but by one of the Coroners or for affinity in one c. Yet the Process shall still go to the Coroners Ita quod the Coroner se non intromittat If Default be in the Sheriff and To whom Process shall be directed for default in the Sheriff and Coroners Coroners the Court may choose two Esliors and if the parties can say nothing against them they shall make the Pannel But the Distringas shall not be directed to Esliers for the Court cannot make Officers to distreyn the Kings Liege people but the King may 8 H. 6. 12. dubitatur Process may be directed to the Justices of Assise by assent of parties not without When a Pannel is made by the Esliors they shall afterwards serve all Process that comes upon this as the Sheriff should 15 E. 4. 24. 18 E. 4. 3 8. Rolls tit Tryal 670. For it may be the Sheriff will distreyn only those who are his friends and be partial When the Process is once awarded Venire facias once directed to the Coroners shall not be to the Sheriff afterwards to the Coroners for a default in the Sheriff if there be a new Sheriff made afterwards who is indifferent yet the Process shall not revert but continue to the Coroners pendant le plea. 14 H. 7. 31. Bro. tit Venire facias 17. So the Entry is Ita quod Vicecomes se non intromittat 18 E. 4. 3. 8 H. 6. 12. And therefore where the Sheriff ought Sheriff shall not return the Tales where he cannot the Venire facias not to retorn the Venire he cannot retorn the Tales For in Error in the Exchequer Chamber of a Iudgement in the Queen's Bench the Error assigned was because the Venire facias was awarded to the Coroners for Consanguinity in the Sheriff and it was retorned by the Coroner and afterwards a Tales was awarded and it was retorned by the Sheriff and it was tryed and a Verdict given and Iudgement And for this cause held to be Erroneous and not aided by the Statute of 32 H. 8. or 18 Eliz. Wherefore the Iudgement was reversed Cro. 3. par 574. Bro. tit Octo. Tales 9. I will instance one Case more in the same Reports fo 586. because it is very full in the point After issue in Trespass the Plaintiff for his expedition surmised that he was Servant to the Sheriff which being confessed by the Defendant the process was awarded to the Coroners and Where the Coroner returns the Venire facias he ought to return the Tales after Verdict it was moved in Arrest of Iudgement that the Tales de Circumstantibus was awarded and returned by the Sheriff which was held by the whole Court to be good cause for Staying the Iudgement For it is a mis-tryal not aided by any of the Statutes for process being once awarded to the Coroners the Sheriff afterwards is not the Officer to return the Jury no more than any other man And process ought always to be returned by him who is an Officer by Law to return it otherwise it is meerly void But afterwards upon view of the Record it appeared that the Tales was returned by the Coroners and their names annexed thereto wherefore it was without further question But the Court said if their names had not been annexed No name to the Return to the Tales yet it had been well enough for they be annexed to the first Pannel And it shall be intended that the right Officer return'd it and the usual course is That to such Tales there is not any officers name subscribed and yet it is good enough for it is not within the Statute of York which appoints that the name of the Sheriff should be subscribed but it was moved that the Record of the Postea is that the Tales were returned by the Sheriff But the Court held that it was amendable and it was done accordingly and the Plaintiff had Iudgement But if the Venire be awarded to the Coroners Venire facias to the Sheriff after one awarded to the Coroners for default in the Sheriff and they do nothing upon the Writ then I suppose upon a default discovered in the Coroners de puisne temps the party may shew this to the Court and have a Venire awarded to the Sheriff if there be an indifferent one made in the mean time or else to Esliors sice converso In Error of a Iudgement in Chester Venire facias to the Coroners after one to the Sheriff the parties being at issue a Venire was awarded to the Sheriff And at the day of the Return it was entred Quod Vicecomes non misit breve And then the Plaintiff prayed a Venire facias to the Coroners for Cozenage betwixt him and the Sheriff which was awarded accordingly and at the day of tryal the Defendant made default and there upon Iudgement Error was assigned because that after the Plaintiff had admitted the Sheriff to execute the Writ he could not pray a Venire facias to the Coroners without some cause de puisne Temps sed non allocatur because there was nothing done upon the first Writ And the Defendant having made default it was not material Cro. 3. part 853. But the Defendant might have demurred No Venire facias to the Coroners after one to the Sheriff to this prayer For if the Plaintiff pray a Venire facias to the Sheriff he shall not challenge the Array nor have a Venire afterwards to the Coroners because the Sheriff is his Cousin or for any other principal challenge whereof he might by common intendment have Conusance when he so prayed the Venire facias for upon shewing this Cause at first he might have prayed Process to the Coroners but for a principal challenge of which by common intendment the Plaintiff could not know at the first as that the Defendant is of kindred to the Sheriff c. he may afterwards challenge the Array when they appear or if the Sheriff doth nothing upon the Writ he may pray a new Venire to the Coroners 15 H. 7. 9. If the Plaintiff prayes a Venire facias to If the Defendant denies the Planitiffs suggestion he shall have no benefit of it by Challenge the Coroner because he is of kindred to the Sheriff if the Defendant will not confess this but denies it this shall be entred and the Defendant shall not challenge the Array for this cause afterwards Br. tit Venire facias 21. and 23. If a Venire facias be awarded to the Coroners By Consent the Venire facias may be directed to a wrong Officer where it ought to be to the Sheriff or the Visne cometh out of a wrong place yet if it be per assensum partium and so entred of Record it shall stand for omnis consensus tollit errorem 1 Inst 126. li. 5. Mistryal without such consent 36. But if it be directed to the Coroners where it ought to be to the Sheriff
it may be supplied by matter ex post facto and how And for this know that if damages be left out of a Vide hic cap. 6. Verdict this omission cannot be supplied by Writ of Inquiry of damages for this would prevent the Defendant of his Remedy by Attaint which would be very mischievous for then such omission might be on purpose to deprive the Plaintiff of his Attaint li. 10. 119. And the Rule is That when the Court ex officio ought to inquire of any thing upon which no Attaint lies There the omission of this may be supplyed by â— Writ of Inquiry of damages as in a Quar impedit if the Jury omit to enquire of these 4 things that is to say de plenitudine ex cujus presentatione si tempus semestre transierit and the value of the Church per annum there the Plaintiff may have a Writ to inquire of these points Dyer 241. 260. because of these no Attaint lies as it is holden in 11 H. 4. 80. because that as to these the Inquest is but of Office But in all cases where any point is omitted whereof on Attaint lyeth there this shall not be supplyed by Writ of Inquiry upon which no Attaint lyeth And therefore in Detinue if the Jury find Damages and Cost and no value as they ought this shall not be supplyed by Writ of Inquiry of damages for the Reason aforesaid Ib. Et sic in similibus But how then What shall the Plaintiff Verdict set aside because the damages not well assessed loose the benefit of his Verdict because the Jury assessed no damages or did insufficiently assess them Certes in such Cases where damages only are to be recovered he must loose the whole benefit of his Verdict but where any thing else is to be recovered besides damages as in Debt Ejectment c. he may release his damages and have Iudgment Release Damages upon his Verdict as to the rest And so where damages are to be recovered if part of them are assessed insufficiently and part well he may have Iudgment for those damages well assessed And oftentimes the insufficiencâ— Verdict set aside in part of the Declaration shall set aside the Verdict as if an Action upon the Case be brought upon two promises and one of For insufficiency in the Declaration them be insufficiently laid and the Verdict give intire damages this is naught for the whole But if the Damages had been severally assessed upon the several promises then the Verdict as to the promise well laid should have stood In the 11th Report fo 56. Marsh brought a Writ of Annuity against Bentham and the parties discended to issue which was tryed for the Plaintiff and the Arrerages found c. But the Iurors did not assess any damages or Cost which Verdict was insufficient and could not be supplyed by Writ of Inquiry of damages wherefore Release of damages where none were assessed the Plaintiff released his damages and costs and upon this had Iudgment upon which the Defendant brought a Writ of Error and assigned the Error aforesaid scil the insufficiency of the Verdict fed Judicium affirmatur because the Plaintiff had released his damages and costs which is for the benefit of the Defendant In Detinue of Charters or non detinet Verdict for the Plaintiff and Damages but the Iury did not find the value of the Déeds and a Writ of Inquiry was awarded to that purpose and returned and ruled good and by Twisden Just Debt against Executor who pleads plenè c. and it 's fouâ—d against him and the Iury give no damages that can't be aided by Writ of Inquiry Burton versus Robinson Pasch 17 Car. 2. B. R. In Dyer 22 Eliz. 369. 370. In a Wri Release of damages where they were not well assessed of Ejectione Custodiae terrae haeredis the Iurors assessed damages intirely which was insufficient for it lay not for the Heir yet the Plaintiff released his damages and had Iudgment for the Land And Note that insufficient assessment of damages and no assessing is all one The Iury ought to assess no more damages Damages and Costs pro injdria illata than the Plaintiff declares for But they may assess so much and moreover give cost which is called Expensae litis though in the proper and general signification Dampnum also comprehends Costs of Suit as the Entry reciting both damages and costs well affirms scil Quae dampna in toto se attingunt cum c. But if the Iury do assess more damages More damages than the Plaintiff declares for then the Plaintiff declares for the Plaintiff may remit the overplus and pray Iudgment for the residue as in the 10th Report fol. 115. in Trespass the Plaintiff declared ad dampnum c. 40 l. at the tryal the Iury assessed damages occasione transgressionis prâ—dict ad 49 l. and for costs of Suit 20 s. upon which Verdict the Plaintiff at the day in Bank remitted 9 l. parcel of the said 49 l. assessed for damages and prayed Iudgement for 40 l. Damages remitted to which damage he had counted with increase of costs of suit and had 9 l. de Incremento added by the Court which in all amounted to 50 l. and had his Iudgment accordingly upon which a Writ of Error was brought and the Iudgment affirmed For as in real Actions the Demandant shall not count to Damages c. because it is incertain to what sum the damages will amount by reason he is to recover damages pendant le briefe so in the ease of Costs he shall recover for the expences depending the suit which being uncertain cannot be comprehended in the Count because the Count extends to damages past and not to expences of Suit For in personal Actions he counts Damages in real and personal Actions to damages because he shall recover damages only for the wrong done before the Writ brought and shall not recover damages for any thing pendant le briefe But in real Actions the Demandant never counts to damages because he is to recover damages also pendant le briefe which are incertain The Iury may if they will assess the damages Damages and Costs intirely assessed and costs intirely together without making any distinction 18 E. 4. 23. But then they must not assess more damages and costs than the damages are which the Plaintiff counts to for if they do the Plaintiff shall recover only so much as he hath declared for without any increase of cost because the Court cannot distinguish how much they intended for cost and how much for damages As in 13 H. 7. 16. 17. One Darrel brought a Writ of Trespass and counted to his damage 20 marks the Defendant pleaded not guilty and the Iury taxed the damages and costs of suit joyntly to 22 marks and the Verdict was held to be good for 20 marks and void for the residue because it doth not appear how much
assisas in ComÌ„ N. Capiend assignÌ„ ê‘ formam statuti c. venÌ„tam infra nominatÌ„ J. A. quaÌ„ infra scriptÌ„ H. C. ê‘ atturnatÌ„ suos infra ContentÌ„ IurÌ„ Iure unde infra fit mentio ExactÌ„ similitÌ„ venerÌ„ Qui ad veritatem de infra ContentÌ„ dicend electi triati Iurati fuerÌ„ Super quo pÌ„d H. ê‘ quendam J. B. de Consilio ipsius H. C. manutentione exitus interius IunetÌ„ Coram pÌ„fatÌ„ IustÌ„ IurÌ„ pÌ„d in Evidentijs oftend dicÌ„ quod c. Here recite the Evidence truely unde petitÌ„ IudiciuÌ„ qd IurÌ„ pÌ„d veredictÌ„ suum de suê‘ infra ContentÌ„ pro ipso H. reddant c. Et pd J. A. ê‘ quendaÌ„ C. J. de Consilio suo Demurrer dicÌ„ qd materia ê‘d ê‘ pÌ„fatÌ„ H. C. IurÌ„ pred suê‘ius in Evidentiis ostentÌ„ minus in lege existic ad pro band exitum interius IunctÌ„ pro parte ejusdem H. quodque ipse ad materiam illam in forma pÌ„d in EvidentÌ„ ostentÌ„ necesse necesse non habet nec ê‘ legem terrÌ„ tenetÌ„ respondere hoc paratus est verificare unde pro defectu sufficientÌ„ materÌ„ IurÌ„ pÌ„d in hac parte ostens Idem I. petitÌ„ IudicÌ„ quod IurÌ„ de VeridictÌ„ suo suê‘ Exit pÌ„d reddend exoneretur debitum suum infra specÌ„ una cum dampnÌ„ suis occasione de tentÌ„ debiti illius sibi addiundi cari c. Et pÌ„d H. C. Ex quo ipse sufficÌ„ materÌ„ in Joynde lege ad manutenen exitÌ„ infra ContentÌ„ pro parte ipsius H. IurÌ„ pred suê‘ius in EvidentÌ„ ostens qd ipse ê‘atÌ„ est verificare quaÌ„ quidem materiaÌ„ pÌ„d J. non dedicit nec ad eam aliqualiter respond sed verificationem illam admittere omnino recusat petÌ„ IudicÌ„ qd pred J. ab actione sua pred versus Eum habend precludatur ac qd IurÌ„ pred de VeredictÌ„ suo suê‘ exitÌ„ pred reddend onerentur c. A Precedent of a Demurrer upon the Evidence And now at this day the said Plaintiff and Defendant by their Attornies did appear and the Iury likewise did appear and were sworn c. upon which Sir T. W. Serjeant at Law of Councel with the Plaintiff gave in Evidence so and so and repeat it truely and did require the Iurors to find for the Plaintiff upon which J. C. of Councel with the Defendant saith That the Evidence and Allegations aforesaid alledged were not sufficient in Law to maintain the Issue joyned for the Plaintiff to which the Defendant néedeth not nor by the Laws of the Land is not holden to give any Answer wherefore for default of sufficient Evidence in this behalf the Defendant demands Iudgment that the Iurors aforesaid of giving their Verdict be discharged c. and that the Plaintiff be barr'd from having a Verdict c. Then the Plaintiff joyns and says That he hath given sufficient matter in Evidence to which the Defendant hath given no Answer c. and demands Iudgment and that the Iury be discharged and that the Defendant be Convicted then the Iury may give Damages if Iudgment shall happen to be for the Plaintiff c. A Bill of Exception Memorand That the First day of August Ebor. sc An. 1650. before T. P. and W. Iustices of our said Lord the King for taking of Assizes in the said County assigned in a Plea of Trespass and Ejectment which J. S. in the Court of our said Lord the King before himself by Bill doth Prosecute against E. B. supposing by the said Bill that the aforesaid T. B. c. and recite the substance of the Declaration or what it is c. and the Issue and then what the Evidence to prove the Defendant guilty was c. which here was a Surrender of a Copyhold out of Court c. and that he desired the Iury aforesaid to give their Verdict for the said T. B. of and upon the Premisses and that he likewise desired the Iudges aforesaid that they would inform the Iury aforesaid that the Surrender aforesaid out of Court made was good and effectual in Law and the aforesaid Iustices the aforesaid Surrender of the Land aforesaid with the Appurtenances made out of Court of the Mannour aforesaid in form aforesaid did affirm to the said Iurors was not good in Law by which the said Thomas for that the aforesaid matter to the said Iurors in Evidence shewed doth not appear c. did request of the said Iustices according to the form of the Statute in such case provided this present Bill which doth contain in it the matter aforesaid above by him to the Iurors aforesaid shewed by which the said Clayton's Reports Iustices at the request of the said Thomas this Bill have sealed at D. aforesaid 1. Westm 2. 31. 13 E. 1. When the Iustices will not allow a Bill of Exception upon Prayer if the Party impleaded tender the same unto them in Writing and requires their Seals thereunto they or one of them shall do it 2. If the Exception sealed be not put into the Roll upon Complaint thereof to the King the Iustice shall be sent for and if he cannot deny the Seal the Court shall procéed to Iudgment according to the Exception This Bill of Exception is given by the Statute Westm 2. cap. 31. before which Statute a man might have had a Writ of Error for Error in Law either in redditione Judicii in redditione Executionis or in Processu c. which Error in Law must be apparent in the Record or for Error in sait by alledging matter out of the Record as the death of either party c. before Iudgment But the mischief was if either party did offer any exception praying the Iustices to allow it and the Iustices over-ruling it so as it was never entred of Record this the party could not assign for Error because it neither appeared within the Record nor was any Error in fait but in Law and so the party grieved was without remedy until this Statute was made This Act extendeth to all Courts to all Actions and to both parties and to those who come in their places as to the vouchee c. who comes in loco tenentis It extendeth not only to all Pleas Dilatory and Peremptory c. to Prayers to be received Oier of any Record or Déed and the like but also â—o all Challenges of Iurors and any material Evidence given to any Iury which by the Court is Over-ruled 2 Inst fo 427. All the Iustices ought to Seal the Bill of Exceptions yet if one doth it it is sufficient if all refuse it is a contempt in them all And the party grieved may have a Writ grounded upon this Statute commanding them to put their Seals Juxta formam Statuti hoc sub periculo quod incumbit nullatenus omittatis The party must pray the Iustices to put their Seals but if they deny it they may be
shall not be tryed by Certificat but per pais Rolls tit Tryal 583. Concerning Certificates of Spiritual persons vide Rolls ibidem 591 592. 7. A Record shall be tryed by the Record it Records self and not per pais But matter of fact concerning a Record is tryable by a Jury as whether a plaint c. was levied according to the Custom non prosecutus est ullum breve is tryable by the Country Mixt with fact Hob. 244. Hutt 20. So if a Statute hath two Seals or but one 1 Leon. 229. 2 Cro. 375. 1 Inst 125. b. so in a per quae servitia if the Tenant say he held not of the Conusor Jour del note levie shall be tryed per pais In Escape upon a Cepi returned ne unques in son gard shall be tryed per Record but upon Rolls tit Tryal 574. a Capias not returned the prisal shall be tryed per pais So shall an action brought by Covin for the Covin is not of Record In a scire facias per Roy to have execution of a Iudgment in a Quare impedit if the Def. say that after the Recovery the King presented issint Judgement execute and the issue be whether the King presented per cause del Judgement or of an avoydance after the death of J. S. who was presented by a stranger after the avoidance upon which the King had Iudgment This shall be tryed per pais And Why there needs no visne where Letters Patents were made otherwise in pleading Deeds 4 Rep. 71. for this Reason in pleading of Letters Patents the place need not be alledged where the Letters Patents were made because the Dâ—fendant cannot plead nul tiel Record but must plead non concessit and then the Jury shall come from the place where the Lands lie Vide li. 6. fo 15. 1 Inst 117. 260. Plo. Com 231. But upon a Non est factum pleaded to a Deed there must be a place alledged where the Deed was made because though the Deed as to the matter of Law be tryable by the Court yet the sealing and delivery thereof Deeâ— and other matter of fact must be tryed by the Jury so that in this case of a Deed there is a Tryal per Pais and by the Court. 1 Inst fol. 35. vide apres 18. The issue upon an Indictment or acquittal What issues shall be tryed per Record upon this shall be tryed by the Record So shall the allowance of a Protection in Bank The imprisonment upon the execution and not for other cause in escape The justification of an imprisonment because he is a Iustice of Peace A Statute-Merchant Count or not Count Baron of the Parliament or Vicount or not Whether a place be within the Ligeance of the King of England or in Scotland A Fine sur release Rendring his body in discharge of his Baile shall be tryed by the Record Rolls tit Tryal 574. But in escape against the Mayor of Astaple What per Pais for suffering J. S. in execution upon a Statute Staple to go at large if the Defendant say he was not in Prison upon the execution but upon a Plaint there this shall be tryed per pais and not per Record because 't would be unreasonable that the Defendant should certifie a Record where he himself was concerned ibid. The time of inrolliing Letters Patents shall be tryed per pais Co. Lib. 4. 71. 9 H. 7. 2. Disseisin of an Office in any Court or Office Raseing a Record rasing a Record in any Court by the Filizers and Attorneys of the Court. 8. A Peer of the Realm i. e. a Lord of Peers the Parliament shall upon an Indictment of Treason or Felony misprision of Treason and misprision of Felony be tryed by his Peers without Oath 1 H. 4. 2. But in an Appeal at the Suit of the Party he shall be tryed per probos legales homines Juratores 10 E. 4. 6. c. because that is not the Kings Suit but the Parties Vide li. 9. 31. Le case del Abbot de Strata Mercella And in a Praemunire his Tryal shall be per pais 12 Bep 93. Lamb. Inâ—t 520. 3. Inst 30. Bolstr 1. part 198. Dutchesses Countesses or Baronesses although married shall be tryed as Peers of the Realm are but so shall not Bishops and Abbots Stam. 153. 20 H. 6. 9. 2. Inst 48 49 50. 156. b. 294. 9. The Customs and usages of every Court shall be tryed by the Judges of the Customs of Courts c. tryed by the Judges same Court if they are pleaded in the same Court ib. and many other things are tryed by the Judges as the reasonableness of a fine of an offender or upon surrender of a Copy-hold Estate and so it is of Customes services and also of the time that a Tenant at will shall have to carry away his Goods And these Cases come under the Rule which makes matter of Law to be tryed by the Judges Vide 1 Inst fol. 56. And in some Cases matter of fact shall be tryed by the Judges as if the Plaintiff appear by Attorney in Court and then the Defendant pleads that the Plaintiff is dead If one appears and saith that he is the Plaintiff whether he is or not shall be tryed by Inspection the Judges li. 9. 30. So the non-age of an Infant generally by inspection of the Court But in many Cases Infancy shall be tryed per Pais as if an Infant appear by Attorney v. Bulst 1 part 131. Rolls tit Tryals 573. in Error this shall be tryed per Pais li. 9. 31. and so it is in an Aetate probanda Maihim in an Appeal of Maihim the Maihim Court may adjudge this upon the view at the prayer of the Defendant and this Tryal is peremptory to the Parties by a Jury of Chirurgeons Vide Rolls tit Tryal 578. Maihim may be tryed again by the Court by inspection for increase of Damages but then these things are to be considered First it must be a Maihim and not a bare wounding Secondly The Maihim must be ascertained in the declaration so as that it Maihim may appear that the Maihim inspected and the Maihim in the declaration be all one as was resolved Mich. 21 Car. 2. B. R. in the Case of Badwel and Burford the principal Case of which was that the Defendant whip'd the Plaintiffs Horse which made him throw her and another Horse trod on her and maim'd her hand and adjudged no increase of Damages in that Case being a Consequential and not a direct Maihim Nonage in a Writ of Error to reverse a Inspection Iudgement or a fine of the Tenant by resceit of one vouched come deins age issint praie le paroll à demurrer Nonage sur aid praier in Appeal Audita querela to avoid a Statute Accompt and in all actions where 't is prayed that the paroll demurroit Nonage shall be tryed per
