of England not herein abovementioned nor provided for in matters concerning the good and health of their bodies which to effect and to the end that the abuses and irregularities abovementioned may in those parts bee seasonably corrected or tymely prevented and none but able learned and well qualified persons admitted to exercise and practise in Physicke in the parts of this our Kingdome without our said Citty of London and Westminster and the lymitts of seaven miles aforesaid OUR WILL AND PLEASURE is And Wée doe by theise presents for us our heires and successors Grant Constitute and Ordeyne that all and every person and persons whatsoever now or hereafter willing or desirous to exercise or practise Physicke in any the parts of this our Kingdome without the Citties and lymitts aforesaid Doe and shall before hée or they or any of them respectively make any open profession thereof Offer and submitt themselves to the examination and tryall as to their severall abilities and qualifications requisite in that faculty of the President and Elects or Vice-president and Elects in the absence of the President of the Colledge aforesaid or any foure of them for the tyme being whereof the President or in his absence the Vice-president for the tyme being to bée alwayes one To the end that such person and persons as on such Examination or Tryall shall appeare to bée able and qualified for the exercise of that faculty may bée approved and allowed of by testimoniall in writing under the particular hands of the persons respectively so examining and approveing them AND WEE DOE hereby will and require and by theise presents for us our heires and successors give and grant unto the President and Elects of the Colledge aforesaid and in the absence of the President to the Vice-president and Elects of the same Colledge for the tyme being or any foure of them whereof the President or in his absence the Vice-president for the tyme being to bée one from tyme to tyme to receive send for and call before them all and every such person and persons that is or shall be willing or desirous or shall begynn or venture to exercise or practise in the said faculty of Physicke within any the parts of this our Realme of England without the Citty and lymitts aforesaid And them and every of them well faithfully and exactly to examine and make tryall of their severall and respective qualifications and abilities as to the said faculty of Physicke and the exercise and practice thereof And to allowe lycence and approve of such and soe many of them as shall bée by the said Examiners respectively as aforesaid adjudged able and qualified for that profession And thereupon to make and give unto them and every of them soe approved of as aforesaid a testimoniall in writing under the hands of the Examiners respectively as aforesaid AND alsoe to refuse suppresse and reject all and every such person and persons as to the said Examiners respectively appointed as aforesaid shall from tyme to tyme appeare to be insufficient or not duely qualified for the exercise of that faculty AND FURTHER by all just and lawfull wayes and meanes possible in the future to the utmost of their power to prevent or tymely to reforme and correct the abuses irregularities and enormities aforesaid in all and every the parts of this our Realme without our said Citty of London and Westminster and lymitts of seaven miles aforesaid AND our further will and pleasure is And Wee doe by these presents for us our heires and successors Graunt Constitute and Ordayne that noe person or persons whatsoever Except hee or they bee a Graduate or Graduates of Oxford or Cambridge which have or hath accomplished all things for his or their forme without any grace shall doe or may from henceforth exercise or practise or bee permitted to exercise or practise in the said Art or Faculty of Physicke in any part or parts of this our Realme of England without our said Citty and the lymitts aforesaid untill he or they respectively shall be examined tryed and approved of as aforesaid and have and receive a Testimoniall thereof in writing as aforesaid upon paine of forfeiting of five pounds of lawfull money of England unto the said President Fellowes and Comonalty of the Colledge aforesaid and their Successors for every Moneth wherein any such person or persons shall soe exercise or practise in the said Art or Faculty of Physicke as aforesaid being not duely examined and approved of or haveing not had or received his Testimoniall as aforesaid All and every such forfeiture summe and summes of money to be had and recovered in such manner and by such wayes and meanes as the said penalty or forfeiture of Tenn pounds the Moneth for practising without lycence within our said Citty of London or seaven myles thereof as aforesaid is ought or may bee had sued for obteyned or recovered And in which Actions Suite or Suites to bee had brought or prosecuted noe Essoyne wager of Lawe or protection shall or ought to bée admitted or allowed for or to any Defendant or Defendants therein AND WEE WILL and for us our heires and successors Doe hereby graunt that the Playntiffe and Playntiffs in all and every Action and Actions Bill Suite Plaint or Information hereafter brought or to bée brought exhibited or prosecuted for the recovery and obteyneing of the said severall paynes or forfeitures of Tenn pounds the Moneth and five pounds the Moneth any or either of them wherein such Playntiffe or Playntiffs shall or ought to have recover or obteyne his or their Iudgment therein respectively shall have and recover his and theire reasonable Costs of suite to bée from tyme to tyme taxed and assessed by the Iudge Iudges or Iustices of the Court wherein such Action or Actions Bill Playnt or Information shall be brought or prosecuted as aforesaid and shall alsoe have his and theire Execution and Executions for the same in such manner to all intents and purposes as in any Action of debt Case or Trespass is now used or ought to bée had given or done in any of our Courts of Record att Westminster And that the Defendant and Defendants in every such Action and Suite Bill Playnt or Information wherein Iudgment is or ought to bee given for such Defendant or Defendants shall have and recover his and theire Costs of suite in such manner as in any Action or Actions of Debt Case or Trespasse is nowe used or ought to bée had or given in any of our Courts aforesaid AND WEE DOE hereby for us our heires and successors impower and
