Clergy in an appeale 1. Because it is but to notifie to the Judges that he hath once had his Clergy and that he shall not have it againe by the Statute of 4. H. 7. c. 13. 2. Because it is no part of the judgement and the party shall goe at large although he be not burned by good construction of the Statute of 18. Eliz. c. 7. which provideth that after Clergy allowed and Burning he shall goe at large for otherwise when he is pardoned he shall be imprisoned for ever In the Starre-Chamber the King may Pardon corporall punishment for forgery c. but not if attainted at the common Law in an Action of forgery of false deeds Halls Case 2. Jacobi com banco fo 51. A. C. Libelled for defamation in the Court Christian against H. and had sentence and costs taxed at a day to be paid H. sueth an appeale and obtaines a Pardon from the King and brings a prohibition 1. Resolved all Suites in the Court Christian Pro salute animae or reformatione morum are for the King as suits in the Starr-chamber he may pardon them before or after the Suite comenced but he cannot Pardon where the party sueth for a thing in which he had interest as Tythes 2. All proceedings in the Court Christian Ex officio are for the King and he may pardon them 3. Although the suite may be pardoned yet he cannot pardon the costs which are taxed 4. Although the sentence by the appeale is suspended to many purposes yet untill reversall the party had interest in the costs not pardonable and after a consultation was granted for the costs Pages case 30. Eliz. in the Exchequer fol. 52. I. Demiseth to his wife who is an Alien and before the death of the Testator indenized the date of the Letters Patents is corrupted so that they bore date after his death shee obtaines an exemplification by Commission under the Exchequer Seale it is found that she was an alien and an Information is brought against her and she pleads the exemplification 1. Resol This office is voyde for every office of Intitling as this is ought to be by Commission under the Great Seale but an office of Instruction may be under the Exchequer Seale 2. It appeared not what authority the Commissioners had but Inquisitio capta virtute Cujusdam Commissionis c. 2. That the Exemplification was pleadable by the Statute of 13. Eliz. c. 6. which extends to all Patents whatsoever without any restraint An Exemplification and an Inspeximus as an Innotescimus and a Vidimus are all one A Constat cannot be had without Affidavit and it is when Letters are casually lost An Innotescimus or a Vidimus are alwayes of a Charter of Feoffment or other Instrument not of Record Knights case 31. Eliz. Communi Banco fol. 54. THe Prior of St. John of Je 29. H. 8. Leased divers houses reserving 5. li. 10. s. 11. d. per annum at the foure usuall feasts in L. viz. for one house 3. li. 11. d. and so severally of the others with condition of re-entry for non payment and after surrenders to H. 8. who in Anno 36. grants one house to the lessee and another in fee the lessee dyeth It is found by Inquisition in the Com' of Mid ' by Commission under the Exchequer Seale that 37. s. 5. d. parcell of the said rent was arreare at M. for a quarter of a yeare before the returne of the office or seisure the King grants the residue of the houses to one who leaseth to the Plaintiffe who upon entry of the Executors of the first lessee brings Trespas and the Court being divided it was argued in the Exchequer Chamber by all the Judges 1. Resol This is an intire Lease and the viz. is but a declaration of the severall values of the houses and no severance of the reservation but by apt words divers parcells may be severally leased by one demise and severall rents reserved 2. Admitting them severall rents yet the condition is intire and in case of a common person by severance of any part of the reversion will be extinct 3. This being in case of the King his patentee of part shall not take advantage of the condition but the King himselfe may and the Patentee to whom he grants the residue although the Lease originally made by a Subject 4. Although it be found that more was arreare then was reserved quarterly yet it sufficeth that the office had matter of substance and the Jury in M. may finde which are the usuall feasts in L. 5. The grant after office and before the returne of it is good and by entry without other seisure the Lease is voyde 6. This office under the Exchequer Seale is sufficient to intitle the King to a Chattell Specots case 32. Eliz. Banco Regis in Error fol. 57. S. sa feme bring a Qu impedit against the Bishop of E. and declare that J. A. was seised of a Mannor to which an advowson was appendant and demised it to the feme for life and they presented D. W. who dyed and so it belongs to them to present the defendant pleads that the plaintiffe presented one who is schismaticus inveteratus whereof he gave notice to the plaintiffe It was adjudged for the plaintiffe in the Common place and Error brought thereupon 1. Error Because no presentment alledged in J. A. but over ruled for the presentment of the plaintiffe is sufficient for themselves 2. The Bishop ought not to shew any particular schisme for the Court of