without such consent of parties This is an insufficient Tryal not remedied by any Statute except it be upon an insuffâ—ient suggestion and then the Statute of 21 Jac. 13. helps it Vpon suggestion that the Plaintiff and Venire facias to some of the Coroners the Sheriff and one of the Coroners are of kindred to the Plaintiff or Defendant or upon any other suggestion which contains a Principal challenge the Venire facias may be directed to the other Coroners Dier 367. Error of a Iudgement in Northampton Bayliffs because in Northampton the Court being held before the Mayor and two Bayliffs the Venire facias upon the Issue was awarded to the two Bayliffs to return a Jury before the Mayor and Bayliffs secundum Consuetudinem which being returned and Iudgement given the Error assigned was because the Bayliffs being Iudges of the Court could not also be Officers to whom Process should be directed there being no Custome that can maintain any to be both Officer and Iudge But all the Court absente Hide conceived it might be good by Custome And that it is not any Error for the Iudges be not the Bayliffs only but the Mayor and Bayliffs and it is a common course in many of the Antient Corporations where the Bayliffs are Judge and Officer to return Writs Judges or the Mayor and they be Judges yet in respect of executing Process they be the Officers also And one may be Iudge and Officer diversis respectibus as in Redisseisin the Sheriff is Judge and Officer Whereupon Iudgement was affirmed Cro. 1 part 138. In Trespass and Assault laid in the Venire facias to the Garden of the Palace of Westminster Rolls tit Tryal 667. Court to be at the Palace of Westminster It was adjudged that the Venire facias shall issue al Garden del Palace and not to the Sheriff of Middlesex Bro. tit Ven. fac 31. In Trespass against two if one plead Award of Venire facias and two issues are joyned upon his Plea and two other issues are also joyned and the Court award a Venire ad triandum extitum illum quam praedictum alium exitum inter the Plaintiff and the other Defendant c. This is a good award although there be several issues betwixt the Plaintiff and both Defendants because that this word Exitus may be for all reddendo singula singulis Hob. 91. If an Inquest remain for default of Rapers and a Decem Tales is awarded and the Defendant saith for his deliverance that he is Lord of the Rape where c. and that all there are within his distress and prays a Writ to the next Hundred The Court may try this by Prochein Hundred Tryors presently without a return of the Sheriff and if it be true may award to the next Hundred otherwise if it be false 3 H. 6. 39. CAP. IV. What faults in the Venire facias shall vitiate the Tryal what not When a Venire facias de novo shall be awarded when several Venire facias's When the Venire facias shall be betwixt the party and a stranger to the Issue Who may have a Venire facias by Proviso and when WE have now shewed you to what Officer the Venire facias shall be directed The next step in the Writ is Praecipimus tibi quod Venire facias Which words Venire facias are Venire facias why the Writ so called the most effectual words in the Writ and therefore they give the denomination to the whole Writ And here opportunity is offered us to speak something of a Venire facias in general I am not ignorant how our Books swarm with Cases which arise from the defects in this Process and how that Verdicts have been set aside Iudgements stayed and reversed for want of sufficicient Returns misawarding disagreement with the Rolls discontinuance and many other faults in this Writ But the Statutes of Jeofailes especially the Statute 21 Jacob. cap. 13. have pardoned as I Statute of Jeofailes 21 Jac. 13. may so say these enormities As the awarding this Writ hab Corpora or Distringas to a wrong Officer upon any insufficient suggestion or by reason the Visne is in some part misawarded or sued out of more places or of fewer places than it ouhgt to be so as some place be right named The misnaming of any of the Jury either in Sir-name or addition in any of the said Writs or in any return thereupon so that upon examination it be proved to be the same man that was meant to be returned or if no Return be upon any of the said Writs so as a Pannel of the names of the Jurors be returned or annexed to the said Writ or if the Sheriff or Officers name having the Return thereof is not set to the Return of any such Writ so as upon Examination it be proved that the said Writ was returned by the Sheriff or Undersheriff or such other Officer In all these Cases the Iudgment shall not be stayed nor reversed for these defects But this Act doth not extend to any Writ Declaration or Suit of Appeal of Felony or Murther nor to any Indictment or Presentment of Felony or Murther or Treason nor to any Process upon any of them nor to any Writ Bill Action or Information upon any popular or penal Statute Wherefore since Informations and popular Actions are grown so frequent Popular Action c. the Attorneys c. herein had best beware of these Jeofailes By this Statute many defects are remedied which were not by the Statutes of 32 H. 8. Cap. 30. and 18 Eliz. Cap. 14. yet all are not for this Act only helps the mis-naming of a Juror in Sir-name or addition and saith nothing of his Christian name wherefore I conceive the Law in Christian name mistaken in the Venire facias incurable Codwels Case in the fifth Report remains as it was then which is that if a Juror be mis-named in his Christian name on the Venire though he be named right in the Distringas and Postea yet this is ill and not amendable and with this agrées Goddards Case Cro. 2. part 458. And since the Court Cro. 1. part so 203. doubted thereof I may well put the Christian name right in the Venine facias wrong in the Distringas Question if a Juror be right named upon the Venire and mis-named in his Christian Name in the Distringas c. whether this is amendable or not without dispute it is not by the Statute of 21 Jacob. for that only helps the Sir-name But with Reverence to the Courts doubt I conceive clearly it is holpen by the Statutes of 32 H. 8. and 18 Eliz. as a discontinuance of Process and I may with the more confidence believe it because in Codwels Case aforesaid where in the Pannel of the Venire a Juror was named Palus Cheale and in the Distringas c. he was right named Paulus Cheale and so because he
English County to cause the Jury to come de propinquiori Visne of his County to the Visne in Wales adjoyning For the Court shall not be ousted of the Plea Fitz. Abridg. tit Visne 8. Jurisdict 24. In an action against a Hundred the Venire facias may come from the next Hundred generally In Trespass if the Defendant plead not guilty to part and to the residue a Plea which causes the Tryal of that to be by a Jury de Prochein Hundred The Venire shall be awarded al Prochein Hundred for both issues because there ought not to be two Venire facias in one action vide Rolls tit Tryal 596. In an Appeal of murder committed in the Cinque Ports although the King be concerned yet because this is betwixt common persons the Venire facias to the next adjoyning Vill. ibidem If the issue be joyned of a matter in Ireland Ireland this shall be tryed by a Jury of the next County in England ib. If the issue be to be tryed by the Venue of Prochein Hundred a Mannor and the Plaintiff suggests that he is Lord of the Hundred in which the Mannor is and that all within the Hundred are within his Distress if the Defendant acknowledge this the Venue shall not be de Corpore Comitatus but of the next Hundred for if it should be de Corpore Comitatus this should be tryed by the Tenants of the Mannor Rolls ib. 667. If the Visne is in some part mis-awarded or Visne mis-awarded in part sued out of more places or fewer than it ought to be so as some place be right named this is aided by the Stat. of Jeofailes which hath ended the differences in many cases reported in our Books concerning this point wherefore I purposely omit them Error for that the Iudgment was given Infamy where the Land lies by default against the Defendant being an Infant upon issue that he was of full age adjudged that the Tryal should be in Norfolk where the Land was and not in Middlesex where the Action was brought Cro. 3. part 818. If the Visne cometh from a wrong place May be out of a wrong place by Consent yet if it be per assensum partium and so entred of Record it shall stand for Omnis Consensus tollit errorem 1 Inst 125. Holmes vers Sanders Hill 22 23 Car. B. R. Error to reverse a Iudgement given in the Kings Bench in Ireland in Debt for Rent brought by the Assignes of a reversion the Plaintiff declared of a Lease of Land in such a Parish in the Suburbs of Dublin on nil debet pleaded the Venire facias was from the said Parish in Civitate Dublin and Iudgement there per Plaintiff it was assign'd for Error because the Land lies in the Suburbs of the City and the Venire facias was from a Parish in the City Per Cur. It is all one for the Suburbs are always within the Franchise of the City as Fleetstreet is within the Suburbs of London but the Strand not though so reputed Note It was adjudged Error in an Inferior Court that the Venire facias was awarded secundum consuetudinem Curiae which ought to be per Curiam Reader vers More Mich. 1650. B. R. CAP. IX Challenges YOu have already seen of what Visne the Jury ought to be The next thing to be considered is concerning Challenges Challenge is a word common as well to the English as to the French and sometimes Challenge signifieth to claim and the Latine word is vendicare sometime in respect of revenge to challenge into the field and then it is called in Latine vindicare or provocare Sometime in respect of partiality or insufficiency to challenge in Court persons returned on a Jury And seeing there is no proper Latine word to signifie this particular kind of challenge they have framed a word anciently written Chalumniare and Columpniare and Calumpniare and now written Calumniare and hath no affinity with the verb Calomnior or Calumnia which is derived of that for that is of a quite other sense signifying a false accuser and in that sense Bracton useth Calumniator to Calumnâ—ator be a false accuser but is derived of the old word Caloir or Chaloir which in one signification is to care for or foresee And for that to challenge Jurors is the mean to care for or foresee that an indifferent Tryal be had it is called Calumniare to challenge that is to except against them that are returned to be Jurors and this is his proper signification But sometimes a Summons Sommonitio is said to be Calumniata and a Count to be challenged but this is improperly And forasmuch as mens Lives Fames Lands and Goods are to be tryed by Jurors it is most necessary that they be Omni exceptione majores and therefore I will handle this matter the more largely A Challenge to Jurors is twofold either Challenge is twofold to the Array or to the Polls to the Array of the principal Pannel and to the Array of the Tales And herein you shall To the Array understand that the Jurors names are ranked in the Pannel one under another which order or ranking the Jury is called the Array and the Verb to Array the Jury and so we say in common speech Battail Array for the order of the Battail Array And this Array we call Arraiamentum and to make the Array Arraiare derived of the French word Arroier so as to challenge the Array of the Pannel is at once to challenge or except against all the persons so Arrayed or Impannelled in respect of the Partiality or default of the Sheriff Coroner or other Officer that made the Return And it is to be known that there is a principal Principal Challenges cause of challenge to the Array a challenge to the favour principal in respect of partiality as first if the Sheriff or other Officers be of kindred or affinity to the Plaintiff or Defendant if the affinity continue Secondly If any one or more of the Jury be returned at the denomination of the party Plaintiff or Defendant the whole Array shall be quashed So it is if the Sheriff return any one that he be more favourable to the one than to the other all the Array shall be quashed Thirdly if the Plaintiff or Defendant have an Action of Battery against the Sheriff or the Sheriff against either party this is a good cause of challenge So if the Plaintiff or Defendant have an action of Debt against the Sheriff but otherwise it is if the Sheriff have an action of Debt against either party or if the Sheriff have parcel of the Land depending upon the same Title or if the Sheriff or his Bayliff which returned the Jury be under the distress of either party or if the Sheriff or his Bayliff be either of Counsel Attorney Officer in fee or of Robes or servant of either party Gossip or Arbitrator in the same
Juror shall be drawn in favour to the life of man And yet in a Prâ—cipe quod reddat by two and the Tenant challenge the Array because the Sheriff is Gossip to one of the Demandants and one Demandant acknowledge the challenge the other may say that this is not so and have it tryed Rolls tit Tryal 662. c. In Gager de ley none shall be challenged Ley gager for favour or insufficiency c. If there be a challenge for Cosinage he Cosinage that taketh the challenge must shew how the Juror is Cousin But yet if the Cosinage that is the effect and substance be found it sufficeth for the Law preferreth that which is material before that which is formal If the Juror have part of the Land that Dependingon the same Title dependeth upon the same Title If a Juror be within the Hundred Leet or any way within the Seigniory immediately or mediately or any other distress of Distress either party this is a principal challenge But if either party be within the distress of the Juror this is no principal challenge but to the favour If a Witness named in the Deed be returned Witness of the Jury it is a good cause of challenge of him So if one within age Infant of one and twenty be returned it is a good cause of challenge Vpon his own Act as if the Juror hath Challenges arising from the Jurors own Act. given a Verdict before for the same cause albeit it be reversed by Writ of Error or if after Verdict Iudgment were arrested So if he hath given a former Verdict upon the Former Verdict same Title or matter though between other persons But it is to be observed that I may speak once for all that in this or other like Cases he that taketh the challenge must shew the Record if he will have it take place as a principal challenge otherwise he must conclude to the favour unless it be a Record of the same Court and then he must shew the day and term So likewise one may be challenged that he was Indictor of the Plaintiff or Defendant Indictment either of Treason Felony Misprision Trespass or the like in the same cause If the Juror be Godfather to the Child of God father the Plaintiff or Defendant or è converso this is allowed to be a good challenge in our books If a Juror hath been an Arbitrator chosen Arbitrator by the Plaintiff or Defendant in the same cause and have been informed of or treated of the matter this is a principal challenge Otherwise if he were never informed nor treated thereof and otherwise if he were indifferently chosen by either of the parties though he treated thereof But a Commissioner Commissioner chosen by one of the parties for examination of Witnesses in the same cause is no principal cause of challenge for he is made by the King under the great Seal and not by the party as the Arbitrator is but he may upon cause be challenged for favour Arbitrator in another matter is no cause of challenge If he be of counsel Servant or of Robes Counsel or Fee or of either party it is a principal challenge If any after he be returned do eat and Eat or drink at the parties charge drink at the charge of either party it is a principal cause of Challenge otherwise it is of a Tryor after he be sworn Action brought either by the Juror against Actions of malice either of the parties or by either of the parties against him which may imply malice or displeasure are causes of principal challenge unless they be brought by Covin either before or after the return for if Covin be found then it is no cause of challenge other Actions which do not imply malice or displeasure are but to the favour as an action of debt c. More 3. In a cause where the Parson of a Parish Parson and Parishes is party and the right of the Church cometh in debate a Parishioner is a principal challenge Otherwise it is in debt or any other Action where the right of the Church cometh not in question If either party labour the Juror and give To labour the Jury him any thing to give his Verdict this is a principal challenge But if either party labour the Juror to appear and to do his Conscience this is no challenge at all but lawful for him to do it That the Juror is a Fellow Servant with Fellow Servant either party is no principal challenge but to the favour Neither of the parties can take that challenge to the Polls which he might have had To the Polls to the Array Note if the Defendant may have a principal cause of challenge to the Array if the Sheriff return the Jury the Plaintiff in that Venire facias to the Coroners case may for his own expedition alledge the same and pray Process to the Coroners which he cannot have unless the Defendant will confess it but if the Defendant will not confess it then the Plaintiff shall have a Venire facias to the Sheriff and the Defendant shall never take any challenge for that cause and so in like cases But on the part of the Defendant any such matter shall not be alledged and Process prayed to the Coroners because he may challenge the Jury for that cause and can be at no prejudice Challenge concluding to the favour when Challenges to the favour either party cannot take any principal challenge but sheweth causes of favour which must be left to the conscience and discretion of the Tryors upon hearing their evidence to find him favourable or not favourable But yet some of them come neerer to a principal challenge than other As if the Juror be of kindred or under the distress of him in the reversion or remainder or in whose right the Avowry or Iustification is made or the like These be in principal challenges because he in Reversion remainder or in whose right the Avowry or Iustification is is not party to the Record otherwise it is if they were made parties by aid Receipt or Voucher and yet the cause of favour is apparent so it is of all principal causes if they were party to the Record Now the causes of favour Favour are infinite and thereof somewhat may be gathered of that which hath been said and the rest I purposely leave the Reader to the reading of in our books concerning that matter For all which the rule of Law is that he must stand indifferent as he stands unsworn The Subject may challenge the Polls King where the King is party And if a man be out-lawed of Treason or Felony at the Suit of the King and the party for avoiding thereof alledgeth imprisonment or the like at the time of the Outlawry though the issue be joyned upon a collateral point yet shall the party have such
one challenged by the Plaintiff and the other by the Defendant When the Tryal is to be had by two Counties the manner of the tryal is worthy of observation and apparent in our Books If the four Knights in the Writ of Right be challenged they shall try themselves and they shall choose the grand Assise and try the challenges of the parties If the cause of challenges touch the dishonour or discredit of the Juror he shall not be examined upon his Oath but in other cases he Juror examined shall be examined upon his Oath to inform the tryors If an Inquest be awarded by default the Defendant hath lost his challenge but the Plaintiff may challenge for just cause and that shall be examined and tryed Wheresoever the Plaintiff is to recover View per visum juratorum there ought to be six of the Jury that have had the view or known the Land in question so as he be able to put the Plaintiff in possession if he recover In Proprietate probanda and a Writ Challenges to inquire for waste the parties have been received to take their challenges But passing over many things touching this matter I will conclude with the saying of Bracton Plures autem aliae sunt causae recusandi juratores de quibus ad praesens non recolo sed quae jam enumeratae sunt sufficiant exempli causa 1 Inst 157 158. Treat doth signifie as taken out or withdrawn Treat what and is applied to a Juror that is withdrawn by consent or removed and discharged by challenge A Juror sick was withdrawn and another sworn Palmers Reports 411. If the Defendant do not appear at the tryal Challenge lost when he is called he loseth his challenge to the Jurors although he doth afterwards appear 'T is a good challenge to a Juror to say he A wrong name is returned by another name in the Pannel A Juror appeared and said he had no No Freehold Freehold and prayed that he might not serve yet the Judge would not spare him for he may have an action against the Sheriff for returning him Rolls 2 part Reports 483. CAP. The Challenge pro defect Hundred must be written in Parchment and tâ—e Council must arraign it in French upon which the Defendant may take issue or demur The Clerk or Associate in Court must call the Jury over and ask if they have any Lands within the Hundred or had at the time of the Array of the Pannel and whether they dwell or did dwell in the same And upon examination if it appear clearly that they have no Lands or Tenements nor dwell in the Hundred then the Clerk is to mark them by the side of every of their names thus prâ—ter Hundred but if he find there be two Hundredors he is to resort back to the praeâ—er Hundred and swear them in order So that you see the Tryal whether Hundredors or not is determined by the Courts examination by the Poll severally But if the Council demur and the other side joyn in demurrer the Iudge of Assises may affirm the Challenge and over-rule the Demurrer or allow the Demurrer good and proceed to the Tryal of the Cause or if the Iudge doubt it may be determined in Bank but this is great delay If the challenge be adjudged good the Court awards Que le pannel il soit casse At Common Law there ought to have been In Cities Corporations Burroughs and Towns and Counties this Challenge cannot be 4 Hundredors returned and appeared in all actions pro meliori notitia causae in controversia for vicini vicinorum facta scire praesumuntur But by the Statute 35 H. 8. ca. 6. six are to be returned and appear But since by the Statute 27 Eliz ca. 6. if two Hundredors be returned and appear it is sufficient in all personal actions But in real actions there must be six or else Remanet pro defectu Jur. The Court shall appoint two Tryors in a challenge to the Poll and if they find two indifferent the first Tryors shall be discharged and the two that are found indifferent being sworn to try the Issue shall also be sworn to try the rest of their Fellows At Common Law there used to be returned 24 upon the Venire and afterwards a Habeas corpora with a Decem Tales and if a full Jury did not appear or were challenged then a Distringas with an Octo Tales and so to the Duo Tales if there was not a Tales de circumdantibus may be in the case of Aliens full Jury And this was the course until the Statute 35 H. 8. which gives the Tales de circumstantibus at the Assises c. and by the Stat. 5 Phil. Marie ca 7. where the King Queen or Informer c. are parties A Challenge may be taken to those of the Tales de circumstantibus By the Statute 33 Ed. 1. The King and those who prosecute for him must shew their cause of Challenge as betwixt party and party and left to the discretion of the Iustices The King or any one authorised for him may release his challenge Where the party may challenge the King may challenge 'T is no challenge to say the Juror is the Kings Tenant or that he is favourable to the King but 't is good to say the Sheriff or Juror bears grudge or malice to the Defendant where the King is party If the Juror hath any Freehold 't is sufficient although not to 40 s. a year For the Statute which injoyns that speaks only betwixt party and party The first who challenges be he Plaintiff or Defendant shall have the preference and advantage of his challenge If a Juror be once challenged and withdrawn upon the principal he cannot serve upon the Tales if he doth 't is Error and Iudgement may be stayed And so if he be challenged and a Jury remain pro defect Juratorum if he be sworn upon a new Distringas 't is Error not helped by any Statute of Jeofailes and a mis-tryal and a Venire facias de novo may be awarded Cro. Eliz. fol. 429. Whitbys Case Elisors may be sworn in some cases to return and impannel all Juries as should upon any Venire facias Habeas Corpora or Distringas Jur. come to their hands impartially indifferently and without favour or affection or at the denomination of any person The Record of Attainder Conviction Excommunication Outlawry c. or a Copy thereof ought to be produced to prove the cause of challenge thereupon Where bodies politick or Corporate are concerned a challenge may be taken which arises from the individuals as Brother to one of the Prebendaries is a good challenge where the Dean and Chapter are parties c. Hob. 87. so a Parishioner where the right of the Church comes in question at the Suit of the Parson 17. Ass 15. In High-Treason the prisoner may peremptorily challenge to the number of 35. which is under the