part for we labour only for part so that 14. is in force as it was at first in every branch thereof notwithstanding 34 H. 8. for 1 Mariae restored this and that which the 14. gives is Medicines not as it is generally to be intended and so to include Chirurgery but all that was proper to Physicians 34 H. 8. although it allow men to give Medicines yet it is at their perils for if a man die under their hands it is as it was at Common Law By the Statute of 34. to repeal all of 14. which was contrary to 34. which does not in the least name the 14. yet it is repealed for so much as concerns Agues c. The Statute of 33 H. 8. for trial of Treason is repealed And after by 1 Mariae our Case is a far stronger Case that every Clause shall be in force notwithstanding any Statute c. these words ought not to be void if by construction they may be made to stand and no Statute withstands this Statute but 34 H. 8. and therefore all which this Statute takes away ought to be restored He confessed the case put of Confirmation of 32 H. 8. Statute of Wills that this doth not take away the Stat. of 34. for it is but an explanation and one being confirmed the other is confirmed And it is plain that the 13 Eliz doth not take away 1 Eliz. for it was in the affirmative and commenced after and therefore it is expounded not to extend to the Bishop As the Statute of contra formam collationis doth not include the Bishop as it was there adjudged And he cited Langton's Case where this point which is the point of departure was adjudged and 10 and 11 Eliz. rot 248. B. R. action by the College versus Eliheus Cornelius and upon these very points Iudgment was given for the College Also the Barr is ill Allow the Statute of 34. were in force yet the Iustification is ultra that which the Statute gives and took the same exception as before 2. There is a departure which was so ruled in Langton's Case and is so in reason Also this is a proper departure when a man relinquishes the title upon which he grounds himself and betakes himself to another And we have not made a departure our title is 14 H. 8. which makes good the Letters Patents then if you repeal the Letters Patents we ought to repeal the 14 H. 8. and it would be absurd for us to commence with 1 Mariae for then we ought to have recited all the Statutes 37 H. 6. 5. 21 H. 7. 25. 18. If a man avow for rent granted by I. S. the other saith that I. S. had nothing in the Land at the time of the Grant the other shews that he was seifed to his use this is a departure for his title to the first was by the Common Law and therefore seeing the Statute was his title it ought to have béen shewed But in our Case the Statute 1 Mariae is not our title to the action but onely removes the impediment 6 H. 7. 8. A condition is pleaded in destruction of a Feoffment and a release pleaded to destroy the condition and no departure but the Feoffment stands with a good title So in our Case Hill 4 Jac. intrat H. 3. Jac. Bagshaw versus Gower Trespass for chasing his Cattle 14 Maii 1 Jac. The Defendant Iustifies as an Estray and that 16 Maii 1 Jac. he delivered them The Plaintiff replies that 15 Maii he laboured and worked them upon which the Defendant demurres This was no departure but the working maintained the Trespass done 14. and made him Trespasser ab initio Mich. 23 24 Eliz. C. B. rot 2297. Pledal and Clark Trespass for chasing his Cattle in Barkshire the Defendant justifies damage fezant the Plaintiff replies that afterwards he drove them into another County scil Oxford c. and sold them the Defendant demurred and the declaration was in Barkshire yet the sale made him a wrong doer ab initio Where the Replication maintains the title and onely removes the impediment it is good Pasch Jac. B. R. Action upon the Case Wood and Hankford for disturbing him of Toll and intitles himself by Letters Patents of H. 6. The Defendant pleads 28 H. 6. which restores all Franchises The Plaintiff replies 4 H. 7. which revives the first Statute and adjudged no departure for if he pleadeth the resumption and the reviver if there were 20 he ought to plead all Then in our case all is gone and we know not whether he ought to justifie one kind or other 3. For the Iurisdiction This Court is most proper for the Informer and he cited Gregories Case and said If the King might elect to sue in what Court he pleased the Informer might also But however it is out of the Statute of 21 Jac. The title is for the ease of the Subject The preamble c. 18 Eliz. cap. 5. there it appeareth that the common Informer ought to inform in proper person the College was never so nor cannot and in common Information there ought to be the day of the Information c. and there is not any day here 25 Eliz. 12. Knevet informed against Butcher and afterwards was non-suited for which the Defendant prayed to have Costs c. and there the Plaintiff alledged that he was not a common Informer insomuch that this was the first Information that he ever exhibited yet ruled against him insomuch that it was upon a penal law where every one may have the action But in our case it is not so because this is no such Information or Informer within the Statute 40 Eliz. Agar informs against Cavendish and others upon the Statute of 8 E. 4. for Liveries which appoints the Information in C. B. B. Reg. and that they may sue as many as they will and the Exchequer is not named there but inferiour Courts be and Iudgment was given for the Informer But after in a Writ of Error brought it was adjudged that the Information doth not lie in the Exchequer but they resolved that the King might have sued there and therefore the Iudgment shall be good to intitle the King to the intire sum forfeited Richardson said that it was a hard case to prove the King may sue in any Court and he cited 14 E. 3. Countess of Kent's case 40 Ass 35. the King may sue for Spiritual matters in the Temporal Court as a Legacy c. Hill 36 Eliz. rot 135. Hammond Informant upon a penal Statute and died and upon motion by the Attorney General Iudgment was given for one Moiety for the King notwithstanding And the difference betwixt this and Agar's Case that in this case the Informer was well intitled to a Moiety but there not Statutes which take away Iurisdictions of the Courts at Westminster ought to be taken strictly Mich. 44 45 Eliz. Buck informs in the Exchequer for transporting of raw hides in Middlesex
authority in that case 3. The fines and amercements to be imposed by them by force of the Act do not belong to them but to the King for the King hath not granted the fines and amercements to them and yet the fine is appointed to be paid to them in proximis Comitiis and they have imprisoned the Plaintiff for non-payment thereof 4. They ought to have committed the Plaintiff presently by construction of Law although that no time be limited in the Act as in the Stat. of West cap. 12. De Servientibus Ballivis c. qui ad compotum reddend ' tenentur c. cum Dom ' hujusmodi servientium dederit eis auditores compoti contingat ipsum in arreragiis super compotum suum omnibus allocatis allocandis arrestentur corpora eorum per testimonium auditorum ejusdem compoti mittantur liberentur proximae gaolae Domini Regis in partibus illis c. in that case although that no time be limited when the Accomptant shall be imprisoned yet it ought to be presently as it is holden in 27 H. 6. 8. and the reason thereof is given in Fogossa's Case Plow Com. 17. that the generality of time shall be restrained to the present time for the benefit of him upon whom the pain shall be inflicted and therewith agréeth Plow Com. 206. b. in Stradling's Case And a Iustice of Peace upon view of the force ought to commit the offender presently 5. For as much as the Censors had their authority by the Letters Patents and Act of Parliament which are high matters of Record their proceedings ought not to be by word and so much the rather because they claimed authority to fine and imprison And therefore if Iudgment be given against one in the Common Pleas in a Writ of Recaption he shall be fined and imprisoned but if the Writ be Vicontiel in the County there he shall not be fined or imprisoned because that the Court is not of Record F. N. B. in bre de Recaptione so in 47 F. N. B. a Plea of Trespass vi armis doth not lie in the County Court hundred Court c. for they cannot make Record of fine and imprisonment and regularly those who cannot make a Record cannot fine and imprison And therewith agréeth 27 H. 8. Book of Entries The Auditors make a Record when they commit the Defendant to prison A Iustice of Peace upon view of the force may commit but he ought to make a Record of it 6. Because the Act of 14 H. 8. hath given power to imprison untill he shall be delivered by the President and the Censors and their Successors reason requireth that the same be taken strictly for the liberty of the Subject as they pretend is at their pleasure And the same is proved by a Iudgment in Parliament in this Case For when this Act of 14 H. 8. had given power to the Censors to imprison yet it was taken so literally that the Gaoler was not bound to receive them which they committed to him and the reason thereof was because they had authority to do it without any Court And thereupon the Statute of 1 Mar. cap. 9. was made that the Gaoler should receive them upon a pain and none can be committed to any prison if the Gaoler cannot receive him but the first Act for the cause aforesaid was taken so literally that no necessary incident was implyed And where it was objected that this very Act of 1 Mariae hath enlarged the power of the Censors and that upon the word of the Act It was clearly resolved that the said Act of 1 Mariae did not enlarge the power of the Censors to fine or imprison any person for any cause for which he ought not to be fined and imprisoned by the said Act of 14 H. 8. For the words of the Act of Q. Mary are according to the tenor and meaning of the said Act Also shall send or commit any Offender or Offenders for his or their offence or disobedience contrary to any Article or clause contained in the said Grant or Act to any Ward Gaol c. But in this Case Bonham hath not done any thing which appeareth within this Record contrary to any Article or clause contained within the Grant or Act of 14 H. 8. Also the Gaoler who refuseth shall forfeit the double value of the fines and amerciaments that any offender or disobedient shall be assessed to pay which proveth that none shall be received by any Gaoler by force of the Act of 14 H. 8. but he who may be lawfully fined or amerced by the Act of 14 H. 8. and for that was not Bonham as by the reasons and causes aforesaid it appeareth And admit that the replication be not material and the Defendants have demurred