is insufficient for the whole But if the Iury give a Verdict of the whole Finding more than the Issue Issue and of more c. That which is more is Surplusage and shall not stay Iudgment for Utile per inutile non vitiatur Leon. 1 part 66. Gro. 1 part 130. But necessary incidents required by Law the Iury may find Yet in many Cases nay almost in all Where the Verdict ought to be of more than is in the Issue the Iury ought to find more than is put in Issue otherwise their Verdict is not good and therefore they are to assess Damages and Cost because it is parcel of their Charge as a Consequent upon the Issue though tâ— be not part of the Issue in terminis li. 10. 119. An Action of the Case on Deceit was brought for that he sold unto the Plaintiff two Oxen and warranted them to be sound on not Guilty the Iury found him Guilty as to one and not Guilty to the other and good for that the Action was founded not on the Contract but the Deceit 3 Cro. 884. Gravenor and Mete In Debt the Plaintiff declares that he had Iudgment against Baron and Feme for a Debt of the Wives dum sola c. that they were in Execution and suffered to Escape the Iury found the Husband only in Execution and Escaped and Iudgment for the Plaintiff Roberts versus Herbert Hill 12. Car. 2. C. B. So in Trespass against two one comes Damages by the first Inquest and pleads Not guilty and is found guilty In this case the first Inquest shall assess damages for the whole Trespass by both Defendants and afterwards the other comes and pleads Not guilty and is found guilty The finding of Damages by the first Inquest to which he was not party shall bind him and therefore if the Damages are outragious and excessive the Defendant Attaint in the last Enquest shall have an Attaint li. 10. 119. So in Trespass Quare clausum fregit if Issue be joyned upon a Feoffment and the Jury give outragious Damages An Attaint lies for the inquiry of Damages is consequent and dependant upon the Issue and parcel of their charge Ibidem In the 11th Report fo 5. It was resolved Damages by the first Inquest That in Trespass against two where one comes and appears c. against whom the Plaintiff declares with a simul Cum c. who pleads and is found guilty and Damages assessed by the Enquest and afterwards the other comes and pleads and is found guilty The Defendant which pleaded last shall be charged with the Damages taxed by the first Inquest for the Trespass which the Plaintiff had made joynt by his Writ and Count and done at one time cannot be severed by the Jurors if they find the Trespass to be done by all at one and the same time as the Plaintiff declared So in the Trespass against divers Defendants Several Damages Vide Devant ca. 4. if they plead not guilty or several Pleas and the Jury find for the Plaintiff in all the Jurors cannot assess several Damages against the Defendants because all is but one Trespass and made joynt by the Plaintiff by his Writ and Count. And although that one of them was more malicious and de facto did more and greater wrong than the others yet all came to do an unlawful act and were of one party so that the act of one is the act of all of the same party being present But in Trespass against two if the Jurors find one guilty at one time and the other at another time there several Damages may be taxed But if the Plaintiff bring an Action of Trespass against two and declare upon a several Trespass his Action shall abate And this is the diversity betwéen the fâ—nding of the Jury and the confession of the party And in Trespass where the Defendants plead several Pleas all tryable by one Jury and they find generally for the Plaintiff the Jurors cannot sever the Damages if they do their Verdict is vicious But in Trespass against two where one Judgment de melioribus dampnis appears and pleads not guilty to a Declaration against him with a simul Cum c. and afterwards the other appears and pleads not guilty to a Declaration against him also with a simul Cum c. Whereupon two Venire fac issue out and one Issue tryed after the other and several Damages assessed in judgment of the Law the several Juries give one Verdict all at one time and the Plaintiff hath his Election to have judgment de melioribus dampnis by any of the Inquests And this shall bind all but fiat nisi una Executio It is a Maxim That in every case where Damages an Inquest is taken by the Mise of the parties by the same Inquest shall damages be taxed for all And in Mich. 39 H. 6. fo 1. In an Action of Trespass against many who pleaded in Barr the Term before and one of them made default which was Recorded Writ of Inquiry There it is resolved by all the Court That for saving of a Discontinuance a Writ of Enquiry of Damages shall be awarded but none shall issue out because he shall be contributory to the damages taxed by the Inquest at the Mise of the parties if it be found for the Plaintiff and if it be found against the Plaintiff then the Writ of Enquiry shall issue forth And the Reason wherefore no Writ shall issue out at first to inquire of damages until c. is because that if a Writ should issue out and be executed this is nothing but an Inquest of Office and not at the Mise of the parties and yet this Inquiry if it might be allowed ought to serve for all the damages For inquiry of damages shall not be twice and the others which have pleaded to Inquest if the Issue be found against them shall be chargeable to those damages which are found by the Inquest of Office and if they be excessive they shall have no remedy although there be no default in them for they cannot have an Attaint because it is but an Inquest of Office But in Trespass against two who plead Damages by the first Inquest not guilty c. severally and several Venire fac awarded The Inquest which first passes shall assess damages for all and the second Inquest ought not to assess damages at all but that Defendant shall be contributory to the damages assessed by the first Jury notwithstanding he is not party to it yet if these damages be excessive he shall have an Attaint because though he is a stranger to the Issue yet in Law he is privy in Charge And so no damage or mischief can accrue to him in this Case Now let us sèe when something is left Verdict when to be supplied by Writ of Inquiry c. out of the Verdict which the Jury ought to have inquired of whether
was intended for damages and how much for costs so that there may be more damages than the Plaintiff declared for or less and so the Court knows not how to increase the cost wherefore he shall have Iudgment but for 20 marks by reason of the incertainty Where a special Verdict is not entred according Verdict amended by the Notes to the Notes the Record may be amended and made agrée with the Notes at any time though it be 3 or 4 c. Terms after it is entred lib. 4. 52. lib. 8. 162. Cro. 1 part 145. In the Case of Turnor and Thalgate Mich. 1658. B. R. It was said per Cur ' That special Verdicts may be amended by the Notes but the Notes cannot be amended or inlarged by any Averment or Affidavit for that were to fâ—â—d a Verdict by the Court. Yet in that Case where the Notes were that the Iudgment c. was vacated pro ut per Rule the Verdict was amended vacated per Cur ' pro ut per Rule for so is implied in the Notes See a Verdict amended by the Notes after Iudgment and Error brought Rolls 1 part Reports 82. If the matter and substance of the Issue Form Hob. 54. be found it is sufficient for precise forms are not required by Law in special Verdicts which are the finding of Lay-men as in Pleadings which are made by men learned in the Law and therefore intendment in many Cases shall help a special Verdict as much as a Testament Arbitrament c. And therefore he which makes a Deputy ought to do it by Escript but when the Iury find generally that A. was Deputy to B. all necessary incidents are found by this and upon the matter they find that he was made Deputy by Déed because it doth tantamount lib. 9. 51. And in the 5th Report Goodale's Case It was resolved That all matters in a special Verdict shall be intended and supplyed but only that which the Iury refer to the Consideration of the Court. In all Cases where the Iury find the matter Ill conclusion committed to their charge at large and over more conclude against Law the Verdict is good and the conclusion ill li. 4 42. and More 105. 269. the Iudges of the Law will give â—udgment upon the special matter according to the Law without having regard to the conclusion of the Iury who ought not to take upon them Iudgment of the Law li. 11. 10. Vide Devant Where the Declaration in Trespass is As general as the Narr Cum aliquibus averiis of a number uncertain and the Verdict is as general as the Declaration cum aliquibus averiis there the Verdict is good Cro. 2. part 662. In Ejectione firme where the Plaintiff declared of a Messuage and 300 Acres of Pasture in D. per nomina of the Mannor of Monkhall and five Closes per nomina c. upon Not guilty the Iury gave a special Verdict viz. quoad four Closes of Pasture containing by Estimation 2000 Acres of Pasture that the Defendant was Not guilty Quoad residuum they found matter in Law And it was moved by Yelverton That this Verdict was imperfect in all For when the Quoad Residuum incertain Iury find that the Defendant was Not guilty of four Closes of Pasture containing by estimation 2000 Acres of Pasture it is incertain and doth not appear of how much they acquit him And then when they find quoad residuum tne special matter it is incertain what that Residue is so there cannot be any Iudgment given and of that Opinion was all the Court wherefore they awarded a Venire facias de novo to try that Issue Cro. 2 part 1â—3 Ejectione firmae of 30 Acres of Land in D. and S. The Defendant was found guilty of 10 Acres and Quoad Residuum not guilty Quoad Resisiduum and it was moved in arrest of Iudgment That it is uncertain in which of the Vills this Land lay and therefore no Iudgment can be given sed non allocatur and it was adjudged for the Plaintiff for the Sheriff shall take his Information from the party for what ten Acres the Verdict was Cro. last part 465. diversitas apparet Where the Iury find Circumstances upon Circumstances an Evidence given to incite them to find fraud c. yet the same is not sufficient matter upon which the Court can judge the same to be fraud c. Brownlow 2. part 187. Yet in many Cases the Iury may find Circumstances and presumptions upon which the Court ought to judge As to find that the Husband delivered Goods devised by the Wife Vpon this the Court adjudged that More 192. the Husband assented to the devise at first Where a Verdict is certainly given at the Postea amended how Tryal and uncertainly returned by the Clerk of the Assizes c. The Postea may be amended upon the Iudges certifying the truth how the Verdict was given Cro. 1. pâ—rt 338. In many Cases a Verdict may make an ill Ill Plea made good by Verdict Plea or Issue good As in an Action for words Thou wast perjured and hast much to answer for it before God Exception after Verdict for the Plaintiff in arrest of Iudgment For that it is not laid in the Declaration that he spake the words in auditu complurimorum or of any one according to the usual form sed non allocatur for being found by the Verdict that he spake them it is not material although he doth not say in auditu plurimorum whereupon it was adjudged for the Plaintiff Cro. 1. part 199. Sée Cro. last part 116. Where the Barr was ill because no place of payment was alledged yet the payment being found by Verdict it was adjudged well enough for a payment in one place is a payment in all places Trespass by Baron and feme de clauso fracto of the Barons And for the battery of the feme ad dampnum ipsorum the Defendant Quoad the Clausum fregit pleaded Not guilty Quoad the Battery justifies And for the first Issue it was found for the Defendant And for the second for the Plaintiff and now moved in arrest of Iudgment that the Declaration is not good because the Baron joyns the feme with him in Trespass Baron Feme de clauso fracto of the Barons which ought not to be But for the Battery of the feme they may joyn whereto all the Court agréed But it was moved That in regard it was found against the Plaintiffs for this Issue in which they ought not to joyn and the Defendant is thereof acquitted and the Issue is found against the Defendant for that part wherein they ought to joyn This Verdict hath discharged the Declaration for that part which is ill and is good for the residue As in 9 E. 4. 51. Trespass by Baron and Feme for the Battery of both The Defendant pleaded Not guilty and found guilty and damages assessed
for the Battery of the Baron by its self and for the Battery of the Feme by its self and Iudgment was given for the damages for the batâ—ery of the feme and the Writ abated for the residue And of that Opinion was Lea Chief Justice and Doderidge al. contra And the same Law I conceive if the Iury had found the Defendant Not guilty of the battery to the Palmer's Reports 338. Husband but guilty to the Wife Cro. 2. part 655. Rochel and his Wife brought an Action of Trespass and Assault in the Exchequer Rochel and his Wife against Steel Hill 1659. against Steel and others who pleaded Not guilty and the Verdict found Steel guilty of the Battery to the Wife but found nothing concerning the Husband Wherefore Iudgment was stayd but the Barons held That if the Iury had found the Defendants not guilty as to the Husband then the Verdict had helped the Declaration and the Plaintiff should have had Iudgment for the Damages for the Battery of the Wife The Iury may find any thing that may be Of what a Verdict may be given in Evidence to them as Records either Patent Statute or Iudgment Things Plo. Com 411. done in another County or Country for which sée Evidence before Hob. 227. And of those things they ought to have Conusance they are to have Conusance also of all Incidents and dependants thereupon for an Incident is a thing necessarily depending Incidents upon another Co. Littleton 227. b. If the Verdict may by any ways be construed How construed good a construction to destroy it ought not to be made If one of the Iury be Outlawed when the Verdict is found the Verdict is not good but Outlaw may be reversed by Error In a special Verdict the case in Fact must be found clear to a Common intent without Equivocation Vaughan's Reports 78. If the Iury collect the Contents of a Contents of a Deed. Deed and also find the Déed in haec verba the Court is not to Iudge upon their Collection but upon the Déed it self The Iury may find the Contents of a Déed or Will proved by Witnesses Ibidem Trespass for disturbing him of his Common Common belonging to 100 Acres and the Iury find Common for 50. this is for the Plaintiff otherwise upon an Avoury or Quod permittat which are founded upon the right but the Trespass is for Damages Palmer's Rep. 289. If the matter and substance of the Issue The Verdict may be against the Letters of the Issue so the substance is found be found it is sufficient though it be against the Letter of the Issue As in the first Institutes fo 114. b. A Modus decimandi was alledged by prescription time out of mind for Tythes of Lambs And thereupon Issue joyned And the Iury found that before twenty years then last past there was such a prescription and that for these twenty Prescription years he had payd Tythe Lamb in specie And it was objected first That the Issue was found against the Plaintiff for that the prescription was general for all the time of the prescription and 20 years fail thereof 2. That the party by payment of Tythes in specie had waved the prescription or custom But it was adjudged for the Plaintiff for albeit the modus decimandi had not been paid by the space of twenty years yet the prescription being found the substance of the Issue is found for the Plaintiff In Assiise of Darrein Presentment if the Avoydance Plaintiff alledge the avoydance of the Church by privation and the Jury find the voydance by death the Plaintiff shall have Iudgment for the manner of voydance is not the title of the Plaintiff but the voydance is the matter 1 Instit 282. If a Gardein of an Hospital bring an Assise against the Ordinary he pleadeth that Deprivation in his Visitation he deprived him as Ordinary whereupon Issue is taken and it is found that he deprived him as Patron the Ordinary shall have judgment for the deprivation is the substance of the matter Ib. The Lessee Covenants with the Lessor not to cut down any Trées c. and binds himself in a Bond of 40 pounds for the performance of Covenants The Lessee cut down 10 Trees the Lessor bringeth an Action Breach of 20 Trees cut down for 10. of Debt upon the Bond and assigneth a breach that the Lessée cut down 20 Trées whereupon Issue is joyned and the Jury find that the Lessée cut down ten Iudgment shall be given for the Plaintiff for sufficient matter of Issue is found for the Plaintiff to forfeit the Bond. Ib. And this Rule holds in Criminal Causes For if A. be appealed or indicted of Murder viz. that he of malice prepensed killed J. A. pleadeth that he is not guilty Modo forma yet the Jury may find the Defendant Indictment of Murder and Verdict finds Manslaughter guilty of Man-slaughter without malice prepensed because the killing of J. is the matter and mâ—lice prepensed is but a Circumstance Plo. Com. 101. And generally where modo forma are Modo forma not of the substance of the Issue but words of form there it sufficeth though the Verdict doth not find the precise Issue As if a man bring a Writ of Entry in câ—su proviso of the Alienation made by the Tenant in Dower to his disinheritance and counteth of the Alienation made in Fee and the Tenant saith that he did not Alien in Manner as the Demandant hath declared Alienation and upon this they are at Issue and it is found by Verdict that the Tenant aliened in tail or for term of another mans life The Demandant shall recover yet the Alienation was not in manner as the Demandant hath declared Littleton Sect. 483. Also if there be Lord and Tenant and the Tenant hold of the Lord by fealty only and the Lord distrain the Tenant for Rent and the Tenant bringeth a Writ of Trespass against his Lord for his Cattel so taken Trespass by the Tenant against the Lord. and the Lord plead that the Tenant holds of him by fealty and certain Rent and for that Rent behind he came to distrain c. And demand Iudgment of the Writ brought against him Quare vi armis c. And the other saith That he doth not hold of him in manner as he supposed and upon this they are at Issue And it is found by Vâ—rdict that he holdeth of him by fealty only in this case the Writ shall abate and yet he doth not hold of him in manner as the Lord hath said For the matter of the Issue is Whether the Tenant holdeth of him or no for if he holdeth of him although that the Lord distrain the Tenant for other services which he ought not to have yet such Writ of Trespass Quare vi armis c. doth not lye against the Lord but shall
Castle but that there was a Goal this was for the Plaintiff because Goal is the Substance If the Issue be whether the Defendant had Accompted before R. and W. Auditors Accompt assigned by the Plaintiff and the Iury find an Accompt before R. only the Issue is found for the Defendant for the Accompt is the effect of the Issue Vide Rolls tit Trial. 707. c. If 11 agrée and the 12th will not the Verdict of the 11 cannot be taken but the Court Jury agree may carry the Iurors with them in Carts until they are agréed 41 Ass 11. A privy Verdict may be altered in open Verdict altered Court In an Extendi fac upon a Statute if the Iury deliver their Verdict in Writing they may afterwards make it more formal but they cannot alter it in substance for it is a compleat Verdict by the delivery So of Presentments c. A Fine pleaded in Barr and that after Fine and Non-claim the death of A. scil 1 August 3. Car. B. Father of the Plaintiff was alive in plena vita remansit infra hoc Regnum infra quatuor Maria c. apud W. in Com. D. and no Entry or Claim within five years after and the Plaintiff replies and takes Issue què Modo forma il non fuit remansit infra hoc Regnum Angliae modo forma c. And the Iury find quod non fuit remansit infra hoc Regnum Angliae 1 August 3 Car. but that he was there 1 Maii 4. Car. and remained there a Month and refer to the Court Au fuit remansit infra hoc Regnum modo forma c. This Issue is found for the Defendant for the matter and substance of the Plea is whether he was within the Realm after the death of A. and five years before Entry or Claim per him or the Plaintiff and modo forma shall not make the day material Roll. tit Trial. 713. Iudgment upon a Demurrer and a Writ Judgment Arrest at what time of Inquiry executed at the return the party may shew any thing in Arrest of Iudgment for Iudgment is not compleat until the last Iudgment The first is but an Award A man may plead any thing in Arrest of Iudgment after a Verdict which will make Error if the Iudgment be given In Debt upon a simple Contract against an Executor if he will not plead in Abatement but other Matter which is found against him he shall not afterwards alledge that he is not chargeable in Arrest of Iudgment So in Debt against Executors upon Arrearages of Accompt where they are not chargeable That which appears ill upon the same Record What may be alledged but not a maâ—â—er of Fact which doth not appear upon the Record because the parties cannot by the Issue As that a Iuror was challenged and yet served on the Tales for this cannot appear without alledging matter of Fact Nor that the Defendants Attorney had no Warrant But if there be any irregular or foul practice this may be offered to set aside a Iudgment If any thing be omitted in the Declaration Variance between the Verdict and the Declaration or if more be put into the Declaration than is found by the Iury if it make a material Variance betwixt the Nar. and the Verdict the Action shall abate These following are adjudged material Variances If the Declaration be for these words Thou procuredst eight or Ten of thy Neighbours Words to Perjure themselves and the Iury find that he said Thou hast caused eight or 10 c. for he might be a remote Cause scilicet causa sine qua non without Procurement Nar. He is a Bankrupt Verdict He will be a Bankrupt within two days Nar. He is a Thief Ver. He stole a Horse Nar. Thou art a Murderer Ver. He is c. Nar. I know him to be a Thief Ver. I think him to be a Thief So it is a material Variance if a special Promise be laid to be upon Request and the Verdict find it without Request So if the Promise Declaration be upon a Lease made by two or by Baron and feme and the Iury find that one of them had nothing in the Land or that the Baron only made the Lease or that the two were Tenants in Common and so several Leases otherwise if they were Coparteners So in Case that the Testator was indebted to the Plaintiff in 55 l. and the Defendant being Administrator in consideratione c. Promise to pay this upon non Assumpsit if the Verdict find the Promise to be to pay 30 l. part of the 55 l. So in Ejectment If the Nar. be of a Lease Eje ment of thrée Acres a Lease of a Moiety will not maintain the Nar. So in Wast for Cutting Trees and the Wast Verdict find that he eradicated the Trées but did not cut them A Prescription in modo decimandi That Prescription every one who hath seven Lambs or under seven shall pay to the person ob for every Lamb and the Iury find that and further That if he had more than seven Lambs he should pay a Lamb and that the Parson should pay the Parishioner ob This is not the same Prescription but makes a Variance But if there be a Variance between the Variance Verdict and the Nar. either by way of Surplus or Defect but if this matter of Variance be not material in the extenuation of the Action or Damages the Action shall lye notwithstanding the Variance These ensuing are adjudged not to be material Nar. Strong Thief Verdict Thief Nar. I say c. Ver. I affirm or I doubt not Nar. The Plaintiff will do such a thing Ver. I think in my Conscience he will c. Nar. Of a Lease by a Parson for five years if he tam diu should be Parson tam diu viveret And the Verdict find the Lease to be for five years if he tam diu viveret without the words and should continue Parson for the Law implyeth That if he be deprived or resign that the Lease Determines Nar. He is a Murderer Ver. He was a Murderer for when he says He is a Murderer 't is not intended that he did the Act in presenti but before So in Trespasses or Actions upon Torts and wrongs which are several If the Verdict find part 't is no material Variance and the Plaintiff in these Cases shall have Iudgment Roll. tit Tryal 720. A Jury of Middlesâ—x was demanded in Enquest by default the Common-Pleas the first day of the Term and some appeared and some not so that there was not a full Jury and neither the Defendant nor his Attorney did appear and therefore the Plaintiff prayed that the Inquest might be awarded by default and by the opinion of Welsh and Dyer his prayer shall be granted and the Custos Brevium and all the Prothonotaries said the