upon it yet forasmuch as the Defendants have confessed in the Bar that they have imprisoned the Plaintiff without cause the Plaintiff shall have Iudgment And the difference is when the Plaintiff doth reply and by his replication it appeareth that he hath no cause of action there he shall never have judgment But when the Bar is insufficient in matter or amounteth as this Case is to a confession of the point of the action and the Plaintiff replyeth and sheweth the truth of the matter to enforce his Case and in Iudgment of Law it is not material yet the Plaintiff shall have Iudgment for it is true that sometimes the Count shall be made good by the Bar and sometimes the Bar by the Replication and sometimes the Replication by the Rejoynder c. But the difference is when the Count wantethtime place or other circumstance it may be made good by the Bar so of the Bar Replication c. as appeareth in 18 E. 4. 16. b. But when the Count wanteth substance no Bar can make it good so of the Bar Replication c. and therewith agrée 6 E. 4. 2. a good case and mark there the words of Choke vid. 18 E. 3. 34. b. 44 E. 3. 7. a. 12 E. 4. 6. 6 H. 7. 10. 7 H. 7. 3. 11 H. 4. 24. c. But when the Plaintiff makes a Replication Sur-rejoynder c. and thereby it appeareth that upon the whole matter and Record the Plaintiff hath no cause of action he shall never have Iudgment although that the Bar or remainder be insufficient in matter for the Court ought to judge upon the whole Record and every one shall be intended to make the best of his own case Vid. Rigeways case in the 3. part of my Reports 52. And so these differences were resolved and adjudged betwéen Kendall and Heyer Mich. 25 26 Eliz. in the Kings Bench. And Mich. 29 30 Eliz. in the same Court betwéen Gallys and Burbry And Coke Chief Iustice in the conclusion of his argument did observe 7 things for the better direction of the President and Commonalty of the said Colledge in time to come 1. That none can be punished for practising
and streightly commandyng the said Grocers and Apothecaries and every of them not to faile herof as thei tendre our pleasure the health and securitye of our lovyng Subjects and as thei shall answere for doyng the contrarie before yow to their such losses damages and penalties as be prescribed in our Lawes and Statutes above mentioned aswell concernyng Physicians as also Grocers and Apothecaries Yeven under our Signet at our Manor of St. James the xxiiii daye of June in the fourthe and fivethe yeres of our Reignes PROCEEDINGS Against Empiricks c. In Queen Elizabeth 's Reign IN the first year of this Queen's Reign Thomas Glamfelde was committed to prison for practising Physick and Stalworth and Gylmyn Norwich Empiricks fined upon the same account In the second year of her Reign a Commission was given by the College to Walter Hawgh a Norwich Physician and to Hugh Glynne a Chester Physician to Prosecute all Empiricks of their own and neighbour Counties Several others were summoned before the College and severely rebuked for exposing Pills to sale without their approbation Others were punished for the ill preparation of Medicines Amongst whom one Edward Stephens a sweet Grocer that he might be released from his imprisonment for obstinately refusing to appear upon the President 's summons of his own accord fell down upon his knees before the President and humbly begg'd pardon of the Queen's Majesty for his disobedience to the President of her College the Lord Cobham and several others being present In the 6th year several Empiricks were prosecuted others were imprisoned for practising Physick In the 12th year the Wife of one Bomelins an Empirick having procured the Lord Treasurer's Letter to the College petitioned that her husband might be discharged from prison he having given satisfaction to the Queen's Majesty for his violation of the Statutes in practising unlearnedly and by Magical Arts. To this Letter the College answered that her husband must first pay 20 l. for his practice and 15 l. for expences in the suit and likewise give security that he would not practise Physick for the future After this the President of the College and Dr. Caius were appointed to wait upon Sir William Cecil Secretary of State he having wrote a Letter to the College in favour of Bomelins upon whose application the Secretary was pleased to express great respect to the College and all the members of it assuring them that he should be well pleased to have Bomelins banished the Kingdom Some time after Bomelins was released from prison by consent of the College having given Bond of 100 l. that he would not for the future practise Physick in London nor in any other parts of England It was ordered by the College that the President should enter an Action against Dr. Lewes Judge of the Admiralty for suffering William Rich an Empirick committed to his care in the Marshalsea to practise Physick against the Laws of the Kingdom his own trust in contempt of the College and to the great prejudice of the Queen's Subjects A foreign Physician who had taken his Degree at Lovain in Brabant was summoned before the President and Censors and examined by what authority he practised Physick in England without licence He pleaded his ignorance of the Laws and was dismissed upon promise of not practising in London nor any other parts of England being likewise ordered to return into his own Country in a few days Dr. Walker was summoned to appear before the College to answer several things objected against him by Dr. Corimbec he having examined and admitted some Physicians in Norwich and Norfolk and extorted above 100 Marks from several Empiricks in those parts whom he had licensed to practise He was Fined for not appearing and Letters were wrote by the College to Dr. Corimbec to authorize him to cite those Empiricks to appear before the College in order to their due punishment One Sylva an Italian was charged before the President and Censors for evil practice in that he undertook to cure an old woman by suffumigation with which she died and prescribed Stibium to another person troubled with an affection of his Lungs to his great prejudice He was afterwards examined and rejected by the whole College by reason of his egregious ignorance in Philosophy and Physick and was fined 20 l. for having practised Physick for half a year to the apparent hurt of the Queen's subjects and the year following was committed to prison in that he had practised without College licence Thomas Pennye was summoned for practising Physick but pleading that he had taken his Doctours degree he was dismissed and ordered that he should bring his Letters testimonial to the Censors which accordingly he did but upon examination was found so ignorant in the first principles of Philosophy and Physick that he was thought unfit for that employment and prohibited the practice thereof and afterwards imprisoned for contemning the Judgment of the College and adventuring to practise without their licence In the 13th year of this Queen a Surgeon was Fined 20 l. for practising Physick but upon the intercession of some persons of Quality the College forgave him 20 Marks of that Fine upon condition that he bound himself in a bond of 100 l. that he would not practise for the future which refusing he was forced to pay the forementioned 20 l. Richard Reynold was examined and rejected as being very ignorant and unlearned But voluntarily confessing that he had practised Physick for 2 years the College ordered that he should be imprisoned untill he had paid 20 l. In the 14th year One Emme Baxter an impudent and ignorant woman was committed to prison for practising Physick the 7th of February Upon the 11th she was brought before the College where her husband William Baxter and Nicholas Staples a Citizen entring into bond to the College and their Successors that she should not practise for the future in London nor any other parts of England she was dismissed paying all Fees due to the Officers of the Prison c. In the same year it was argued in the Lord Mayor's Court before Sir William Allen then Lord Mayor Whether the Surgeons might give inward medicines in the Sciatica French Pox or any kind of Ulcer or Wound Many arguments were used by the Bishop of London Master of the Rolls c. for their practice in this manner Dr. Caius the President of the College being summoned by the Lord Mayor in his own and the Queen's Delegates names did defend the illegality of their practice upon the forementioned accounts After which it was agreed by all present that they ought not to practise In the 23th year of the Queen's Reign one Baptista an Empirick was fined by the President and Censors 6 l. 13 s. 4 d. which he paid to the President He afterwards paid 5 l. to the College ob rem malè gest am in praxi gave bond to pay 5 l. more at our Lady day and at Midsummer was required to pay
he petitioned that he might answer the College action without an arrest which was granted provided he would find Sureties to answer the College Suit if he were cast at Law Which being done and this Cause appointed to be heard at the King's Bench Bar 6 of the Fellows of the College were deputed to attend there and after this hearing Dr. Harvey the Treasurer and the 4 Censors were desired to take special care in the future management of the College's cause against Butler who had procured a protection from the Lord Chamberlain upon which account 4 of the Fellows were ordered by the President to wait upon his Lordship to take off his protection that the College might proceed in their Suit against him The Lord Chamberlain upon their application declared his readiness to comply with the College's request and ordered his Secretary to write the following reference against Butler The College of Physicians having represented that one George Butler under colour of being sworne an extraordinary Chirurgion to his Majestie doth take upon him to give Physick and practise Chirurgery without either skill or Licence to the apparent prejudice and endangering of the lives of his Majestie 's subjects and thereupon desired leave to take the ordinary course of Law to inhibite his practice and to prevent the danger which may ensue thereby I do hereby declare and publish unto all such as it may concerne that I have and do give free leave and liberty unto the said College to use all lawfull wayes and meanes accustomed in like cases either by arrest or otherwise for the suppressing and prohibiting of the said Butler's further practice in as free and ample manner as if the said Butler had never been sworne the King's servant Whitehall the 25th of November 1626. About 8 months after several fresh complaints of great mischief done by Butler in his practice were exhibited against him As particularly for giving a sleeping potion to one Patient who was sound dead in his sleep The wife of this man thus murthered applied her self to the Censors and desired that Mr. Butler might be punished for professing that which he did not understand which she pressed the more because she said such a man as he might kill many both Body and Soul every one being not so well prepared for death as her husband She desired a Certificate from the College concerning Mr. Butler and his ill practice After this Butler sent a Letter to the President and College which being read was rejected After this a servant of Butler's acquainted the Censors that while she dwelt with him a woman came to him for Cure who within 3 weeks died and was carried