informed the Court hereof and the Iury being examined confessed the matter aforesaid upon which Iudgment was stayed for after the Iury are sworn they ought not to sée nor carry with them any other Evidence but what was delivered to them by the Court Afterwards the Plaintiff said That the Escrowle proved the same Evidence which was given to them at Barr by him wherefore it was not so bad as if it had béen new Evidence not given before Sed non allocatur 11 H. 4. 17. Pasche 38 Eliz. Inter Vicary Farthing Church-Book delivered to the Jury act of Court at the Nisi prius The Issue was about Non-age and two Church-Books were given in Evidence one whereof was delivered to the Iury in Court by the assent of parties and afterwards the other was delivered to the Iury out of the Court by the Solicitor of the Plaintiff without the assent of the Court and a Verdict for the Plaintiff and this was indorsed on the Postea The Question was whether this should make the Verdict void or no for the Iustices differed in opinion Popham and Gawdy that it should not Fenner and Clench that it should the Negative Iustices gave these Reasons That the Book was delivered in Evidence in the Court and so the other party might answer to it and that the Court had informed the Iury of the validity thereof how far they were to believe iâ— with many other Reasons But the Affirmative was urged because there might be some matter in this Book to induce them otherwise than was intended before and because it was delivered on his part for whom the Verdict passed without the Courts assent yet one Book scil Cro. last part 411. tells us Iudgment was afterwards given for the Plaintiff sée More 's Reports 452. The Books differ for Cro. makes Clinch give Consider the Reasons in the former cases his opinion for the Verdict But More brings him on the other side which I conceive is truest and for my part I know no reason why foisting of Evidence to the Iury without the Court should have any favour at all In the Case of Taylor and Webb Trin. 1653 B. R. Twisden moved to set aside a Verdict given at Barr because that after Evidence when the Writings were delivered to the Iury some Writings which were not sealed and therefore ought â—ot to be delivered to the Iury were delivered by a stranger to the Iury. Hales Counsel of the other side produces an Affidavit of the Foreman 's of the Iury that they made no use of them in giving their Verdict and that most of those Writings were read in Court in Evidence upon the Tryal and Hales said That if this should avoid the Verdict then that would be in the power of any Stranger unknown and against the mind of the parties to avoid any Verdict Roll. Ch Iust The Affidavit of the Iury ought not to be allowed to make good their own Verdict for now they are as it were parties and have offended and shall not be allowed by their own Oath to take off their offence and it is the Duty of the Iury to look what Writings they receive before they go from the Barr and if any such Paper be wrap'd up among other Papers delivered to them by the Court so soon as they have discovered it they should call in the Tip-staff who keeps them and deliver it to him and to testifie they made no use of it and he said it would be dangerous to give the least way to the delivering of any Writings to a Iury. And at another day Roll cited 11 H. 4. 18. the Plaintiff before the Tryal delivered a a breviaâ—e of his Evidence to the Iury which contained no more than was proved in Court yet by this the Verdict was avoided So Mich. 31 Eliz. C. B. Metcalfe and Dean After the Iury were gone from the Barr they sent for one of the Witnesses and re-examined him who gave the very same Evidence that he had before given in Court yet the Verdict was avoided and the reason of both is a fear and jealousie that other matters might be given c. 37 Eliz. Farthing's Case a Paper not under Seal which was given in Evidence was delivered to the Iury this did not avoid the Verdict because here can be no such fear and per Roll If any Writing though not given in Evidence be delivered to the Iury by the Court it shall not avoid the Verdict And in the principal Case the Verdict was avoided Hill 40 Eliz. Rot. 847. In Arrest of Iudgment after Verdict it was alledged Escrowle from one who was no party that a Iuror delivered to his Companions an Escrowle for Evidence to them which was not given in Evidence at the Tryal and adjudged no cause to Arrest Iudgment unless it had béen received from one of the parties which did not appear More 546. but otherwise if it had béen given by a party and the Iury had found for him In the Case of Duke and Veâ—tres Mich. 1656. B. R. tryed at Barr one Mr. Beverly of Suff. a Barrister was returned of the Iury who having béen at a Tryal of the same Cause above 20 years before in the Cheq and heard there great Evidence to make a Deed fraudulent which was now the Contest demanded of the Court whether he ought to inform the rest of the Iury privately of this or conceal it or declare it in open Court The Court ordered him to come into Court and deliver all his knowledge which he heard then proved which Evidence was not now given because the parties were dead and so he did being not sworn again but only upon the Oath taken as a Iuryman And certainly It is of dangerous Consequence to receive a Verdict against Evidence given on supposal that some of the Iury knew otherwise or on private Information given by one Iuryman to the rest where he can't be Cross-Examin'd and let such Iurors beware of Attaint but the best way is as before in open Court In a Writ of Error the first Error assigned was that Termino Trin. twelve Iurors and no more did appear This ex assensu partium was adjourned until Jury adjourned Crastino Animar on which day two others came in and were sworn being of the first Pannel The Court all clear of Opinion that this is no Error this being good enough they being all to be called again Leon. 3. part 38. If a Iuror depart after he is sworn Juror depart he shall be sined and imprisoned and by assent of parties another Iuror may be sworn Bro. Jurors 46 lib. 5. 40. If a man be non-suited after the Jury is ready to give their Verdict the Court may cause the Amercement of the Plaintiff to be presently affered by the Iurors li. 8. 39. CAP. XV. What Punishment the Law hath provided for Jurors offending as taking Reward to give their Verdict Of Embraceors Decies tantum Attaint several Fines on Jurors
that the very reading of the Law will make a man Master of any of those Sciences And since Rhetorick is Ars ornatè dicendi and consisteth of those two parts Elocution and Pronunciation How can we read in our Law-Books those Learned Arguments Elegant Speeches and Judgements pronounced with such Eloquence and Elegance of words and matter and not conclude that Rethorick is the Glory and Grace of a Lawyer Though some not gifted that way would perswade us that the Law hath little relation to it If any man be delighted in History let him read the Books of Law which are nothing else but Annals and Chronicles of things done and acted from year to year in which every Case presents you with a petite History and if variety of matter doth most delight the Reader doubtless the reading of those Cases which differ like mens faces though like the Stars in number is the most pleasant reading in the World I thought to have expatiated my self in this Eulogical Commendation of the Study of the Law But when I consider the Glory of the thing it self I think it but in vain to light the Sun with Candles and as no Arguments will perswade one to love against Nature so he whom the excellency of the Law it self cannot invite to study it will never be forced to it with the fist of Logick or other perswasion Wherefore 't is now time to expose my self to the Censure of the Reader who always judges according to his capacity or affection for which cause if I were to chuse my Reader I could wish with Caius Lucilius Quod ea quae scribo neque ab indoctissimis neque à doctissimis legi quod alteri nihil intelligerent alteri plus fortasse quà m ipse de se That this Treatise might not be read of the most Learned nor of those who are not learned at all because these understand nothing and the others more perhaps than my self However I put this Request to all Bracton l. 1. fol. 1. Vt si quid superfluum vel perperam positum in hoc opere intervenerit illud corrigant emendent vel Conniventibus oculis pertranseant Cum omnia habere in memoria in nullo peccare divinum sit potius quà m humanum That if any thing be superfluous and placed amiss in this Work That they will either correct and amend it or without carping connive at it since to remember to do all things right and nothing amiss is rather the part of a God than Man wherefore let him which never offended cast the first stone A Summary of the Contents of each Chapter in this Book CAP. I. THE Derivation of the word Jury The Definition Antiquity and Excellency of Juries by way of Preface p. 1 CAP. II. Of an Issue and the divers sorts of Tryals thereof and when a Tryal shall be by a Jury and when not when by the Spiritual Law When by Certificate when by Battail when by an Almanack c. What Issue shall be first Tryed per Pais what shall be tryed by the Court and what by examination of the Attorney Sheriff c. p. 7 CAP. III. Of a Venire facias To whom it shall be directed when to the Sheriff when to the Coroners when to Esliors and when to Bayliffs When well awarded c. p. 35 CAP. IV. What faults in the Venire facias shall vitiate the Tryal what not when a Venire facias de novo shall be awarded when several Ven. fac When the Ven. fac shall be betwixt the Party and a stranger to the Issue Who may have a Venire facias by Proviso and when p. 50 CAP. V. Why the Venire facias runs to have the Jury appear at Westm though the Tryal be in the Country Of the Writ of Nisi prius when first given when grantable when not and in what Writs of the Justices of Nisi prius Of the Tales at Common Law and by Stat. when the Transcript of the Record of the Nisi prius differs from the Roll whereby the Plaintiff is nonsuited he may have a Distringas de novo p. 66 CAP. VI. Of the number of the Jurors and why the Sheriff returns 24. though the Venire facias mentions but 12. If he returns more or less no Error and of the number 12. And when the Tryal shall be per primer Jurors And of Inquests of Office And when to remain pro defect Jurator p. 83 CAP. VII Who may be Jurors who not who exempted and of their Quality and Sufficiency p. 90 CAP. VIII Concerning the Visne from what place the Jury shall come c. p. 98 CAP. IX Challenges p. 130 CAP. X. Of What things a Jury may inquire when of spiritual when of things done in another County or in another Kingdom when of Estopels and when not when of a mans intent c. p. 173 CAP. XI Evidence and Witnesses p. 181 CAP. XII The Juries Oath Why called Recognitors in an Assise and Jurors in a Jury Of the Tryal per medietatem linguae when to be prayed and when grantable Of a Tryal betwixt two Aliens by all English Of the Ven. fac per medietatem linguae and of Challenges to such Juries p. 351 CAP. XIII The Learning of general Verdicts especial Verdicts privy Verdicts and Verdicts in open Court and where the Inquest shall be taken by Default Inquests of Office c. Arrest of judgement Variance betwixt the Nar and the Verdict c. ◠359 CAP. XIV How the Jury ought to demean themselves whilest they consider of their Verdict when they may eat and drink when not What misdemeanor of theirs will make the Verdict voyd Evidence given them when they are gone from the Barr spoyls their Verdict For what the Court may fine them and where the Justices may carry them in Carts till they agree of their Verdict An amercement affered by the Jury p. 416 CAP. XV. What punishment the Law hath provided for Jurors offending as taking reward to give their Verdict Of Embraceors Decies tantum Attaint Several fines on Jurors What Issues they forfeit and of Judgement for striking a Juror in Westmin c. p. 430 Precedents containing the Forms of Challenges to the Array c. And the Proceedings thereupon Pleas Puis le Darrein Continuance Demurrers upon the Evidence Bills of Exception c. And the Law concerning the same Very Useful for all Lawyers and other Attorneys Practisers especially at the Assizes A Form of Challenge to the Array p. 449 Challenge to the Array because the Sheriff is Cousin c. p. 450 A Challenge because the Sheriff is Tenant c. ibid. A Precedent of a Challenge for default of Hundredors which hath been several times made use of at the Assises p. 451 The form of a Challenge made by the Defendant because the Plaintiff is the Sheriffs Cousin p. 452 A Challenge to the Array because no Knight was returned upon the Jury p. 453 A Challenge against the
Sheriff for returning the Jury at the Instance request and denomination of the Plaintiff p. 454 A Challenge because that the Town is within a Hundred of which the Plaintiff is Lord and prays a Writ to the next Hundred p. 455 Challenge because the Sheriff and two Coroners are Tenants of the Plaintiff and a Venire facias awarded to the rest of the Corroners p. 456 Challenge where after the last Continuance the Cousin of the Plaintiff is made Sheriff after Issue joyned ibid. Challenge because the Sheriff is of Councel with the Plaintiff and hath received Fees and the Defendant doth deny the Challenge therefore the Venire facias awarded to the Sheriff notwithstanding p. 457 Challenge because the Plaintiff is Brother to the Sheriff p. 458 Challenge where the Plaintiff is Sheriff and one of the Coroners is his Tenant ibid. Another Challenge to the same purpose ibid. Challenge because the Wife of the Plaintiff is Kin to the Sheriffs Wife p. 459 Challenge because the Plaintiff is the Sheriffs Servant ibid. Challenge after the Jury Impannelled returned and called because the Prie in aid is Sheriff and of the Council of the Plaintiff and a Distringas Jur. with a decem Tales Coron awarded ibid. Challenge because the Plaintiff is one of the Sheriffs of London and the Venire facias awarded to the other Sheriff p. 460 Challenge to the Deputy Sheriff because he Impannelled and return'd the Jury at the instance and Denomination of the Plaintiff p. 461 Challenge by the Kings Serjeant upon an Indictment of Felony because the Sheriff returned the Jury of Life and Death at the Instance and request and denomination of the Prisoner ibid. Challenge by the Kings Serjeant for the King to some of the Jury for default of Freehold to the vallue of 40 s. per annum p. 462 A Precedent of Challenge to the Array p. 464 A Precedent of a Plea after the last Continuance p. 465 A Precedent of a Demurrer upon the Evidence p. 469 A Bill of Exception p. 470 A Release pleaded at the Assises after Issue joyned p. 475 The Death of one of the Defendants pleaded after the Last Continuance 475 A Baron Challenges the Pannel because no Knight was returned of the same p. ibid. Tryals per pais CAP. I. The Derivation of the Word Jury The Definition Antiquity and Excellency of Juries JUrie Jurata cometh of the French Vid. Cap. 12 Jurie word Jurer i. e. Jurare And signifieth in Law those 12 men who are sworn Judges in matters of fact evidenced by witnesses debated before them I call them Judges because as 't is the property of the Court Jus dicere so t is in the power of the Jury to determine the fact upon an Evidence Pro and Con According to those common Adagies Ad quaestionem Juris respondent Judices Ad quaestionem facti respondent Juratores And as the Judgment of the Court ought to be guided by the Law So Vid. cap. 15. is the Verdict of the Jury by the Evidence They of the Jury are called Juratores Jurors à Jurando as in ancient Laws Sacramentales à Sacramento praestando I need not here divide and shew the differences The Antiquity and excellency of Juries of Juries nor the several sorts they being so well known viz. The Grand Jury or great Inquest and petty Jury or Jury of Life and Death in Criminal causes and in Civil Causes the Assise Jury Inquest of Office By some called Inquest of Jury and Inquest of Office Something concerning each of these will incidently be spoken of in what follows As to the excellency of Juries it appears from their Antiquity Sr. Hen. Spelman verb. Inquestio says Tryal by Juries was used in England Normannis noâ—dâ—m ingressis Leg. Ed. Confess Ca. 38 postea inquisisset Justitia i. e. Justitiarus per Lagamannos i. e. legales homines per meliores homines de Burgo vel de Villa vel de Hundredo ubi mansisset Emptor c. For as to Tryal by 12 men though Mr. Daniel and Poyldor Virgil deny it to be older than the Conquest and the latter says there is no Religion in it but in the number yet he stands fairly Corrected by that Excellent and learned Antiquary Mr. Camden p. 1â—3 who says Whereas Polydor Virgil writeth that William the Conqueror first brought in the Tryal by 12. men there is nothing more untrue For it is most certain and apparent by the Laws of Etheldred that it was in use many years before c. And whereas Lamb. verb. Centuria says In singulis Centuriis Comitia sunto aâ—que liberae Conditionis viri duodeni atate superiores una cum praeposito Sacra tenentes jurento se adeo virum aliquem innocentem haud damnaturos sontemve absoluturos he referrs to the Laws of Etheldred cap. 4. cited by the learned Spelman verb. Jurata And to the same doth my Lord Coke referr Com. super Lit. 155. and Preface to his 3. and 8. Report And as to the Religion in the number of 12. my Lord Coke gives instances ubi suprà and Sir Henry Spelman in verb. Jurata suprà makes addition thereto So that I may truly say Tryals by Juries have been used in this Nation time out of mind and were contemporary and coeval with the first Civil Government thereof and Administration of Iustice for amongst the first Inhabitants the Britains the Free-holders were used in all Tryals And Tryal by Juries was as you see practised by the Saxons continued by the Normans and confirmed by Magna Charta And was ever so esteemed and prised in this Island that no Conquest no change of Government ever prevailed to alter it 'T is true Tryals by Juries before the time of H. 2. were not so frequent be-because Sadae or Purgationes Ordalia Tryals by hot Iron hot Water cold Water Duels and other Superstitious ways were then in use but Tryals by Juries were here in the Saxons time and were found here and not brought in by Williâ—m the Conqueror from Normandy Nay rather setled by Edw. the Confessor in Normandy where he a long time was and taught many Laws as you may see in the book of the Customs of Normandy Glanvil lib. 2. cap. 7. says Ex aequitate autem maxima prodita est legalis ista institâ—tio speaking of these Tryals in opposition to Duels c. Their general use being the only Tryers The use of Juries of Choses in fair almost in all Courts throughout England speaks them a publick good To be tryed by ones Peers is the greatest priviledge a Subject can wish for and so excellent is the constitution of the Government of this Kingdom that no Subâ—ect shall be tryed but by his Peers The Lords by their's The Commons by their s which is the Fortress and Bulwark of their Lives Liberties and Estates and if the good of the Subject be the good of the King as most certainly it is then those are enemies
to the good of the King and State who attempt to alter or invade this Fundamental Principle in the administration of the Iustice of this Realm by which the Kings Prerogative has flourished and the just liberties of the people have been secured so many Ages And what answer shall I make to the Princes vehementer admiror videlicet Wherefore are not Juries used in other Countries if they are so good but that of Fortescue the Portescue ca. 29. Learned who best could tell scil That other Countries can scarce produce one Jury so well accomplished with Wealth and Ingeny as one County nay one Hundred can in England But not to dwell in the Porch I will address my self to the Gravity of the Law where you must not so much expect the flash of Rhetorick as the light of Reason No the Law knows best how to express Things not words most regarded in the Law her self in her own terms wherefore all other Sciences must learn with reverence to keep their distance And as the Golden Finch sings be glad to have their Finch c. 3. sparks raked up in her Ashes And since an Issue is previous and the matter of a Tryal I shall first give you the description thereof and then touch upon the several Tryals allowed by the Law for discussion of the truth CAP. II. Of an Issue and the divers sorts of Tryals thereof and when a Tryal shall be by a Jury and when not when by Certificate when by the Spiritual Law when by Battail and when by an Almanack what Issue shall be first tryed per Pais what shall be tryed by the Court and what by Examination of the Attorney Sheriff c. ISsue exitus saith Cook is a single 1. Inst fo 126. Omnia unum aliquem sortiuntur exitum vel per patriam vel per Judices terminandum Finch Epistle certain and material point issuing out of the Allegations and Pleas of the Plaintiff and Defendant consisting regularly upon an Affirmative and Negative to be tryed by Twelve men and it is twofold scil either special as where the special matter is pleaded or general as in Trespass Not guilty In Assise nul tort nul disseisin c. And as an Issue natural cometh of two several persons so an Issue legal issueth out of two several Allegations of adverse parties And to give you likewise his definition of Tryals Note that upon a demurrer to part and Issue to part though it is the best way to give Judgment upon the quaestio juris first yet the Court may try the quaestio facti first at their discretion 1 Inst 72. 125. Lach. 4. Rolls tit Tryals 626. 723. Tryal It is to find out by due examination the truth of the point in Issue or question between the parties whereupon Iudgement may be given And as the question between the parties is twofold so is the Tryal thereof For either it is quaestio Juris and that shall be tryed by the Judges either upon a demurrer Special Verdict or Exception For Cuilibet in sua arte perito est credendum quod quisque noverit in hoc se exerceat Or it is quaestio facti And the tryal of the fact is in divers sorts First chiefly and most commonly by a Jury of Twelve men of which kind of tryal my intention is principally to treat in this Book For by Twelve men are matters of Proceedings in Civil Causes fact for the most part tryed with us in England in Causes both Criminal and Civil in Causes Civil after both Parties have said what they can one against another in Pleading if there arise a question about any matter of fact it is referred to Twelve indifferent men to be Impanelled by the Sheriff and as they bring in their Verdict so Iudgment passeth And this the Judge is to declare as the Law is upon the fact found For the Judge saith the Jury finds thus and then the Law is thus and so we judge For the Law arises upon the fact For Criminal Causes the course is this Proceedings in Criminal Causes At the Kings-Bench for Midds and at the great and general Assises and at the general Sessions of the Peace there is one Jury called the Grand-Jury which consists commonly of 24 men substantial men out of every Hundred with in the County returned by the Sheriff and they are to consider of all Bills of Indictment preferred to them which they either approve of by writing Billa Vera or disapprove by writing upon them Ignoramus and those which they approve of are to be tryed by another Jury called the Petit-Jury Or the Grand-Jury may charge any person upon their own Presentment which will be of the force of an Indictment and the party charged may Traverse the offence and bring it to be tryed by a Petit Jury Some lesser matters in these Courts are proceeded upon without a Jury and some things are removed by Certiorari into higher Courts and then must be tryed there and that thing to which there is a Traverse put in must be tryed and ended by a Petit Jury which for the most part in all Civil and Criminal Causes are but Twelve men which ought to be Free-men not Villains or Aliens and lawful men not Outlawed and also men of worth and honesty But because it is necessary to be known that there are many ways allowed by the Common-Law to try matters of fact besides this by Juries I will here repeat some of them And for this first hear the Oracle who tells you that he had read of six 1 Inst fol. 74. kinds of Certificates allowed for Tryals by the Common-Law 1. The doing of service by him that Tryals by Certificate holdeth by Escuage in Scotland was to be tryed by the Kings Marshal of his Army Per son Certificat en escript south son seal que serra mis a les Justices saith Littleton 2. If it be alledged in avoydance of an Outlawry that the Defendant was in prison at Burdeaux in the service of the Mayor of Burdeaux It shall be tryed by the Certificate of the Mayor of Burdeaux Note this was when Burdeaux was partel of the dominions of the King of England Rolls tit Tryal fo 583. 3. For matters within the Realm the Custome of London shall be Certified by the Mayor and Aldermen by the mouth of the Recorder vide apres 17. 4. By the Certificate of the Sheriff upon a Writ to him directed in case of Priviledge if one be a Citizen or Foreigner 5. Tryal of Records by Certificate of the Judges in whose Custody they are by Law All these be in temporall Causes 6. In Causes Ecclesiastical as Loyalty of Marriage general Bastardy Excommengement profession These and the like are regularly to be tryed by the Certificate of the Ordinary vide apres 16. If the Def. claim his priviledge as a Scholar of the Vniversity of Oxon of such a Colledge or Hall This