away secretly without tolling the Bell or any Minister being called Upon this information Butler endeavoured to imprison this servant using all arts to take her which occasioned her application to the College for their protection complaining of the many injuries she had received from Mr. Butler since her appearing against him Wherefore the President ordered the following Letter to be drawn up and presented to the Lord Chief Justice in her behalf MAy it please your Lordship to understand that the Petitioner on the 7th of Jan. last past came to our College voluntarily to complain of the evil practice of Mr. Butler as is in the petition specified since which time we are certainly informed that he hath laid heavy actions upon her and kept her in prison as is above specified We conceiving the chief grounds of his violent proceedings against her to have risen upon her complaint made to us In consideration of her misery We having noe power to relieve her doe presume humbly to intreat your Lordship to take such course as your Lordship in your wisdome shall think fit that she may obtain the benefit of her Petition After this Dr. Winston signified to the College that Butler sent a petition to him to be presented to the College which he refused Then Butler sent a Letter to the President after which it was agreed that if he paid in the money recovered and due to the College before the Term then the other Suits depending might be suspended if it pleased the President A Letter about this time in the behalf of Butler was brought from the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas by Captain Butler directed to the President and Censors of the College the Contents of which are the following Mr. Doctor Argent I Am informed of a Judgment which is obtained against Mr. Butler at your Suit and the rest of the College of Physicians for 60 l. which I find him very willing and ready to satisfie so far forth as his ability will give leave for the present He will pay half the money in hand and the next some time the next Terme which I conceive is no ill payment his estate considered Therefore I desire you and the rest of your College to take him thus far into your consideration And what you do herein I shall take as done in respect of me who am intreated to write in his favour by some whom I am willing to satisfy in this request appearing to me to be but reasonable and little hurtfull to your selves But to animate him of any other against your Government I neither do nor ever will write Your very assured loving friend Ro. Heath Julii 1. 1633. Captain Butler promised that on Friday 36 l. of the money due from Butler should be paid and desired time till the next Term for the payment of the rest The College took time to consider for a few days and then promised him their answer Upon the Friday aforementioned according to promise Captain Butler brought 36 l. from Mr. Butler to whom by Mr. President 's appointment was given the following note It was ordered by Mr. President and Censors the 5th of July 1633. that Mr. George Butler having sent in 36 l. in part of Payment of the 66 l. due to the College by a judgment given against him in the King's Bench in Easter Term in the 7th year of his Majestie K. Charles 1. his Reign at the request of the Lord Chief justice of the Common Pleas should have time given him for the payment of the other 30 l. till the 20th of November next ensuing and in the mean time all prosecution upon the foresaid judgment should surcease Mrs. Bendwell was complained of by Thomas Audley for undertaking his cure in 3 days though in a Hectick Fever she telling him that she had cured those whom the Doctours had left and could not cure She gave him a Purging drink that wrought day and night and brought him to exceeding weakness He said that about the same time she gave his Laundress physick of whom she had Linen to pawn which she was warned to bring in Complaint was likewise made against her by a man and his wife who had bargain'd with her for a cure and had pawned a dozen of Napkins to raise money for her payment c. She
both by Physicians and Patients upon which account he procured the following Letter from the Earl of Exeter To my very loving friends the President and Censors of the College of Physicians Good Mr. President I Have had almost 20 years experience of the civil carriage honesty and sufficiency of my servant John Reeve Apothecary and am confident that in all affairs of his vocation he hath as skilfully carefully and legally demeaned himself as any of his Profession whatsoever Neverthelesse I understand that at sundry times since May last he hath been molested with Messengers from you and the Censors to make his appearance personally before you when by reason of his great sicknesse my self was deprived of his desired attendance in my service and well might you in such case have spared him also But I conceive that the false information of malitious persons against him and the Messengers fond hopes to enforce unnecessary fees from him was the cause of his molestation His service is of such consequence and esteeme with me that he is daily and hourly upon every notice to attend me and I may not want him being well assured of his honest and fair demeanour as well in the affairs of his profession as in all his actions And therefore I desire you to forbeare sending Messengers for him or interrupting him any further wherein you will oblige me who in no wise would see him suffer to acknowledge your respects towards him and rest always Your very loving friend J. Exeter To this Letter the President and Censors returned the following answer Right Honourable WE have in our dutifullest manner received your Honour's Letter written to us the President and Censors of this College in the behalf of John Reeve Apothecary your Honour's servant of whom we are very glad to heare how honest and usefull he hath been to your Honour for the desire we have that your Honour should be well served and should be as glad to have had the like testimony from others of his behaviour towards them wherein how little he hath answered the good opinion that your Honour hath of him your Honour may please to understand by this ensuing report Which is That upon the 19th of January 1637. one Sibyll Butler came before us in our College and declared how John Reeve Apothecary finding her husband inclined to a Consumption and for a moneth before and at that time being afflicted with a continuall scowring did let him bloud and gave him a sleeping pill every other night for 3 weeks together whereupon he dyed and thereupon the said Reeve being convented before us the 26th of the same moneth the accusation was verifyed by witnesses and made soe plaine that he was brought to confesse how he had let the said Butler bloud twice and given him certain pills and other things all of his own head and as he said out of his own Judgment alledging for his so doing that there were Physicians that would not give poore folks Counsell if they wanted money This practice found soe soul and contrary to Art by the Censors in a person that hath no calling or ability to give Physick was the cause of our sending for him which whether it be a molestation or no as he informes your Honour we remit to your Honour's Judgment now that your Honour is truely informed of the truth wherein we humbly desire your Honour to believe us without counterpoising his report with ours and the rather for that we forbeare to aggravate his fault with such circumstances as he knoweth we are able to bring against him if it were not for putting him out of your Honour's favour And for satisfying your Honour and to shew how absolute a power your Honour hath over us and every of us we doe remit to your Honour how farre the same shall be pleased to command us to proceed in the matter of the complaint Onely we are humble Suiters to your Honour to excuse us in the point of calling him before us upon the like occasions except it be at such times as we shall know he is in actual service with your Honour for that this being the due way granted us for the execution of our duty unlesse we shall leave it as a precedent for all other Offenders to decline us we may not remit it being bound by the trust that the State putteth upon us and charged by the continuall commandments of the Kings and Queens of the Realme and other admonitions of the Lords of his Majestie 's honourable Privy Council and lastly tyed by Oath at our entring into these places to look diligently to the abuses committed by bad practisers upon the lives of his Majestie 's Subjects and in which we as yet were never interrupted by any solicitation and soe with our heartiest prayers for your Honour 's long and prosperous estate we humbly take our leaves From our College-house the 28. Decemb. 1638. Bartholomew Vanderlash was accused for practising Physick which he denied but yet confessed that he had given healing draughts Upon which order was given for prosecuting him in the Court of Exchequer After this he was complained of by Dr. Crooke for giving purging pills to a woman in a Fever and Physick to another person for a year and half Dr. Spicer likewise exhibited several informations against him to the President and Censors As likewise one Mrs. Fitten to whom for a small pain and redness in her leg and arme he had given a powder in white Wine which purged her vehemently upward and downward above 25 times and 12 times the next day After which he gave her 4 fluxing pills of which she took onely 2 which caused a salivation for above 20 days for which she was forced to seek ease from Dr. Argent Vanderlash denied not this fact but avouched that he gave her the physick by directions from Dr. Read But because he confessed that he had no bill from the said Doctour the Censors took it for his own practice which they declared to be very bad and sent him to Newgate thereupon with a fine of 20 li. Russel Hutton Surgeon was complained of for giving pills of Turbith Mineral to one afflicted with a Dysury upon which he fell into pissing of bloud ulceration of the mouth and other ill symptomes He was punished 40 s. which if not discharged by the next Censors day he was to be committed to prison for mala praxis Du Pont was accused for prescribing Mercurial powder to several persons who had received great mischief by them One of them having lost 14 teeth Another by a Mercurial fumigation prescribed by him fell into swooning fits lost her teeth and was so dangerously ill that 2 Physicians were called in for her relief Du Pont being taken by the Beadle and brought before the President was released upon his brother's engagement for his appearance before the Censors but he broke his word his brother excusing him that he durst not come lest he should be imprisoned