whether a Statute shewed Statute before be the true Statute or not shall be by the examination of the Mayor and Clerk of the Statutes which took the Statute and not per pais ib. Whether a Statute hath two Seals or not shall be tryed per pais Leon. part 228 229. 27. In Assise the Tenant said that the Escheator Lands were taken into the Kings hands this shall be tryed by the Examination of the Escheator 28. If one in avoidance of an Out ' awry Certificate alledge that he was in Prison at Burdeaux ultra mare in servitio Majoris de Burdeaux this shall be tryed by the Mayor's Certificate and in such like Cases other Tryals shall be by the Certificate of the Marshal of the Messenger Host and by the Captain of Calice and also by Messenger of a thing done beyond Sea Ib. 29. At the Petit Cape the Tenant said Petit Cape that he was imprisoned 3. days before the default and 3. days after this shall be tryed by the Examination of the Attorney Nient Attach per 15. Jours in Assize shall Bayley not be tryed per pais but by examination of the Bayley ib. 30. It seems an Almanack is so infallible Almanack that it hath countervailed the Verdict of a Jury For in Error of a Iudgment given in Lynne the Error assigned was that the Iudgment was given at a Court held there on the 16th day of February 26 Eliz. and that this day was Sunday and it was so found by Examination of the Almanacks of that year upon which it was ruled that this Examination was a sufficient Tryal and that a Tryal per pais was not necessary although it were an Error in Fact and so the Iudgment was reversed Cro. 3. part so 227. 1 Leon. 242. the same Case and there it was said it was twice so ruled before 31. In ancient times there was a tryal in Criminal Causes called Ordalium for Orde al. upon Not Guilty pleaded the Defendant might put himself upon God and the Country as is the use at this day or else upon God only and then if he was a Fréeman he was to be tryed per ignem that is he was to pass over Novem vemeres ignitos nudis pedibus and if he was not hurt by this then he was to be acquitted otherwise condemned and this was called Judicium Dei But if he was a slave then his tryal was to be per aquam and that divers ways which all appear in Lambard verbo Ordalium From which kind of tryal I presume we still retain this expression of an innocent person That he need not fear fire or water this manner of tryal was first prohibited by the Canons then by Parliament The tryal by Battel is likewise prohibited by Battel the Canons but not by Parliament as you may read in the ninth Report fo 32. and in the authorities there cited which I therefore omit to recite here though I have the Books by me and so in this whole Treatise where I refer you to a Book I shall not set down the authorities cited in that Book which will avoid prolixity 32. When the matter alledged extendeth Which Tryal shall be first to a place at the Common Law and a place within a Franchise it shall be tryed at the Common Law 1 Inst 125. 4. Inst 221. In what Cases a Tryal in one issue shall Tryal in one issue binds in another bind the same party in another issue upon the same matter In Debt against two per several Precipes if one plead a release and they are at issue upon the Deed and the other plead the same issue if it be found the Deed of the Plaintiff in the former issue this shall bind him in the second issue 12 H. 4. 8. In trespass if the Defendant Plead villenage in the Plaintiff if this be found against the Defendant this shall bind him in the same issue in another action in the same Court betwixt the same parties 44. Ass 5. If a man be found guilty of a Conspiracy upon an Indictment at the Kings suit this shall not bind in a Writ of conspiracy at the suit of the Party but he may plead not guilty 27. Ass 13. If a man upon an Indictment of extortion confess it and put himself in the Kings grace and makes fine c. this shall bind him and he shall not plead not guilty to the suit of the party for a confession is stronger than a Verdict 27. Ass 57. per Sharde vide Rolls tit Tryal 625. He which is not party to the issue nor In what Cases tryal against one shall be against others can have attaint or challenge the Inquest shall not be bound by the Tryal 11. H. 4. 30. And therefore in Trespass against two and one pleads a Release and the other justifies as his Servant If the issue be found against the Master it shall not conclude the Servant 11 H. 4. 30. Rolls ib. 625. One shall not be compelled to try a traverse At what time the Tryal shall be the same Sessions he makes it for a man shall have time to make his defence and is not supposed to be ready to answer sudden objections and for this reason many Iudgments upon Indictments have been reversed Iustices of Oyer and Terminer nor Iustices of Peace cannot inquire and determine the same day But Iustices of Gaol Delivery and Iustices in Eyre may Justices of Peace cannot proceed to the delivery of a person indicted of Felony before them the same day he is arraigned 22 E. 4. Coron 44. Declared by all the Iustices of England to be observed as a Law In an Indictment in B. R. or in the same County and removed thither the Defendant may be arraigned and tryed the same day For the Kings Bench is a Court of Eyre for all Offences in that County Otherwise of an Indictment removed out of another County Vide Rolls tit Tryal 626. many Cases de ceo 33. All matters done out of the Realm of Marshal Affairs England concerning War Combate or Deeds of Arms shall be tryed and termined before the Constable and Marshall of England before whom the Tryal is by Witnesses or Witnesses or Combate by Combat and their proceeding is according to the Civil Law and not by the Oath of Twelve men 1 Inst 74. 261. Wherefore if the Kings Subject be killed by another of his Subjects in any Foreign Country the Wife or Heir of the Dead may have an Appeal before the Constable and Marshall who sentence upon the testimony of Witnesses or Combat ib. So if a man be wounded in France and dye thereof in England ib. 4. Inst 140. It is worthy our observation to take What Issue shall be first tryed notice when there are several issues which of them shall be first tryed And for this you have already heard that where issue is joyned for part and a Demurrer for
the principal Pannel and two of the Tales notwithstanding Maynards Opinion to the contrary and Cro. 3. part 587. The Sheriffs used to summon above 24. scil effraenatam multitudinem but Must not return above 24. now they are prohibited by Statute to summon above 24. Westm 2. cap. 38. In what cases the Inquest shall remain for default of Jurors If the issue be to be tryed by 2 Counties if but one of one County appear although a full Inquest appear of the other yet this shall remain for default because they cannot try that whith is in another County 2 Counties There ought to be six of each County And so of one Inquest out of a Franchise and another out of the Guildable and so of 2 Pannels returned in an Assise by several Bayliffs of Franchises to try one issue and one Pannel makes default the issue shall not be tryed by the other Pannel for the Jurors in one Franchise cannot make the view in another Franchise Roll tit Tryal 673. If the Jury be of 2 Counties or 2 Pannels The manner of swearing the Jurors of the Guildable and Franchise c. they shall be sworn interchangeably first one of one then another of the other If the Jury go at large until another day after they are sworn and the Roll of the entry be not in Court they may be sworn anew Roll. tit Trial 674. To make a Jury in a Writ of Right Where there must be 16. and 24. in a Jury which is called the Grand Assise there must be 16. scil four Knights and 12. others the Jury in an Attaint called the Grand Jury must be 24. Finch 412. 485. But if the issue be upon a matter out of the point of the Attaint as upon a Plea of non-tenure the Tryal shall be by 12 Juratores 21 E. 3. 10. There may be more than 16 in a Writ of right Rolls tit Tryal 674. When Process used to be made out Where Witnesses joyn with the Jury the number is uncertain against the Witnesses in Carta nominat to joyn with the Jury in Tryal of the Deed as was used before the Statute of 12 E. 3. C. 2. his Testibus being then part of the Deed then the number was uncertain according as the number of Witnesses were in the Deed wherefore no Attaint lay if the Deed were affirmed because more than 12 joyned in the Verdict But otherwise Cannot prove a Negative if the Deed was not found because Witnesses cannot prove a Negative F. N. Br. 106. h. 1 Inst 6. 2 Inst 130. c. If 12 are sworn and one of them depart Juror departs and another sworn by consent by consent another of the Pannel may be sworn and joyn with the other 11. in the Verdict 11 H. 6. 13. In Error upon a Iudgment in Cornwal A Jury of 6. because the Tryal was but by 6. adjudged that it was erroneous though it was returned secundum consuetudinem ibidem ante c. for such Customs are against Law unless in Wales which are permitted by Act of Parliament Cro. 1. part 259. If the record be pleaded in Bar of the Per primer Jurors See hic cap. 4. Assise and the Party that pleads says the same Tenements were put in view to the former Jurors If the Plaintiff saith nient comprise This shall be tryed per primer Jurors auters 13 H. 4. 10. So if the Tenant saith that these Lands are not the same Lands before recovered this shall be tryed per primer Jurors auters 22. Assise 16. and so in a Redisseisin So in an Assise if the Defendant plead a Recovery per view de Jurors in another Assise this shall not be tryed by the Assise but per primer Jurors 13 H. 4. 10. And if at the return of the former Jurors and others all the former Jurors appear the Tryal shall be by them only but if any do not appear they shall be supplied by the others 40. Assise 4. In such cases where the Plaintiff is not to recover the Land nor to defeate the former Iudgement if nient comprise be pleaded upon a Recovery pleaded this may be tryed by other than the former Jurors 1 H. 6. 5. As in Trespass for Trees cut the Defendant pleads that he recovered before in an Assise the same Land where c. and cut c. the Plaintiff says this Land where c. was not put in view and so nient comprise This shall not be tryed by the first Jurors but by others because this action doth not defeat the former Iudgement nor recover any thing but Damages Note the difference 1 H. 6. 5. Where the Tryal shall be per primer Jurors Certificate of Assise what and where by them and auters and where only per auters see Rolls tit Tryal 593. This is where the Bayliff of a Tenant in an Assise pleadeth c. and loseth by the Assise and the Tenant himself hath a release or some other discharge to plead then he may by this means have the parties and first Jurors to appear again and if it be found he that before recovered shall lose the Land and yield double Damages Terms of Law CAP. VII Who may be Jurors who not who exempted and of their Quality and Sufficiency SO much for their Number next their Jurors must be Liberi Quality is to be considered And for this the Writ informs you who they ought to be 1. Liberos that is Freemen not Villains or Aliens and that not only Freemen and not bond but also those that have such freedom of mind that they stand indifferent without any Obligation of Affinity Interest or any other Relation whatsoever to either party sometimes the word Probos instead of Liberos is attributed Fortescue cap. 25. to them they are both good Epithetes for a Juror but I esteem the first most significant 2. They ought to be Legales not outlawed Legales not such as have lost Liberam legem or become infamous as Recreants persons attainted of Felony false Verdict Conspiracy Perjury Praemunire or Forgery upon the Statute of 5 Eliz. cap. 14. and not upon the Statute of 1 H. 5. 3. Not such as have had Iudgement to lose their Ears stand on the Pillory or Tumbrel or have been stigmatized or branded nor Infidels neither can any such be Witnesses 1 Inst 6. 3. Homines they ought to be men yet A Jury of Women there shall be a Jury of Women to try if a Women be Enseint upon the Writ de ventre inspiciendo But what kind of men these ought to be is worthy to be known And for this some men are exempted from serving in Juries in respect of their Dignity as Barons and all above them in degree Many are exempted by the Writ de non Exemption of Juries ponendis in Assisis F. N. B. 166. as aged persons 70. years old and many others are exempted as Clerks Tenants in
And all these points were resolved by all the Judges of England upon Conference between them in the Case of John Arundel Esq indicted for the death of William Parker Where there may be a special Visne the De Corpore Com. Tryal shall never be de Corpore Comitatus Leon. 1 part 109. If a Venire facias ought to be of one or more Vills in certain in a County and this is awarded de Corpore Comitatus This seems to be aided by the Statute of 21 Jac. of Jeofailes for this comes from the Vills out of which it ought to come and from others in as much as it comes de Copore Comitatus Rolls tit Tryal 618. and many other cases touching this matter But in Ejectment of Land called S. and no place is named where the Land lyes and a Venire is awarded de Corpore Com. this is erroneous and too large because there is a place certain where the Land lyes and yet it is not named in the Nar. as it ought to be Hob. 121. But if the issue be taken upon a title of dignity as whether Chivaler or not this may come de Corpore Comitatus because that the lieu lou c. is not material ib If A. by the name of A. of the County of Hamshire bring a Scire facias upon a Recognisance in Chancery in the Countie of Mid. against B. And the Defendant plead that the Plaintiff is Outlawed by the name of A. of the County of Chester to which the Plaintiff replies that he is not una eadem persona this may be by the body of the County of Mid. where the Writ is brought ibidem In a quare impedit for the Church de Uselbee and the Defendant pleads that there is no such Church the Venue shall not come de Corpore Comitatus but de vicineto de Uselbee for this is a place known and it is intended the Church of Uselbee is within the Ville of Uselbee Hob. 325. IN a prohibition if the parties be at issue Wild. upon a custom de non decimando of wood in the Wild of Sussex the Venire facias shall be de Corpore Com. for the Wild is not such a place whereof the Court may have conusance to be sufficient to have a Jury to come stom this for the Wild is a wood by intendment Hob. 348. In a real Action where the Demandant Heir tryed where the Land lies where not demands Land in one County as Heir to his Father and alledges his Birth in another County if it be denyed that he is Heir it shall not be tryed where the Birth is alledged but where the Land lyeth For there the Law presumes it shall be best known who is Heir But if the Defendant make himself Heir to a Woman for that is the surer and more certain side and the Mother is certain when perhaps the Father is incertain and therefore there it shall be tryed where the Birth is alledged because they have more Cro. 3. part 818. Cro. 2. part 303. certain Conusance than where the Land lyeth And so it is where Bastardy is alledged Bastardy the Tryal shall be in like Case Mutatis mutandis If the man plead the Kings Letters Patents Non concessit where the Land lies and the other party plead non concessit it shall not be tryed where the Letters bear date for they cannot be denyed but where the Land lyeth Every Tryal must come out of the Neighbour-hood of a Castle Mannor Town Visne or Hamlet or place known out of a Castle Mannor Town or Hamlet as some Forests and the like as before Every Plea concerning the person Where the Writ is brought at Common-Law Plaintiff c. shall be tryed where the Writ is brought When the matter alledged extendeth into a place at the Common Law and a place within a Franchise it shall be tryed at the Common-Law Matters done beyond Sea may be tryed in England and therefore a Bond made beyond Sea may be alledged to be Matters done beyond Sea how tryable in England Vide cap. 10. made in any place in England if it bear date in no place But if there be a place as at Burdeaux in France then it shall be alledged to be made in quodam loco vocat Burdeaux in France in Islington in the County of Middlesex and from thence shall come the Jury 1 Inst 261. Lach. 4. and 5. So if the Tenant plead that the Demandant is an Alien born under the Obedience of the French King and out of the Legiance Alien of the King of England the Demandant may reply that he was born at such a place in England within the Kings Legiance and hereupon a Jury of 12. men shall be charged and if they have sufficient Evidence that he was born in France or in any other place out of the Realm then shall they find that he was born out of the Kings Legiance And if they have sufficient Evidence that he was born in England or Ireland or Guernsey or Jersey or elsewhere within the Kings Obedience they shall find that he was born within the Kings Legiance And this hath ever been the pleading and manner of Tryal in that Case So of other things done beyond Sea the adverse party may alledge them to be done at Things done beyond Sea such a place in England from whence the Jury shall come and in a Special Verdict they may find the things done beyond Sea Ib. lib. 7. 26. Lib. 7. 26. So when part of the act is done in England and part out of the Realm that part that is to be performed out of the Realm Part without the Realm and part within if issue be taken thereupon shall be tryed here by 12 men and they shall come out of the place where the Writ or Action is brought Ib. lib. 6. 48. Error for that Iudgment was given by default against the Defendant being an Infant Full age tryed where the Land lies issue was taken that he was of full age And Godfrey moved whether the Tryal should be in Norfolk where the Land was or in Middlesex where the Action was brought And the Court held that it should be tryed in the County where the Land lay and Tanfield said It was so adjudged in the Kings Bench between Throgmorton and Burfind Cro. 3. part 818. Questions of Title of Land except by Where the Land doth ly special order of the Judges in some cases are to be tryed in the County where the Land lies for the Law is that all real and mixt actions as Wast Ejectment c. must be brought in the County where the Land is But Debt Detinue Account Transitory Actions Actions of the Case Battery c. are of their own nature Transitory and yet they ought to be laid and tryed in their proper County where the fact was done unless the Court order the contrary for some Special reasons
if it be alledged in a Ward in the City of Bristol c. the Venue shall be of the Ward not de Civitate A Venire facias was awarded from T. Ward and not de vicinet de T. and for this cause resolved to be ill and not amendable Cro. 2. part 399. Bro. tit Ven. fa. 8. If the issue be Si rex concessit per literas De vicinet left out ill patentes The Tryal shall be as hath been said where the Land lies and not where the Patent was made because the Patent is of Record and if it be traversed Where the Land lies it shall be tryed by the Record and therefore the issue being upon non concessit the issue is not upon the Patent but where the issue is upon non concessit or non dimisit of a thing which passeth by Deed the Tryal shall be where the Grant or Demise is alledged But of a Feoffment or Lease for life pleaded the issue being non Feoffavit or non dimisit Livery ought to be made and therefore the Tryal shall be where the Land lies Cro. 2. part 376. 3. part 259. Where the offence is laid in the Count Where the Action is laid in one County and the Justification in another the Tryal shall be where the Justification is to be in one County and the Iustification in another County and the Plaintiff replies de injuria sua propria c. The Visne shall be where the Iustification is alledged As one Example for all to illustrate In an Action upon the Case for words supposed to be spoken at Bridg-North in the County of Salop the Defendant pleads that he spake them as a Witness upon his Oath upon an issue tryed at Chard in the County of Somerset The Plaintiff replies de son tort demesne c And thereupon it was tryed by a Venire facias of Bridg-North And Error thereof assigned because it ought to have been by a Visne of Chard where the Iustification arose and it was held clearly to be a mis-tryal and not aided by the Stat. of Jeofailes wherefore the Iudgment was reversed Cro. 3. part 468. 261. 870. More 410. Replevin taking 2 Horses at such a place in Denford in Com. Northampton the Defendant makes Conâ—sans as Bayliff to the Lord Mountague of his Mannor of S. which Mannor is holden of the Honour of Gloucester and that the place in which c. is within the said Honour and alledges a Custome within the said Honour on which Custome the parties were at issue and the Venire facias was from Denford the place of taking which was moved after Verdict for that the Venue was not so large as the issue which was the Honour and of this opinion was the whole Court of C. B. Pasch 13 Car. 2. Hull vers Bâ—nning But the great question was whence the Venue should arise in this Case and per Bridgman Ch. Just and Just Hide in no Case can a Venue arise from an Honour and Ch. Just said he had caused the Prothonotaries to search for Precedents and they Honours could not find that ever a Venue did arise from an Honour which is but a bundle of services and an incorporeal thing from which no Venue can come and yet an Honour may have demesns as the Honours of Grafton and Hampton have but Gloucester not Ch. Just and Just Hide seemed that the Venue should be de Corpore Comitat. Hob. 266. 249. But when the Court was after moved for their opinion they bad them take a Venire facias at their peril and would give no opinion An action of Debt was brought on a Bond to perform Covenants in an Indenture wherely the Defendant had granted to the Plaintiff a walk called shrob-walk in the Forest of in Com Northampton and Covenanted for peaceable in joyment c. and he was ousted per Earl of Northampton who had right on which Right issue was joyned and the Venire facias was from Shrob-walk Per Cur. It 's not good for it appears by the Record that Shrob-walk is not a Vill but if the Obligation had been laid to be made at Shrob-walk the Venue should arise from thence as a Vill. Inter. Stirt Bales Pasch 19 Car. 2. B. R. The Venue shall follow and be according Out of what County to the issue As for words in Warwick-shire Thou art a Vide â—ic ante postea Thief and stolest my Iron The Defendant justifies says the Plaintiff stole the Iron in Leicester-shire and brought it into Warwick-shire and therefore he spake the words in Warwick-shire If the Plaintiff replies de injuria sua propria absque tali causa the Jury shall come from Leicestershire to which the absque tali causa refers for the words are acknowledged See Rolls tit Tryal 598. 623. When part of the matter to be inquired of is in one County or place and part in another the Tryal shall be there where the best Conusans of the matter may be As in an action upon the Case the Plaintiff declares that the Defendant took the From the place best known Horse of A. at S. and sold him at D. to the Plaintiff as his proper Horse and afterwards A. retook the Horse If the Defendant plead that the property was in him at the sale upon which issue is ioyned The Venue shall be de S. where the taking is supposed for there the property may be best known which is only in question 42. Ass 8. see several cases in Rolls ib. 603. under this head If the issue be whether L. did ride from London to York and from York to London Where the Counties cannot joyn 5 times in six days this may be tryed by London only Although part of the matter to be inquired of was done in each County In an action of Battery in London if the Defendant justifies in defence of his possesâ—on in D. in Essex and the Plaintiff says de son tort demesn sâ—ns tiel cause this ought to be tryed by both Counties if they might joyn because he may be found guilty at another day and therefore because they may not joyn this may be tryed in Essex Of Assises in confinio Com. See 1 Inst 154. In case for words in one County if the Defendant justifie in another County and the Plaintiff reply de son tort demesn c. although the Counties ought to joyn if they could and the Iustification is principally put in issue yet the Tryal may be in either County at the Election of the Plaintiff In Ejectment in London upon a Lease Rolls tit Tryal 620. made there of Land in Mid. if the Defendant plead not guilty this may be tryed in London because the Counties cannot joyn although London cannot joyn with another County 49 E. 3. 20. the Jury ought to enquire of the Ejectment in Mid. and judgement affirmed in a Writ of Error See Rolls tit Tryal 602. Two Counties may
joyn although they be not nearest nay though 20 Counties be between them Finch French 59. 1 Inst 154. But if it be of a Lease at Ickford of Land in Bury in Suff. the Venue must be of Bury not of Ickford ib. 619 If the issue be taken upon the name or Where the Writ is brought condition of the person this shall be tryed in the County where the Writ is brought 21 E. 4. 8. for this may be well known there Rolls ib. 615. Where the issue is to be tryed upon a point which shall be tryed by two Counties and one cannot joyn with the other this shall be tryed where the Writ is brought 21 E. 4. 8. but for this see before where the Counties cannot joyn In Debt in London against I. S. of D. in Where in other County than where the writ is brought Essex if the Defendant saith that he was at S. in Essex at the time of purchasing the Writ and not at D. this shall be tryed in Essex and not where the Writ is brought for none can know where he dwelt so well as the County of Essex 12 H. 6. 5. Vide many cases in Rolls ib. 605. c. about this matter In an Action of the Case against a Sheriff upon an escape in London and the Arrest laid Where the escape was and not where the Arrest was to be in Southampton adjudged that the Visne shall be where the escape was because that is the ground of the Action and not where the Arrest was Cro. 3. part 271. In Debt upon an Obligation payment was pleaded apud domum mansionalem Rectoriae de Much-Hadam and the Venire facias was de vicineto de Much-Hadham where it ought to have been de vicinet Rectoriae de Much-Hadam but it was adjudged good because Much-hadam is here intended a Vill. ib. 804. So you see that where a thing is alledged to be done at the Capital House * Rectoriae of D. there the Venire shall be of D. For that is intended to be all one with the Vill. Castle But where it is at the Castle of Hertford c. there the Venire facias shall not be de Rolls tit Tryal 621. vicineto de Hertford but de Castro de Hertford for Castrum Hertford is intended a distinct place by it self and so of all Castles Cro. 2. part 239. More 862. A Venire facias may be awarded of a Castle Rolls 618. Where the issue is not parcel of the Mannor Mannor of D. or the Custom of a Mannor is in question the Venire ought to be of the Mannor Hob. 284. Cro. 2. part 327. If the Mannor be laid to be in a Vill the Venire facias Rolls tit Tryal 621. may be of the Mannor in the Vill as de vicineto maneâ—ii de Stansted-Hall in Windham Cro. 2. part 405. More 851. Arundels Case li. 6. 14. The Venue cannot be of a scite of a Mannor Rolls tit Tryal 618. In the Common Bench in Trespass for taking away a Bag of Pepper the Defendant justified as Servant of the Mayor and Commonalty of London for Wharfage due to them by the Custome of London which the Plaintiff refused to pay The Plaintiff replyed that the Custome did not extend to him London because he was a Free-man of the City and ought not to pay Wharfage to which the Defendant re-joyned that the Custom extended to him as well as to strangers upon which issue was joyned Resolved 1. That the issue should be tryed Reâ—order per Pais not by the mouth of the Recorder because he certifies nothing but what the Mayor and Aldermen direct who are concerned in the cause 2. That the Venire facias should not be awarded to the Sheriffs of London nor Middlesex because the Tryals there are by Free-men But it shall be to the County Where the Tryal shall be by the County next adjoyning next adjoyning viz. to the Sheriff of Surry So where any City is concerned the Venire facias shall not be directed to the Officers of the City but to the County next adjoyning Hob. 85. Stiles 137. More 871. vide hic cap. 2. If the issue concern the Mayor and Commonalty of a Town the Array shall be made all of Foreigners 31. Assise 19. vide Rolls tit Tryal 597. So if the issue concern the Mayor and Commonalty c. although they are not parties yet the Venire facias shall be directed to the Sheriff of the next County 15 E. 4. 18. Where a man lends a Horse to another Where a man lends his horse in one place and he is spoiled in another Visne where he is spoiled to till his Land and the Horse dies with excessive Labour the Visne shall be from the place where the excessive labour was and not where the delivery was More 887. vide Hob. 188. Rolls tit Tryal 615. pasch 22 Car. 2. B. R. Horsley versus Potter An action of the case was brought for misusing an Horse in Itinere the Contract was laid at Swafham in Norf. and the riding to Peterborough in Northampton-shire where the Horse died it was tryed in Norf. and the Court seemed that it ought to have been tryed in Northampton-shire where the damage was done and not where the contract was made but it was aided by the Stat. of Jeofailes 17 Car. 2. cap. 17. after Verdict that Statute being then in force Where a promise is laid in one place and Promise in one place and breach in another Visne guided by the issue the breach in another the Visne must be according to the event of the issue whether it be taken upon the promise or breach But if no place be alledged for the breach and issue be taken upon it the Visne must be from the place of the promise which shall be intended right where the contrary appears not see Godbolt 274. Easter 39 Eliz. In the Kings Bench Trespass Assault and Battery en Wilts continuing the Assault in Middlesex and adjudged that the Jurors shall come out of both Counties More 538. The name of a Mannor or Land or Misnomer other local thing shall be tryed where it lies because it is local but the name or addition of a person shall be tryed where the Action is brought because this is transitory Bro. tit Visne 7. lib. 6. 65. In Covenant upon an Indenture of Demise of the Rectory of Stoken Church in the County of Oxford That the Defendant Where the Land lies had good Power and Authority to demise The Indenture was alledged to be made at London and the Venire facias was awarded to the Sheriff of Oxon and this being assigned for Error Iudgement was affirmed and this adjudged to be good More 710. because the Rectory was in Com. Oxon. vide pag. 45. In Debt upon an Obligation in one Where the Land lies and not where the Writ c. County to perform Covenants in a Lease and the Land
number of 3 Juries but in Petite Treason murder or Felony the number is reduced to 20. The prisoner may challenge any that are Witnesses against him Where the King is party the Defendant must shew the cause of his challenge instantly After a challenge for cause the prisoner may challenge the same person peremptorily CAP. X. Of what things a Jury may inquire when of spiritual when of things done in another County or in another Kingdom when of Estopples and when not when of a mans intent c. THe next words in the Writ which See more of this matter cap. 13. have not yet been taken notice of are these per quos rei veritas melius sciri poterit and this is the chief end of their meeting together No Court can give a right Iudgement Ex facto Jus oritur unless the truth of the fact be certainly known and to find out this truth no way is like to this of Juries for they do not only go upon their own knowledge though they are Neighbours to the place where the question is moved and so are presumed to have a better knowledge of the fact than any others For vicinus facta vicini praesumitur scire But lest this presumption should fail the Law allows other Evidence to be given to them by which they may more certainly and confidently give their Verdict of the issue which is meant by this word Rei And here it will not be amiss to give you a brief description de quibus rebus what the Inquest may inquire of and find Wherefore though it be true that a Jury shall not be charged nor meddle with Of the Law a matter of Law and if they do and find it their Verdict as to this shall be void yet daily experience as well as Littleton Sect. 368. tells us that they may take upon them the knowledge of the Law and give a general Verdict though to find the special matter is the safest way for them because if they mistake the Law they run into the danger of an Attaint In the Case of Manby and Scott adj Trin. 13 Car. 2. B. R. one question was if the Verdict was well found in an action of the case against the Husband for Wares bought by the Wife the Verdict finding that the Wares were necessaries and according to her degree whereas as was objected they ought to have found the degree of the party and the value of the Wares and left it to the Court to judge But it was answered and resolved that the Court i. e. the Judge before whom 't is tryed informs the Jury of the matter of Law and accordingly they find and so it belongs not to this Court Broughton a Reader of the Temple brought a Bill by Quo minus in the Chequer against Prince for maintaining a suit against the Stat. c. Prince pleads that he was admitted in the Inner Temple and student for many years there that he was Consiliarius in Lege eruditus and took his Fee in that cause B. replied de Injuriâ suâ propriâ absque hoc quod in lege eruditus c. hoc petit c. deus defendit similiter It was moved that the Defendant should demurr to the Replication Atkinson excepted to the Traverse and Conclusion for it can't be tryed by a Jury for says he if matter in Law be to be tryed by the Judges à fortiori the learning of the Law ought to be tryed by them Per Manwood Ch. Baron It shall be tryed by the Country 3 Leo. 237. Broughton vers Prince which case is cited 3 Cro. 728. to be otherwise ruled yet it was allowed there a good issue whether a Parson of a Parish could speak Welch Hut 20 21. Whether a plaint was levied according to the Custom was tryed by a Jury who are directed by the Court as to the plaint and whether it were pursuant to the Custom and are to find according to such directions In many cases the Jury are to inquire Of a mans intent of the knowledge and intent of a man as where the Nar. is that the Defendant kept a Dog which killed the Plaintiffs Sheep sâ—iens canem suum ad mordendos oves consuetum though sciens be not traversable yet the Jury upon Evidence must inquire of it lib. 4. 18. In some cases a Jury may try and find a spiritual thing as a Divorce Matrimony Of spiritual things c. and must take notice thereof upon pain of Attaint li. 4. 29. lib. 9. lib. 7. 43. vide hic cap. 2. The Jurors of one County may find any transitory thing done in another County Nay In Trespass Quare Clausum fregit in the County of D. where the Trespass was committed in the County of S. upon Not guilty if the Jury find the Defendant guilty in the County of S. their Verdict is void But if they find him Guilty generally an Attaint lyeth Finch 400. Because this Trespass is local and what is local cannot be inqured of by men of another County for they can have no conusans of it some times they must find local things in another County as if the Heir pleads riens per discent and the Plaintiff replies Assets in a Parish and Ward within London the Jury may find Assets in any County in the same case against an Executor who pleads plene administravit the Jury may likewise find Assets in any part of the world And the Reason is because the place is only named for necessity of tryal But where Of things done in another County or Country Vide cap. 8. the place is part of the issue it is otherwise And therefore if I promise in one place to do a thing in another and issue is upon the breach the Jury ought to come from the place of the breach But if I promise in London to do a thing at Burdeaux in France and issue upon the breach yet this shall be tryed in London for necessity because otherwise it would want tryal the Jury must inquire of the breach at Burdeaux But if I promise in France to do a thing in France so that both Contract and performance is Rolls tit Tryal fol. 571. 624. beyond Sea this wants tryal in our Law lib. 6. 47. li. 7. 23 26 27. In the Case of Drake and Beere Trin. 15 Car. 2. B. R. this difference was agreed by the Court viz. That a Jury in an Inferiour Court may inquire of things out of the Iurisdiction if they be but for encrease of Damages as is 1 Cro. 571. Ireland vers Blackwell but if they inquire of any thing issuable out of that Iurisdiction it is nought 1 Cro. 101. 2 Cro. 503. Error was brought to reverse a Iudgement given in the Palace Court in Indebitat for that the Defendant was indebtted to the Plaintiff Infrà Jurisdictionem for Nursing of a Child not saying the Nursing was Infra Jurisdictionem 〈◊〉 Windam Just held it
per medietatem linguae he cannot challenge the Array for this cause at the Tryal if the Iury be all Denizens notwithstanding Stamford's Opinion to the contrary and the Books cited by him fol. 159. pl. Cor. For the Alien at his peril should pray a Venire facias per medietatem linguae Dyer 357. Vide Rolls tit Trial. 643. If the Plaintiff be an Alien he must suggest it before the awarding of the Venire facias but if the Defendant be an Alien the Plaintiff is allowed to surmise that before or after the Venire facias because the Defendants quality may not be known to him before 27 H. 7. 32. CHAP. XIII The Learning of General Verdicts Special Verdicts Privy Verdicts and Verdicts in open Court and where the Inquest shall be taken by default Inquests of Office c. Arrest of Judgment Variance betwixt the Nar. and the Verdict c. VErdit or Verdict In Latine Vere dictum Verdict quasi dictum veritatis As Judicium est quasi Juris dictum Is the Answer and Resolution of those 12 men concerning the matter of fact referred to them by the Court upon the Issue of the parties And this is the foundation upon which the Iudgment of the Court is built for â—x facto jus oritur the Law ariseth from â—he fact Wherefore it is no wonder that the Law hath ever béen so curious and cautelous as â—ot to believe the matter of fact until it is sworn by 12 sufficient men of the Neighbourhood where the fact was done whom the Law supposeth to have most cognisance of the truth or falsehood thereof which being sworn for the words are Juratores predict The Credit of Verdicts dicunt super sacruÌ„m suum c. is the Verdict whereof we now treat And such credit doth the Law give to Verdicts that no proof will be admitted to impeach the verity thereof so long as the Verdict stands not reversed by Attaint And therefore upon an Attaint no Supersedeas is grantable by Law Plo. Com. 496. And it is worth our observation that the Law seems to take more care of the fact than of her self for the Major part of the Iudges give the Iudgement of the Law though the other Iudges dissent But every one of the 12 Iurors must agrée together of the fact before there can be a Verdict which must be delivered by the first man of the Iury. 29 Assise pl. 27. And this Verdict is of two kinds viz. one General or special general and the other special or at large The general Verdict is positively either General Verdict in the Affirmative or Negative as in Trespass upon Not guilty pleaded The Iury find Guilty or Not guilty And so in an Assize of Novel disseisin brought by A. against B. The Plaintiff makes his plaint Quod B. disseisivit eum de 20 acris terrae cum pertinentiis The Tenant pleads Quod ipse nullam injuriam seu disseisinam prefato A. inde fecit c. The Recognitors of the Assize do find Quod predict B. in juste sinâ— judicio disseisivit predict A. de predict 20 acris terrae cum pertinentiis c. This is a general Verdict 1 Inst 228. A Special Verdict or Verdict at large is Special Verdict so called because it findeth the special matter at large and leaveth the Iudgment of the Law thereupon to the Court of which 1 Instit 226. kind of Verdict it is said Omnis Conclusio boni veri judicii sequitur ex bonis veris premissis dictis Juratorum And as a Special Verdict may be found in Common-Pleas so may it also be found in Pleas of the Crown or Criminal Causes that concern life or member And it is to be observed that the Court The Court cannot refuse it cannot refuse a Special Verdict if it be pertinent to the matter in Issue 1 Inst 228. It hath béen questioned whether the Iury A special Verdict may be found upon any Issue as upon an absque hoc c. could find a Special Verdict upon a special point in Issue or no as they might upon the general Issue But this question hath been fully resolved in many of our Books first in Plo. Com. 92. It is resolved That the Iury may give a special Vardict and find the matter at large en chescâ—n issue en le monde so that the matter found at large tend only to the Issue joyned and contain the certainty and verity thereof lib. 9. 12. And in 2 Inst 425. upon Collection of many Authors it is said That it hath béen resolved that in all Actions real personal and mixt and upon all Issues joyned general or special the Iury might find the special matter of fact pertinent and tending onely to the Issue joyned and thereupon pray the discretion of the Court for the Law And this the Iurors might do at Common Law not only in Cases between party and party but also in Pleas of the Crown at the Kings Suit which is a proof of the Common Law And the Statute of Westm the 2d cap. 30. is but an affirmative of the Common Law And as this spetial Verdict is the safest for A Free-hold upon Condition without Deed may be found by Verdict though it cannot be pleaded the Iury 1 Inst 228. so in many Cases it is most advantagious to the party and helps him where his own pleading cannot As for example saith Littleton Sect. 366 367 368. Albeit a man cannot in any Action plead a Condition which toucheth and concerns a Freehold without shewing writing of this yet a man may be ayded upon such a Condition by the Verdict of 12 men taken at large in an Assize of Novel dissâ—isin or in any other Action where the Iustices will take the Verdict of 12 Iurors at large As put the case a man seized of certain Land in Fée letteth the same Land to another for term of life without Deed upon Condition to render to the Lessor a certain Rent and for default of payment a Re-entry c. By force whereof the Lessee is seised as of Fréehold and after the Rent is behind by which the Lessor entreth into the Land and after the Lessée arraign an Assize of Novel disseisin of the Land against the Lessor who pleads that he did no wrong nor Dissesin And upon this an Assize is taken In this case the Recognitors of the Assize may say and render to the Iustices their Verdict at large upon the whole matter as to say that the Defendant was seized of the Land in his Demesne as of Fée and so seized let the same Land to the Plaintiff for term of his life rendring to the Lessor such a yearly Rent payable at such a Feast c. Vpon such Condition that if the Rent were behind at any such Feast at which it ought to be paid then it should be lawful for the Lessor to enter c. By force of which Lease
the Plaintiff was seized in his Demesn as of Fréehold and that afterwards the Rent was behind at such a Feast c. By which the Lessor entred into the Land upon the possession of the Lessée And pray the discretion of the Iustices if this be a Disseisin done to the Plaintiff or not Then for that it appeareth to the Iustices that this was no Disseisin to the Plaintiff insomuch as the Entry of the Lessor was congeable on him The Iustices ought to give Iudgment that the Plaintiff shall not take any thing by his Writ of Assize and so in such case the Lessor shall be ayded and yet no Writing was ever made of the Condition For as well as the Iurors may have Conusance of the Lease they also as well may have Conusance of the Condition which was declared and rehearsed upon the Lease In the same manner it is of a Feoffment in Fée or a guift in tail upon Condition although no Writing were ever made of it And as it is said of a Verdict at large in an Assize c. In the same manner it is of a Writ of Entry founded upon a Disseisin and in all other Actions where the Iustices will take the Verdict at large there where such Verdict at large is made the manner of the whole Entry is put in Issue But in Assise of Rent it cannot be found to be upon Condition unless they also find the Deed of the Condition So of a Confirmation in Fee to Lessée for years Per Hale Ch. Just Guild-hall Hill 1671. A Special Verdict may be found as to Damagâ—s in an Action of the Case as the Case was there viz. Pro Quer ' and if so c. then such Damages if so c. then Damages such and he said he had known it so done in Debt and the Damages three ways Also in such case where the Enquest may General Verdict give their Verdict at large if they will take upon them the knowledge of the Law upon the matter they may give their Verdict generally as is put in their charge as in the case aforesaid they may well say that the Lessor did not disseize the Lessée if they will c. The Iury may likewise find Estoppel Estoppels which cannot be pleaded as in the 2 d Report fol. 4. it well appears where one Goddard Administrator of James Newton brought an Action of debt against John Denton upon an Obligation made to the Intestate bearing date the 4th day of April Anno 24 Eliz. The Defendant pleaded that the Intestate dyed before the Date of the Obligation and so concluded that the said Escript was not his Deed upon which they were at Issue And the Iury found that the Defendant delivered it as his Déed 30 July Anno 23. Eliz. and found the Tenor of the Déed in haec verba Noveriat universi c. Dat. 4. Aprilis Anno 24 Eliz. And that the Defendant was alive 30 July Anno 23. Eliz. And that he dyed before the said date of the Obligation and prayed consideration of the Court if this was the Defendants Deed And it was adjudged by Anderson Chief Justice Windham Periam and Walmesley that this was his Deed And the Reason of the Iudgment was That although the Obligèe in Note that a Deed may be plâ—aded to be delivered after the dare but nor before because it shall not be intended written before the date which may be after the date 12 H. 6. 1. pleading cannot alledge the delivery before the date as it is adjudged in 12 H. 6. 1. which case was affirmed to be good Law because he is estopped to take an averment against any thing expressed in the Deed yet the Jurors who are sworn ad veritatem dicâ—nd shall not be estopped For an Estoppel is to be concluded to speak the truth and therefore Jurors cannot be estopped because they are sworn to speak the truth But if the Estoppel or Admittance be As in Wast supposed in A. to plead that A is a hamlet in B. and not a Town of it self admitteth the Wast c. 9 H. 6. 66. and the Jury cannot find no Wast for that would be against the Record Estoppel within the same Record in which the Issue is joyned upon which the Jurors give their Verdict there they cannot find any thing against this which the parties have affirmed and admitted of Record although it be not true For the Court may give Iudgement upon a thing confessed by the parties and the Jurors are not to be charged with any such thing but only with things in which the parties vary Ib. li. 5. 30. So Estoppels which bind the Interest of the Land as the taking of a Lease of a mans own Laâ—d by Déed indented and the like Cro. 1. part 110. Lib. 4. 53. being specially found by the Iury the Court ought to judge according to the special matter for albeit Estoppels regularly must be pleaded and relyed upon by apt conclusion and the Iury is sworn ad veritatem dicend yet when they find veritatem facti they persue well their Oath and the Court ought to adjudge according to Law So may the Iury find a Warranty being given in Evidence though it be not pleaded because it bindeth the right unless it be in a Writ of Right Warranty not pleaded when the Mise is joyned upon the méer right 1 Inst 227. Verdicts ought to be such that the Court Uncertain Verdicts may go clearly to Indgment thereon and therefore Verdicts finding matter incertainly or ambiguously are insufficient and void and no Iudgment shall be given thereupon As if an Executor plead Plene Administravit and Issue is joyned thereon and the Jury find that the Defendant hath Goods within his hands to be administred but find not to what value this is an uncertainty and therefore an insufficient Verdict li. 9. 74. 1 Inst 227. It is the Office of the Jurors to shew the The Office of the Jury verity of the fact and leave the Iudgment of the Law to the Court. And therefore upon an Indictment of Murder quod felonice per cussit c. If the Iury find per cussit tantum yet the Verdict is good for the Iudges of the Court are to resolve upon â—he special matter whether it was felonice and so Murder or not li. 9. 69. And if the Court adjudge it Murder then the Jurors in the conclusion of their Verdict find the Felon guilty of the murther contained in the Indictment A Verdict that finds part of the Issue and Verdict finding part of the Issue finding nothing for the rest is insufficient for the whole because they have not tryed the whole Issue wherewith they are charged As if an Information of intrusion be brought More 406. against one for intruding into a Messuage and 100 Acres of Land upon the general Issue the Iury find against the Defendant for the Land but say nothing for the House this