sworn for the true performance of his Office 56 110. S. Seventh Son The cheats of one who pretended himself a Seventh Son with an Historical account of the College's proceedings with him 446 447 c. Statutes or Acts of Parliament how to be expounded 247 248. The difference betwixt Statute Rolls and Rolls of Parliament 268. By whom Statutes were formerly drawn up 268 269. Statutes relating to Physick or Surgery 3 H. 8. c. 11. p. 1. 5. H. 8. c. 6. 3. 14 15 H. 8. c. 5. 5. 32 H. 8. c. 40. 17. 32 H. 8. c. 42. 20. 34 35 H. 8. c. 8. 28. 1 Q. M. Ses 2. c. 9. 30. The 3 H. 8. repealed in effect by the 14 15 H. 8. 185. repealed by the 34 H. 8. 230 231. Its imperfections 252. The 14 15. H. 8. Thirty six Acts passed in the same Session of Parliament when this was made 16. confirmed by the first of Q. Mary 229. It repeals the 3 H. 8. in 3 main points 238. not restrained by the 34 35 H. 8. 253 254 258. The 34 35 H. 8. whether repealed or not is disputable 227 230 236 238 250. This Act extends onely to Surgeons 235 258. It gives liberty onely to those who practise for Piety and Charity excluding all that take money or gain 258. Surgeons By whom to be allowed for City and Countrey 2 3. Exempt from being Constables bearing Armour keeping Watch and Ward c. 3 4 5. The Authority and liberty of Barbers and Surgeons being made of one Company 21. By whom and when the Barbers of London were incorporated ibid. The benefits like to ensue by joyning the Barbers and Surgeons into one Company 22. The Barbers and Surgeons made one Company and incorporated ibid. The Barbers and Surgeons in London exempt from bearing of Arms or being in Watches or Inquests 24. Surgeons may yearly take 4 condemned persons for Anatomies ibid. No Barber in London shall use Surgery 25. No Surgeon in London shall use the craft of Shaving 26. Every Surgeon in London shall have a Sign at his door ibid. None shall be a Barber in London but a Freeman of the Company ibid. Four Wardens shall be chosen and their authority ibid. The forfeiture of offenders 27. Any person may keep a Barber or Surgeon as his servant ibid. Any person being no common Surgeon may minister outward medicines 28. By what means the Surgeons of London have abused the Statute of the 3 H. 8. c. 11. for their own gain ibid. It shall be lawfull for any person to cure outward Sores notwithstanding the Statute of 3 H. 8. c. 11. 29. A Letter sent to the Surgeons from the College requiring them to abstain from the practice of Physick 340. They are not to give inward medicines 315 316 343 344. Their endeavours to procure Letters Patents and an Act of Parliament to prescribe inward medicines in Wounds Vlcors and French Pox 359 c. The College's resentment thereof 361. A second attempt of theirs to procure Licence to administer Physick in all cases Chirurgical 406. Interdicted practice 348 363 367 422. Required to give bond not to practise 332 341 368 423. Discommuned 425. Fined or Fined and imprisoned by the Censors 315 319 331 332 333 340 341 348 349 355 365 367 375 384 395 413 422 438 446. T. Trials of the College against Empiricks è contrà Versus Gardiner pag. 147.  Versus Dr. Bonham 164.  Dr. Bonham versus the College 178 220.  versus Butler 221.  Butler versus the College 225.  versus Butler 229.  versus Bugge 259.  versus Huybert 261.  versus Needham 273.  Trials of the College against Empiricks c. Versus Bourne 275. Harder Merry Stone U. Vniversities Dr. Bonham's case The College's Declaration against him for practising Physick in London without licence 164. Dr. Bonham's Plea 171. The President 's reply viz. that his plea was invalid 175. Dr. Bonham justifies it ibid. Iudgment given by the Court of Kings Bench for the College against Dr. Bonham 177. He brings an Action of false imprisonment against the College 178 202. The College's Plea ibid. Bonham's reply 183 203. The College demurs and why 184. The Iudges divided in their opinions 184 186 209. Why Iudgment was entred for Dr. Bonham 188 189 196 201 220. Their Privileges secured in the 3 H. 8. p. 3. They may not practise in London c. 184 185 204 211 212 277 335 336 364. Summoned to give an account of medicines prescribed in London 377. Why they are subject to the examination correction and government of the College 278. Some of them rejected upon examination 315 348 350 362 376. Interdicted practice 334 350 364 366 377 383 409 419. gave bond not to practise 347 349. Sued or 〈◊〉 by the College 164 178 202 314 335 350 351 366 367 376 418 419 471. Fined or fined and imprisoned 334 348 350 362 363 366 376 407 409 438 47◠THE END 3 H. 8. c. 11. 14 15 H. 8. c. 5. 32 H. 8. c. 42. 1 Q. M. Ses 2. c. 9. K. James and K. Charles 2. in their Royal Patents Inconveniencies ensuing by ignorant Persons practising Physick or Surgery By whom every Physician and Surgeon shall be allowed A. Physician or Surgeon allowed by the Bishop of the Diocess The Privileges of Oxford and Cambridge The causes why Surgeons have been exempt from bearing of Armour or other Services Surgeons discharged of Enquests c. The Surgeons of London shall be exempt from being Constables bearing of Armour or to be put in Watches or Inquests A body Corporate of the faculty of Physick within London and 7 miles compass * rect nostrimunus A perpetual College of Physicians erected and granted in London and the Suburbs * Medicinam * Francisci A Prefident of the College and his office and duty The College shall have perpetual Succession and a Common Seal They shall be of ability to purchase Land They may sue and be sued They may make lawfull Assemblies and Ordinances for Government No man shall practise Physick in London or 7 miles thereof unless he be allowed Four Physicians of London shall be yearly chosen to have the oversight of the others * earum Physicians shall not be summoned on Juries in London The King's Letters Patents and every Article therein confirmed There shall be Eight Elects of the Physicians of London Physicians in other places must be examined by the President and 3 of the Elects * ostendit certis * ferme * assiden * Supple quà m Temporalibus * Modestiae * eidem * tempe * evid * excellenti †fine * tum * penitus * prodeundi Priviledges granted to Physicians in London The Physicians in London shall be discharged to bear certain Offices there Four Physicians shall be chosen yearly to search Apothecary-wares in London The forfeiture of an Apothecary that refuseth to have his house searched Stat. 1 M. 9. The