if a Release be pleaded in a Foreign County and tryed there for the Plaintiff there also shall damages be assessed by the same Iury. For where the 21 Ass 14. principal is tryed there also shall the Accessary and incidents be inquired of I need use no other instances to illustrate this than the case abovesaid They may find a Condition to defeat a What things the Jury may find Freehold of Land although it be not pleaded but of things in grant they must also find the Déed of the Condition Vpon Traverse of a Lease Modo forma the Iury may find a Lease of another date Modo forma although the date be mistaken in the Pleading but not a Lease made by another than from whom was pleaded for this is out of the issue in matter and form In an Assise of Rent the Iury may find Rent that the Rent was granted with an Atturnment although no specialty be shewed A Fine or Recovery may be found by the Matter of Record Iury without shewing of it under Seal The Iury cannot find against what is admitted by the Record They may find a Divorce which is a Record Divorce in the Spiritual Court but not by our Law Attainder of Felony not pleaded cannot be Attainder found unless Sub pede sigilli 26 Ass 2. The Iury is not to inquire of this which is agréed by the parties As in Dower if the Tenant says he has Dower been always ready to render Dower and the issue be if the Husband dyed seised the Iury is not to inquire if the Estate was dowaable for this is confessed If the Defendant doth not deny the Wast Wast but Pleads another matter scilicet nul tiel vill lou c. the Iury is not to inquire of the Wast but give damages although no Wast be made In Debt upon a Bond with a Condition Award to perform an Award and the Defendant Plead Nullum fecit Arbitrium and the Plaintiff reply fecit Arbitrium and sets it forth and the Defendant rejoyn Nul tiel award the Iury cannot find any matter dehors to make the Award void in Law which doth not appear within the Award pleaded As that the release awarded would discharge the Bond of the Submission for nothing is in issue but whether such an Award was made in fâ—it as is alledged neither could this matter be alledged by any Rejoynder for it would have béen a departure from the Plea and â— Iury cannot find that which would have béen a departure because out of their issue But in this Case if the Defendant would have took advantage of it he ought to have Pleaded all this matter in his Barr and not have said Nullum fecit Arbitrium for 't is a departure in the Rejoynder to acknowledge an Award which was denyed in the Plea In Debt for 20 s. and the Issue be solvit How the Jury ought to find their Verdict and what shall be intended ad diem and the Verdict be quod debet the 20 s. this is not good because it is not direct but by Argument In Debt upon an Obligation if the Defendant say That he is a Lay-man not lettered and 't was read as an Acquittance Nient lettered Et issint nient son fait if the Iury find he knew what he did and that it was a Bond and he was willing to be bound this is no good Verdict because they ought precisely to find if it was his Déed or not If the Issue be whether where a Copyhold is granted to thrée for the lives of two if he which dye seised c. ought by Custom to Custom pay a Heriot or not and the Iury find that there was never any such Estate granted in the Mannor this is not good for the reasons aforesaid So if the Issue be if by Custom an Estate tayle may be granted and the Iurâ— find that it may be granted in Fée which is greater yet 't is not good In Trespass for taking and cutting his Trespass Leather if the Defendant justifie as a Searcher and cut it for the better search More scrutatorum without any other damage and the Plaintiff reply De injuria sua propria Absque hoc that he cut it More scrutatorum upon which Traverse issue is joyned and the Iury find that the Defendant cut it as the Plaintiff has alledged this is no good Verdict because 't is not any answer to the issue but by Argument In Trespass and Battery in A. to find Battery not guilty in A. is not good for it ought to be generally not guilty Vpon this Plea if the Plaintiff reply Riens per Descent that he hath divers Lands in D. per descent and the Iury find he had divers Lands by descent this is good without finding what for 't is Incertain not material in regard upon this false Plea a general Iudgment is to be without having respect to the Assets Of 5 Acres if they find the Defendant Ejectment guilty in 8 pieces de terre parcel tenementorum predict 't is a void Verdict because uncertain and no Execution can be made of peices In case upon non Assumpsit Pleaded if Verdict Special the Iury find that the Defendant non Assumpsit yet if two Witnesses say true then we find that he did Assume The first shall stand for the Defendant and the last words are void and Surplusage shall not vitiate Surplusage If upon a Lease of 20 Acres and the Defendant Ejectment plead Non dimisit and the Iury find quod dimisit 10 Acres tantum and the Conclusion of the Verdict is Et si super totam materiam Curiae videbitur quod Defendant dimisit 20 Acres then they find for the Plaintiff and if not then for the Defendant this is repugnant and so the Verdict is void in all To Assess Damages incertainly is void Certain As to say we Assess 40 l. if we must by Law if not then but 3 l. this is void Indelitatus assumpsit to Assess Damages occasione debiti predicti is good although it ought to be occasione non performationis c. In an Information upon the Statute Information 39 El. ca. 11. for Dying with Logwood by which he lost 20 l. for every Offence upon Not guilty if the Iury find him Guilty for using this against the Statute for 40 days by which he lost this is not good because he forfeits 20 l. for every time and the number of times do not appear If the Iury find the words in the Will and yet do not find the Will the Verdict is not good If they first find the Special Matter and then find the Issue generally the Special Matter is hereby waved If the Iury find that J. S. was seised in Where a Special Verdict shall be good by Intendment Fée and Devised the Land to J. D. although they do not find
Fee and part is found in Tail and part in Fée Iudgment shall be given for the Defendant who pleaded the Seisin in Fée If the Plaintiff declares upon a Demise Ejectment made the first of May to Commence at Michaelmas next if the Iury find a Lease made at any other day before the Feast 't is found for the Plaintiff for the day of making is not material Otherwise of a Lease for years â—n Possession As of a Lease made the 5th of May Habend for thrée years from Lady-day before and the Iury find a Lease made the 15th day of May for three years from the same Lady-day for this is a Lease in Possession In false Imprisonment in Middlesex and Imprisonment the Defendant justifie in London to which the Plaintiff saith the Defendant took him in Middlesex de son Tort demesn and Issue upon this and the Iury find the Defendant took him in Middlesâ—x lawfully upon a Writ yet this is for the Plaintiff for the Issue is upon the place and not upon the Tort for that is confessed by the Pleading if the taking was in Middlesex In Debt for 20 l. and the Iury find 40 l. the Debt Plaintiff shall not have Iudgment the reason séems to be because it cannot be the same Debt which is intire but upon another Contract which is mislaid If the Issue be Payment afâ—er Execution Audita Quaerela and the Iury find payment before yet the Issue is proved for payment before is payment after In Debt upon a Bond bearing date the 25 Obligation of June upon Non est factum if the Iury find it his Déed but that it was delivered 8 days after the â—ate this is found for the Plaintiff If the Issue be that two made the Feoffment Joynt and several or two were Churchwardens c. and the Iury find but one c. the Issue is not found If the breach of Covenant or Wast be Obligation Covenant Wast assigned in cutting 20 Trees and the Iury find but 10 yet the Plaintiff shall have Iudgment If in Replevin c. the Iury find that Totum Pars. part of the Cattel were Levant and Couchâ—nt and part not and the Issue is upon all the Issue is not found In Ejectment for him who pleaded all Ejectment Void in part of 14 Acres and the Iury find guilty of 20 the Plaintiff shall have Iudgment for the 14 and the Verdict is void for the residue In an Information upon an usurious Contract Information Usury by two 't is not sufficient to find a Contract by one Otherwise where the Tort and offence is several as against two upon the Statute 4 E. 6. Pâ—o emptione butiri and selling it by Retail c. and so in an Action upon the Case in Nature of Conspiracy and for words laid twice in one Declaration This will put in Issue the manner as well Modo forma as the matter where the manner is material as the time of the Fact and other Circumstances The Plaintiff replies That W. made a Replevin Lease Lease to him 30 Martii Habend from Lady-day last and Issue Modo foâ—ma and the Iury find a Lease made the 25 Marâ—ii Habâ—ndum Exâ—unc for a year this is good although the time of making and Commencement of the Lease are mistaken inasmuch as Extunc includes the Feast Yet because a sufficient Title and Lease is found for the Plaintiff to put in his Cattel this is sufficient this being the substance and the Modo forma shall not put the Circumstances in Issue So in Trespass if the Defendant justifie the putting in his Cattel for Common which he Claims from Pentecost to a certain time every year which is traversed Modo forma and the Iury find that he had Common in Vigilia Pentecostis in festo and the day next to this to the time this is found for the Defendant But otherwise in these Cases id an Assise of Common because there he ought to recover his Title In Debt for Rent if the Defendant plead an Entry by the Plaintiff before the Rent was due scilicet such a day which was after and Issue upon the Entry Modo forma and the Iury find for the Defendant he shall have Iudgment for the scilicet is void and the Modo forma go to the matter Sée after In Debt upon a Bond and the Defendant Non est factum plead Non est factum and the Iury find the Bond made joyntly by another with the Defendant the Plaintiff shall have Iudgment for the Defendant should have pleaded this If a Devise be pleaded Absolute if the Devise Iury find a Devise upon a Condition Precedent 't is not good In Debt against A. as Daughter and Riens per Discent Heir to B. and the Defendant plead Riens per discent of B. and the Iury find that B. was seised in Fée and dyed having Issue the Defendant his Daughter and his Wife with Child of a Boy who was afterwards born alive and dyed one hour after this Issue is found against the Plaintiff because the Defendant had the Land as Heir to her Brother who was last seised and not to the Father and so the Defendant had not the Land by Discent from the Father but from the Brother and yet this is Asseâ—s in her hands if it had béen specially pleaded In a Writ of Error brought by him in remainder Error in Tail to reverse a Fine if the Defendant plead in Barr of the Writ of Error a Common recovery by the Tenant in Tail to which the Plaintiff replies That at the time of the Recovery suffered he himself was Tenant to the Praecipe and so the Recovery void Vpon which Issue is joyned Part. and the Iury find that he was Tenant of part but not of other part This Issue is partly found for the Plaintiff and partly for the Defendant so the Court shall procéed to the Examination of the Error for that whereof he was found no Tenant but 't is a good bar of the Writ of Error for that whereof he is found Tenant to the Praecipe In Assumpsit to pay Money upon request Promise and issue upon this if the Iury find the Plaintiff promised to pay the Money but do not say upon request nor Modo forma 't is not found for the Plaintiff In Ejectment of a Manner if the Iury If the Substance of the Issue be found 't is sufficient Manner find that there were no Fréeholders and so 't is no Manner in Law yet being a Manner by Reputation and so the Tenements pass by the Lease Therefore this Verdict is found for him who pleads the Lease of the Manner for the substance is whether any thing was demised or not In an Information of Extortion against Goal the Gaoler of the Goal a Prison of the Castle of Maidston the Iury found there was no
course was so for the parties are demandable before the Jury and if the Plaintiff make default he shall be non-suited and if the Defendant make default the Jury shall be awarded by default whether they appear or not Dyer 265. Where an Inquest is taken by default What the Defendant looses by his default the Defendant shall loose his Challenges and by 28 Ass p. 42. tit Enquest in Fitz. he shall loose his Evidences also Bro. Enquest 10. quod non est lex Det. The Defendant pleaded a Release and the Plaintiff replyed non est factum and at the day of the Venire facias the Defendant made default and the Inquest was taken upon his default and found for the Defendant for which the Plaintiff took nothing by his When the Defendant may be condemned by default and when an Enquest must be taken upon the default Bill And yet if the Plaintiff had prayed it he might have had the Defendant condemned by his default before the taking of the Verdict Et sic â—ide folly in le Plaintiff Bro. Ib. 5. But upon such Release and default in Trespass the Enquest shall be taken by default and the Defendant shall not be condemned by default though the Plaintiff pray it and the reason is because the debt is certain and the damages are incertain in Trespass Bro. Ib. 3. And Finch fo 409. hath well collected out of Brook That always in an Action of Trespass whatsoever the Issue be Release Iustification c. and also in Debt Detinue Accompt and the rest which are for things in certainty if the Issue be taken upon a matter in fait only as payment or that an Acquittance pleaded in Barr by the Defendant was made by Dures c. The Inquest shall be taken by default if the Defendant makes default But in the last recited Actions of Debt c. If the Issue be upon the Acquittance it self Release or other matter in writing the Plaintiff may pray Iudgment upon the Defendants default if he will but if he do not pray it the Jury shall be taken by default as in an Action of Trespass The Jury may give a Verdict without testimony Verdict without or against testimony or against testimony when they themselves have Conuzans of the Fact Plo. Com. 86. CAP. XIV How the Jury ought to demean themselves whil'st they consider of their Verdict when they may eat and drink when not What Misdemeanor of theirs will make the Verdict voyd Evidence given them when they are gone from the Barr spoils their Verdict For what the Court may fine them and where the Justices may carry them in Carts till they agree of their Verdict An Amercement Assered by the Jury THere is a Maxime and an old Custom Jurors ought not to eat or drink in the Law that the Jury shall not eat nor drink after they be sworn till they have given their Verdict without the Assent and Licence of the Justices and that is ordained by the Law for eschewing of divers inconveniencies that might follow thereupon and that especially if they should eat or drink at the Costs of the parties and therefore if they do so it may be laid in Arrest of Indgment But with the assent of the Iustices they may both eat and drink as if any of the Jurors fall sick before they be agréed of their Verdict so soon that he may not commune of the Verdict then by the assent of the Iustices he may have meat or drink and also such other things as be necessary for him and his fellows also at their own costs or at For by assent of the parties they may eat and drink Br. Jurors the indifferent costs of the parties if they so agrée or by the assent of the Justices may both eat or drink and if the Case so happen that the Jury can in no wise agrée in their Verdict as if one of the Jurors knoweth in his own Conscience the thing to be false which the other Jurors affirm to be true and so he will not agrée with them in giving a false Verdict and this appeareth to the Iustices by Examination the Iustices may in such case suffer the Iury to have both meat and drink for a time to sée whether they will agrèe And if they will in no wise agrée the Iustices may take such order in the matter as shall séem to them by their discretion to stand with reason and conscience by awarding of a â—ew Inquest and by setting fine New Inquest when the Jury cannot agree upon them that they shall find in default or otherwise as they shall think beâ—â— by their discretion like as they may do if one of the Iury die before the Verdict c. D. aâ—â— Student 158. If the Iury after their Evidence given unto them at the Barr do at their own Charges eat or drink either before or after they Where if the Jury eat or drink it shall avoid the Verdict and where only fineable be agreed on their Verdict it is finable but it shall not avoid the Verdict But if before they be agréed on their Verdict they eat or drink at the charge of the Plaintiff if the Verdict be given for him it shall avoid the Verdict But if it be given for the Defendant it shall not avoid it Et sic è converso But if after they be agréed on cheir Verdict they eat or drink at the charge of him for whom they do pass it shall not avoid the Verdict 1 Inst 228. To give the Iury money makes their Verdict void by two Iustices Leon. 1 part 18. If the Plaintiff after Evidence given and What delivered to the Jury after Evidence shall avoid their Verdict the Jury departed from the Barr or any for him do deliver any Letter from the Plaintiff to any of the Jury concerning the matter in Issue or any Evidence or any escrowle touching the matter in Issue which was not given in Evidence it shall avoid the Verdict if it be found for the Plaintiff but not if it be found for the Defendant Et sic è converso But if the Jury carry away any Writing unsealed which was given in Evidence in open Court this shall not avoid their Verdict albeit they should not have carried it with them Ib. By the Law of England a Jury after How the Jury ought to be kept by the Bayliff their Evidence given upon the Issue ought to be kept together in some convenient place without meat or drink Fire or Candle which some Books call an Imprisonment and without spéech with any unless When they may eat and drink See Smith's Common-wealth 74. it be the Bayliff and with him only if they be agréed After they be agréed they may in causes betwéen party and party give a Verdict and if the Court be risen give a privy Verdict before any of the Judges of the Court and then they may eat and drink and the next
morning in open Court they may either affirm or alter their privy Verdict Where there can be no privy Verdict and that which is given in Court shall stand But in Criminal cases of life or member the Jury can give no privy Verdict but they must give it openly in Court Neither can a Jury sworn and charged in Where the Jury cannot be discharged before Verdict The King cannot be nonsuit case of life or member be discharged by the Court or any other but they ought to give a Verdâ—ct And the King cannot be non-suit for he is in Iudgment of Law ever present in Court but a common person may be nonsuit And in Civil Actions the Justices upon cause may discharge the Jury Br. Enquest 68. 47. 39. c. But this is against Common practice and I have known that after a Iury of Life and Death have been sworn and charg'd with Prisoners Arraigned the Iudge having béen credibly Informed That it was a Iury pack'd to favour some Prisoner has discharged that Iury and made the Sheriff return another presently In Hillary Term Sexto H. 8. Rotulo 358. It was alledged in Arrest of the Verdict at the Nisi prius that the Jurors had eat and drunk And upon Examination it was found that they had first agreed and that returning to give their Verdict they saw Rede Chief Iustice in the way going to sée a fray and they followed him Et in veniendo viderunt cyplum inde biberunt And for this every one of them was fined 40 d. And the Plaintiff had Iudgment upon the Jurors fined Verdict Dyer 37. And Dyer 218. At the Nisi prius the Jury after their charge given returned and said That they were all agréed except one who had eat a Pear and drunk a draught of Ale Jurors at the Nisi prius fined in bank for eating Pears and drinking Ale for which he would not agrée And at the Request of the Plaintiff the Iury was sent back again and found the Issue for the Plaintiff And the matter aforesaid being examined by the Oath of the Iurors Seperatim and the Bayliff who kept them and found true the offender was committed and afterwards found Surety for his Fine Si c. And Fitzherbert the then Iustice of Assise gave him day in banco c. at which day a Fine of 20 s. was there assessed Et quoad Ball Curia avisare vult In Trespass by Mounson against West the Iury was charged and Evidence given and Iurors being retired into a House for to Fined for having Figgs and Pippins about them consider of their Evidence they remained there a long time without concluding any thing and the Officers of the Court who attended them seeing their delay searched the Iurors if they had any thing about them to eat upon which search it was found that some of them had Figgs and others Pippins for which the next day the matter was moved to the Court and the Iurors were examined upon Oath And two of them did confess that they had eaten Figgs before they had agréed of their Verdict and three other of them confessed that they had Pippins but did not eat of them and that they did it without the knowledge or will of any of the parties And afterwards the Court set a sine of 5 l. upon each of them which had eaten and upon the others which had not eaten 40 s. But upon great advice and consideration had and conference with the rest of the Iudges the Verdict was held to be good Notwithstanding the said misdemeanor Leon. 1. part 133. And sée the Book of Entries 251. The Fined for eating Raisins and Dates Iurors after they went from the Barr ad seipsos of their Verdict to advise Comederunt quasdam species scil Raisins Dates c. at their own Costs as well before as after they were agreed of their Verdict And the Iurors were committed to prison but their Verdict was good although the Verdict was given against the King In Ejectione firme it was found for the Finable for having sweet-meats c. about them though they do not eat them See Plo. Com. 519. One fined and imprisoned for having Sugar-Candy and Liquorish about him Defendant three of the Iurors had Sweet-meats in their Pockets and those thrée were for the Plaintiff until they were searched and the Sweet-meats found and then did agree with the other nine and gave Verdict for the Defendant It was the Opinion of the Iustices That whether they eat or not they were finable for having of the Sweet-meaâ—s with them for that is a very great misdemeanor Godbold 353. 40 Assise Placito 11. The Iustices said Jurors carted That if the Iurors will not agrée in their Verdict the Iustices may carry them in a Cart along with them till they are agréed The Iury were gone from the Barr to confer of their Verdict and one of the Witnesses before sworn on the Defendants part The same Evidence given to the Jury after they were gon from the Barr spoils the Verdict was called by the Iurors and he recited again his Evidence to them and after they gave their Verdict for the Defendant And complaint being made to the Iudge of the Assises of this misâ—emeanor he examined the Enquest who confessed all the matter and that the Evidence was the same in effect that was given before Et non alia nec diversa And this matter being returned by the Postea the Opinion of the Court was That the Verdict was not good and a Venire facias de novo was awarded Cro. last part 189. Trin. 1653. between Wells and Tayler Copies of a Bill Answer and Depositions were proved but not all read and delivered to the Iury who carried them with them from the Barr in a bundle which they layd by them and did not look on yet their Verdict at the Barr was set aside for this Cause and the Court would not regard their saying that they did not read them for they might say that to save themselves it being a fault to take any thing without the Courts knowledge If one of the parties say to the Iury after they are gone from the Barr You are weak If a party speak to them men it is as clear of my side as the Nose in a man's face This is new Evidence for his affirmation may much perswade the Iury and therefore shall quash the Verdict So if any thing be read to them which they ought not to have with theâ— as a book of Depositions some whereof were read in Evidence Pratt's Case 21 Jac. The Plaintiff delivered an Escrowle to a Escrowle delivered to a Juror before he was sworn Vitiates the Verdict Iuror impanelled before he was sworn who afterwards being sworn and gone with the Iury from the Barr to consider of the Verdict shewed the same Escrowle to his Companions who found for the Plaintiff The Minister who kept the Enquest
What Issues they forfeit and of Judgment for striking a Juror in Westminster c. YOu have already heard how the Court may fine the Iurors for their misdemeanors in giving up their Verdict I will proceed in shewing what punishments they are lyable unto if they neglect their duty and doubtless no men have more need of knowing what penalties the Law inflicts on their offences then common Iurors who too often being preingaged with favour to the Plaintiff or malice against the Defendant Et sic è converso or with common Interest as they call it where Tythes or Commons are in questioâ— will neither hearken to their Evidence â—or direction of the Iudge But subvert the whole drift of the Common Law which will have them of the Neighbour-hood where the fact was committed to the end that they knowing most of the fact may consequently give the best Verdict yet contrariwise Iurors which live nearest do now a days most commonly so fetter themselves with favour or animosities to the parties that those which live furthest off as Iuries from other Counties for the most part give the cleanest Verdicts And how should the Iudges remedy this mischief but by severely punishing those Iuries which offend the Law in this will be their Guide for without doubt excepting life and member the Law hath provided more severe punishments against Iuries than against any other offendor whatsoever as well knowing that corruptio optimi â—st pessima And common Iurors generally have nothing to do with this verse Oderunt peccare boni virtutis amore Therefore 't is fit they should be concerned in the next Oderunt peccare mali formidine poenae wherefore the description of what this poena is shall be the conclusion of this Treatise If any Iuror take a reward to give his Verdict and be thereof attainted at the suit of other than the party and maketh fine he The penalty of Jurors taking Rewards which sueth shall have half the fine and if any of the parties to the Pleaâ— bring his Action against such Juror he sâ—â—ll recover his damages And the Juror so attainted shall have imprisonment for one year which imprisonment shall not be pardoned for any fine this is by the Statute of 34 E. 3. cap. 8. 5 E. 3. ca. 10. It is accorded That if any Juror in Assises Juries or Enquests take of the one party or of the other and be Shall not serve of any other Inquest thereof duly attainted That hereafter he shall not be put in any Assises Iuries or Enquests and nevertheless he shall be commanded to prison and further ransomed at the Kings will And the Iustices before whom such Assises Iuries and Enquests Imprisoned and ransomed that is fined shall pass shall have power to enquire and determine according to this Statute A man would think that these Statutes should have frighted any Iuror from taking Rewards to give his Verdict But Quid non mortalia pectora cogis Auri sacra fames So sacred is this love of Money that Conscience her self must vail to it and not stand in competition with such allurements wherefore the Law did redouble its force nay more produced a Decies tantum scil That a Iuror taking reward to give his Verdict shall pay ten times sâ— much as he hath taken which forfeiture methinks should make even those who love Money best refuse to take Money upon such an account because it is like a Canker in their Estates depriving them in the end of ten times more than it brought for which hear the Statute 38 E. 3. cap. 12. Item As to the Article of Iurors in the Decies tantum 24th year it is assented and joyned to the same that if any Iurors in Assises sworn and other Enquests to be taken betwéen the King and party or party and party do any thing take by them or other of the party Plaintiff or Defendant to give their Verdict and thereof be attainted by process contained in the same Article be it at the suit of the party that will sue for himself or for the Embraceor King or any other person every of the said Iurors shall pay ten times as much as he hath taken And he that will sue shall have the one half and the King the other half And that all Embraceors that bring or procure such Enquests in the Country to take gain or profit shall be punished in the same manner and form as the Iurors And if the Iuror or Embraceor so attainted have not whereof to make agrée in the manner aforesaid he shall have the imprisonment of one year And the intent of the King of Great men and of the Commons is That no Iustice or other Minister shall enquire of office upon any of the points of this Article but only at the Suit of the party or of other as afore is said Vpon which Statute there is a Writ called a Decies tantum and who will may bring it for it is a popular Action and lies as you sée where any of the Iurors after he is sworn taketh of one party or of the other or of both and then he is called an Ambidexter any Reward to give his Verdict c. Ambidexter And it may be brought against all the Iurors So F. N. Br. saith But for my part I think he is mistaken for the Statute mentioneth nothing of his taking money and in my opinion the case of 37 H. 6. 13. is full against him Embraceor and Embraceors although they take several Sums of Money and although the Iury give no Verdict or a true Verdict But it doth not lye against an Embraceor if he taketh no Money and imbraces or taketh Money and doth not imbrace Sée Bro. Tit. Decies tantum 13. and F. N. Br. 171. An Embraceor is he that procures the Jurors in the Country to take gain or profit or comes to the Barr with the party and speaks in the matter or stands there to survey the Jury c. or to put them in fear or solicits them to find on the one side or other and this Fellow cloaks his Embracery under pretence of labouring the Jurors to appear to do their Conscience And thus the Attorneys in the Country often take upon them to do and many times put in a word or two Attorneys ill practice for their Clyents which practice deserves the most severe punishment next to their getting the Sâ—eriff to return such and such in the Jury â—hich they having been Vnder-Sheriffs themselves and so agrée with one another are most expert at But it was said by Roll. Ch. Iust That a Plaintiff might well intreat one Iuror to appear and that it was allowed in the Star-Chamber but a Stranger could not labour one Iuror to appear But Counsellors at Law may plead for Counsellors their Money at the Barr But they must not labour the Jury privately and if they take Money for this they are
punishment is to this end Ut poena ad paucos metus ad omnes perveniat for there is Misericordia puniens and there is Crudelitaâ—parcens And séeing all Tryals of real personal and mixt actions depend upon the Oath of 12 men prudent Antiquity inflicted this severe punishment upon them if they were attainted of Perjury 1 Inst 294. But now by the Stat. of 23 H. 8. cap. 3. The severity of this punishment is moderated if the Writ of Attaint be grounded upon that Statute But the party grieved may at his Election either bring his Writ of Attaint at the Common-Law or upon that Statute Wherefore let the Juror expect the greatest punishment when he offends 3 Inst 163. 222. And so I conclude as to the Iuror only with the words of Fortescue Quis tunc etsi immemor salutis animae suae fuerit non formidine tantae poenae verecundia tantae infamiae veritatem non diceret sic Juratus Who then though he regard not his Souls health yet for fear of so great punishment and for shame of so great infamy would not upon his Oath declare the truth But as to our Practicer I would give this one further Advertisement which relates also to Iurors When a Verdict has been given by a former Iury in the same Cause and on the same Evidence it is allowed to give the former Verdict in Evidence and I have known this Introduced by the Counsel as obliging to the latter Iury to find accordingly intimating that otherwise they do in effect perjure the former 12 men which may amuse render minds and draw them from the strict Inquiry into the Merits of the Cause in favour of their Predecessors which is a palpable mistake and misinformation for these Reasons 1. The same Evidence in the former Cause and Tryal perhaps was not so perspicuously delivered as in this 2. This latter Iury may be of more sagacicus and Comprehensive Iudgment than the former 3. The Directions of the Court which the Iury most héed may be more clearly delivered to this Iury. 4. The Matter in Contest perhaps was not in the former Tryal so clearly manag'd by the Counsel being not so well instructed as afterwards 5. And laâ—â—ly supposing the Evidence equally deliuered by the Witnesses apprehended by the Iury directed by the Court manag'd by the Counsel yet it 's no perjury or fault to differ in Iudgment for if 24 Iurymen were to try a Matter of Fact and 12 were of one Opinion and 12 of another who is in fault while they Iudge according to the best of their Knowledge and Skill to which only they are sworn And it 's a reasonable kindness to Iury-men to make good Construction of differing Iudgments among them while we sée how oft Iudges themselves differ in their Opinions on a matter stated equally to them all and that not only as to matter of Law but as to matter of Fact as attending Practicers may observe in Tryals at Earr in the several Iudges several Directions And this I thought good to advertise for that I have known Verdicts gained on this unwarrantable Suggestion against clear and express Evidence and could instance some Cases Sed verbum sat c. As to the difference betwixt the Judge and the Jury and that Question which has made such a noise viz. Whether a Jury is fineable for going against their Evidence in Court or the Direction of the Judge I look upon that Question as dead and buried since Bushel's Case in my Lord Vaughan's Reports yet some of the Ashes thereof I may sprinkle here without offence It doth appear there to have béen resolveâ— by all the Iudges upon a full Conference at Serjeants-Inn That a Jury is not fineable for going against their Evidence where an Attaint lyes And that it is Evident by several Resolutions of all the Iudges That where an Attaint lyes the Iudge cannot fine the Iury for going against their Evidence or Direction of the Court without other Misdemeanour And where an Attaint doth not lye as in Criminal Causes upon Indictments c. My Lord Vaughan says these words That the Court could not Fine a Jury at the Common Law where Attaint did not lye I think to be the clearest Position that ever I considered either for Authority or Reason of Law And one reason for this which can never be answered is The Iudge cannot fully know upon what Evidence the Iury give their Verdict for they may have other Evidence than what is shew'd in Court They are of the Vicinage the Judge is a Stranger they may have Evidence from their own personal knowledge that the Witnesses speak false which the Iudge knows not of they may know the Witnesses to be stigmatised and infamous which may be unknown to the Parties or Court And if the Iury knew no more than what they heard in Court and so the Iudge knew so much as they yet they might make different Conclusions as oftentimes two Iudges do and therefore as it would be a strange and absurd thing to punish one Iudge for differing with another in Opinion or Iudgment so it would be worse for the Iury who are Judges of the Fact to be punished for finding against the Direction of him who is not Iudge of the Fact But he that would be better satisfyed in this point may read that Case and the Authorities and Reasons given by my Lord Vaughan whom I must honour as a man of great reason It is shewed in that Case That muth of the Office of Jurors in order to their Verdict is Ministerial as not withdrawing from their fellows after they are sworn not receiving from either side Evidence after their Oath not given in Court not eating and drinking before their Verdict refusing to give a Verdict and the like wherein if they transgress they are Fineable But the Verdict it self when given is not an act Ministerial but Judicial and according to the best of their judgment for which they are not fineable nor to be punisht but by Attaint Nor can any man shew That a Jury was ever punisht upon an Information either in Law or in the Star-Chamber where the Charge was only for finding against their Evidence or giving an untrâ—e Verdict unless Imbracery Subornation â—r the like were joyned But the Fining and Imprisoning of Jurors for giving their Verdicts hath several times béen declared in Parliament an Illegal and Arbitrary Innovation and of dangerous Consequence to the Government the Lives and Liberties of the People This celebrated tryal by Iuries having béen confirmed by many Parliaments Littleton Sect. 368. tells us That as the Iury may find the matter at large that is a Special Verdict which the Court cannot refuse if it be pertinent to the matter put in Issue and leave the Law to the Court so if the Iury will they may take upon them the knowledge of the Law upon the matter and may give their Verdict generally as is put in their Charge As
commanded and may do it after Iudgment If the party grieved be dead his Heirs or Executors c. according to the Case may have a Writ of Error upon this Bill of Exceptions And no diminution can be alledged for the parties are confined to the matter in the Bill If the Iustice dye before he acknowledgeth his Seal according to the Act a Scire sac shall go to his Executor or Administrator for the Death of the Iudge is the act of God which shall not prejudice the party As in the case of a Certificate of the Marshal of the King's Host that the person outlawed was in the King's Service beyond Sea in a Writ of Error a Scire fac shall go to the Marshals Executor or Administrator upon shewing the Certificate If the Iudge denyeth his Seal the party may prove it by Witnesses ib. Error of a Iudgment at the Grand Sessions in the County of Pembrok in an Assise of darrein Presentment by Henry Cort against the Bishop of St. Davids Dorothy Owen al. for the Church of Stackpoole The fourth Error assigned was because the Issue being whether H. Cort did last present one R. D. the last Incumbent who was instituted and inducted upon his Presentation The Plaintiff offered in Evidence Letters of Institution which appeared to be and so mentions that they were sealed with the Seal of the Bishop of London because the Bishop of St. Davids had not his Seal of Office there And those Letters were made out of the Diocess And the Defendant had demurred thereupon That those Letters were insufficient and the Demurrer was denyed which Jones said was an Error because they ought to have permitted the Demurrer and should have adjudged upon it But it was held that the not admitting of the Demurrer ought not co be assigned for Error for when upon the Evidence the matter was over-ruled by the Iustices of Assize That was a proper cause of a Bill of Exceptions and the remedy which the Statute appoints in that Case And for the matter of the Letters of Institution sealed with another Seal and made out of the Dioâ—ess it was held they were good enough for the Seal is not material it being an Act made of the Institution the writing and sealing is but a testimonial thereof which may be under any Seal or in any place But of that point they would advise Croke 1. part 340. Note This Bill is to prevent the precipitancy of the Judges and ought to be allowed in all Courts and in all places of Pleadings and may be put in at any time before the Jury have given their Verdict But this Bill is rarely used there being impar congressus betwixt the Judge and the Councel and the Prudence of the Judges induce them to find special Verdicts in Cases of doubt and difficulty A Release Pleaded at the Assises after Issue joyned Et pred Def. in propria persona sua ven dic quod pred Justic Dom. Regis hic ad caption Jur. ss pred inter ipsum Def. prefat Quer. procedere non debent quia dic ' quod post xii diem F. ult preterit de quo die Jurat pred inter partes pred continuat fuit ante hunc diem scilt diem de Assise scilt primo die M. Anno c. apud c. pred Quer. per nomen c. remisit relaxavit c. Et hoc c. unde pet quod Justic pred ad captionem Jur. pred ulterius procedere nolunt The Death of one of the Defendants Pleaded after the last Continuance Et pred Def. per A. B. Attorn suum ven pred T. non ven super hoc pred Def. dic quod post ult concinuationem placiti pred scilt post xv Pasche ult preterit de quo die loquela pred ult continuat fuit hic usq ad hunc diem scilt in Cro. sce Trin. tunc prox ' sequen ' ante eundem diem scilt decimo die Maii ult preterit pred T. apud A. pred obiit Et pet quod null process ' nec aliquid aliud in placito pred ulterius versus prefat T. fiat Et quia pred J. K. hoc non dedic Ideo null process nec aliquiâ— aliud in placito pred versus prefat T. fiat c. A Baron Challenges the Pannel because no Knight was retorned of the same Et sup hoc idem T. calumpniat arraiament panelli pred quia dic quod ipse est tempore arraiament panelli ilâ—ius fuit Baro hujus Regni Angliae locum vocem habens in quol Parliamento hujus Reg. Quodque in eodem panâ—llo nullus Miles nominat retorn existit Et hoo paratus est verificare unde petit Judicium quod panellum illud cassetur c. Evidence and demurrer upon Evidence Middleton against Baker Cro. Eliz. 42. fol. 751. In Eject It was held by all the Court upon evidence to a Jury That if the Plaintiff give in evidence any matter in writing or Record or a sentence in the Spiritual Court as it was in this case and the Defendant offers to demurr thereupon the Plaintiff ought to joyn in the demurrer or wave the Evidence because the Desendant shall not be compelled to put matter of difficulty to lay Gens and because there cannot be any variance of a matter in writing But if either party offer to demurr upon any evidence given by Witness the other unless he pleaseth shall not be compelled to joyn because the Credit of the testimony is to be examined by a Jury and the Evidence is incertain and may be enforced more or less But both parties may agree to joyn in demurrer upon such evidence And in the Queens Case The other party may not demurr upon evidence shewn in Writing or Record for the Queen unless the Queens Councel will thereto assent But the Court in such case shall charge the Jury to find the matter specially as appears 34 H. 8. Dyer 53. But this is by Prerogative vide lib. 4. 104. the same case and 1. Inst 72. where my Lord Cook says If the Plaintiff in evidence shew any matter of Record or Deeds or Writings or any sentence in the Ecclesiastical Court or other matter of evidence by Testimony of Witnesses or otherwise whereupon doubt in Law ariseth and the Defendant offer to Demurr in Law thereupon the Plantiff cannot refuse to joyn in demurrer no more than in a Demurrer upon a Count Replication c. and so è converso may the Plaintiff Demurr in Law upon the evidence of the Defendant but the Kings Councel shall not be enforced to joyn in Demurrer but in that Case the Court may direct the Jury to find the special matter So that the several sorts of evidence make no difference as to the joyning in Demurrer 1. part Leon. 206. Darrose against Newbott Cro. 4. Car. fol. 143. In Error of a Judgment in Bridgewater The Error assigned was for
that in an Action upon the Case far Asumpset the parties being at issue a demurrer was joyned upon the evidence and thereupon the Jury discharged and afterwards judgment was given for the Plaintiff and a Writ of Inquiry of damages awarded and damages found and Judgment thereupon where the Jurors which came to find the Issue although by the Demurrer they were discharged of the Issue yet ought to have assessed damages conditionally if judgment should be given for the Plaintiff And in proof thereof was cited Newis and Scholastica's Case in Plo. Com. fol. 408. and the old Books of Entries c. And it was said by the Court If these Precedents be good Law thâ—â— it may be inquired of by the same Jury conditionalâ—y But it may be as well inquired of by a Writ of Inquiry of damages when the Demurrer is determined And the most usual course is when there is a demurrer upon evidence to discharge the Jury without more inquiry But as My Lord Chief Baron Montague held at the Assises in Cambridgeshire 1682. it may be one way or other In the Assise by R. Newis and Scholastica his Wife against Lark and Hunt which was taken by default The Precedent in Plowd Com. as to this matter runs thus Recogn ' Assisae pred exacti venerunt qui ad veritatem de premissisdicend electi triati 8 â—â—rati fuerunt sup quo Willielmus Bendlows Serviens ad legem de consilio predictorum R. Scholasticae in manutentione Assisae pred coram Justic Dominae Reginae de Banco hic in evident Recognit Assisae pred dixit quod diu ante diem impetration is Assisae pred quidam H. Clark fuit seisitus â—c Et condidit testamentum ultimam voluntatem sua in scriptis inter alia unde pars inde in hiis Anglicis verbis sequitur videl Also this is the last Will and Testament of me the said Henry Clark for and concerning c. Et ulterius idem Serviens ad legem ex parte pred R. S. dedit in evident eisd Recognit quod c. Quorum pretextu idem jam Serviens ad legem exigit quod iidem Recogn Assisae pred Assisam pred de tenementis pred cum pertin ' in visu c. pro parte ipsorum R. S. triari comparere debeant c. Et veredictum suum dare debent quod pred W. Lark J. Hunt dictos R. S. de tenementis pred cum pertin ' in visu c. disseisiverant c. Et pred W. Lark J. H in propriis personis suis dic quod evidentiae allegationeâ— pred ex parte pred R. S. superius allegat minus sufficien in lege existunt ad manutenend Assisam pred ad quos ipsi necesse non habent nec per leg terrae tenentur respondere unde pro defectu sufficien evident in hac parte pet judicium quod juratores pred de veredicto suo in premissis dicend exonerentur c. Et quod pred R. N. S. ab Assisa sua pred habend precludantur c. Et pred R. S. dicunt quod ex quo ipsi sufficien materiam in manutentione Assisae pred in evident recognit pred ostend quam quidem materiam pred W. Lark J. Hunt non dedicunt nec ad eam aliqualit respond petunt judicium Et quod iidem Jurator inde exonerentur quod pred W. J. de Assisa illa convincantur c. Sup. quo dict est Recogn pred quod inquir quae dampna pred R. S. sustinuertam occasione disseisinae pred quam pro misis custagiis suis per ipsos circa sectam suam in hac parte apposit si conting judicium pro eisdem R. S. in placito pred sup evidentias pred reddi Qui quidem Recogn dicunt sup sacram suum quod si conting judicium in placito pred pro pred R. S. sup evidentias pred reddi iidem R. S. sustinuer dampna occasione disseisinae pred ad 13 s. 4 d. pro misis custagiis suis ad 20 s. Et quia Justitiarii hic se advisare volunt de sup premissis priuâ—quam judicium inde reddant dies datus est partibus predict c. Note several Exceptions were taken to the manner of giving the Evidence First for that the intire Will was not shewed but part and that this being the foundation of the Evidence the whole Will ought to have been shewed for there might be some oâ—her matter of substance as a Condition Limitation c. in the parts not shewed But all the Justices disallowed this Exception and said the party in any Title or Bar needs shew no more than what makes for him As in an Act of Parliament in which are divers branches 't is sufficient to shew that branch which serves ones purpose and not like the Case of a Fine or Recovery of 20 acres where I must shew the whole Record although I am concerned but in one acre because the Originial is intire and so is the Record grounded upon it See also Fulmerâ—ton and Stewards Case Plo. Com. 102. Another Exception was That the fine was not shewed under the Seal of the Court or the Great Seal but one part indented of the Chirograph was only shewn which the Jurors were not bound to believe because it wanted a Seal But all the Justices were against this and said the Jury might find the Fine of their own knowledge without the shewing of the parties or they might find it upon the Credit of any Witness that had seen it and the shewing the part indented is the usual evidence of a Fine Note a Fine indented and not exemplified under Seal c. shall not be delivered to the Jury 34 H. 6. 25. And they said because it is only the Inducement of the verity to the Jurors the party could not Demurr upon this for the effect of the matter is that therâ— is such a Fine which is amongst the Records And this is the substance of the matter and the part of the Chirograph is nothing but the Image of the verity and therefore suum coram Baronibus hic prestitum in premissis dicit quod c. here recite the Evidence Et pred Attorn Domini Regis pro eod Domino Rege dic quod evidentiae pred superius dat minus sufficien in lege existunt ad manutenend seu proband exit pred pro parte ipsius A. F. superius ad patriam junct unde ob insufficient earundem evident ac ex quo per evidentias illas non dedicitur forisfactura bonorum pred in informatione pred spec i em Attorn Domini Regis pro ipso Domino Rege petit judicium ac quod eadem bona remaneant Domino Regi forisfacta juxta formam statuti pred Et pred A. F. dic quod evidenciae pred superius ex parte ipsius A. F. dat