the King cannot judge of it but the Bishop is Judge also it is cause to remove a Coroner quia minus Idoneus It was answered that he ought to shew the heresie in certaine and although the Bishop is Judge yet because his Act is not of Record it is traversable and although it belongs not to the Kings Court to judge of Heresies yet the generall cause of suite being in their conusance they shall determine of it by advise of Divines and the cause of removing a Coroner is not traversable 3. The Bishop is twice amerced and a man can be amerced but once towards one man c. It was answered that he was but once amerced for the Judgement in the Kings Bench was but a rehersall of the former yet admitting the second Judgement thereby voyde neverthelesse the first Judgement is good by the Common Law without damages Quod fuit concessum per totam Curiam Fostar 32. El. in Banco le roy fol. 59. IT was resolved that the Constable having a warrant to bring one coram aliquo Justiciar ' c. it is at the election of the Officer to bring the party so attached to what Justice he will For it is greater reason to give the election to the Officer who in presumption of Law is a person indifferent and sworne to execute his Office duly then to the Delinquent Wray chiefe Justice said that a Justice of Peace may make
his warrant to bring the party before himselfe and it is good and sufficient in Law for it is most like that he hath the best knowledge of the matter and therefore most fit to doe Justice in that matter upon refusall to finde surety the Constable may commit him without a new warrant Gooches case 32. El. in banco le roy fol. 60. WRay chiefe Justice said that if A. make a fraudulent conveyance of his Lands to deceive a purchasor against the Statute of 27. El. and continueth in possession and is reputed as owner B entereth in communication with A. for the purchase and by accident B. hath notice of this fraudulent conveyance Notwithstanding he concludes with A. and takes his assurance In this case B. shall avoide the said fraudulent conveyance by the said Act notwithstanding the notice for the Act by expresse words hath made the fraudulent conveyance voyde as to the purchasor And for as much as that is within the expresse provision of the Statute it ought to be taken and expounded in suppression of fraud Resolved that fraud may be given in Evidence because the estate is voyde by the Act of 13. Eliz. and fraud is hatched in secret in arbore cava opaca And according to this opinion it was resolved Per tot ' Cur ' in communi banco Pasche 3o. Jac. where one Bullock had made a fraudulent estate of his Lands within the Statute of 27. El. to A. B. and C. and after offred to sell the same to one Standen and before the assurance by Bullock Standen had notice thereof and notwithstanding proceeded and tooke the assurance from Bullock Standen avoyded the former assurance of fraud by the said act for the notice of the purchasor cannot make that good which an Act of Parliament hath made voyde as to him And it is true Quod non decipitur qui scit se decipi But in this case the purchasor is not deceived for the fraudulent conveyance whereof he had notice is made voyde as to him by the Statute and therefore he knew it could not hurt him Sparries case 33. Eliz. in Scaccar fol. 61. IN action of Trover and convertion the defendant pleads that there is another action depending in the Kings Bench for the same Trover and good for in actions which comprehend no certeinty as assize or trespas this is no plea before a Count because thereby it is made certeine and then it is a good plea and not before but in this action and debt and detinue it is a good plea at the first because they are certeine that an action is depending in an inferiour Court is no plea. Cases of By-Lawes Chamberlaine de Londons case 32. El. in Banco le roy fol. 66. THe Inhabitants of a village without any custome may make Ordinances or By-Lawes for reparation of the Church or of high-wayes or any such thing which is for the publicke weale generally and in this case the consent of the greater part shall binde all without any custome vide 44. E. 3.19 But if it be for their owne private profit for that Towne as for their well ordering of their common of pasture or such like then without custome they cannot make by-Lawes And if it be a custome yet the greater part shall not binde all if it be not warranted by the custome for as custome hath created them so they ought to be warranted by the custome 8. E. 2. tit ass As pontage murage Tolle and such like as appeareth in 13. H. 4.14 In which cases the summes for reparations of the Bridge walls c. ought to be so reasonable that the Subject may have more benefit thereby then charge Clerks case 38. Eliz in communi banco fol. 64. KIng Edward 6. did incorporate the Towne of St. Albones and granted them to make Lawes and Ordinances c. The Tearme was kept there and the Major c. by assent of the plaintiffe assessed every Inhabitant for the charges in erecting of the Courts there and if any did refuse to pay c. to be imprisoned c. the plaintiffe being Burges refused to pay c. and the Major justified c and it was adjudged no plea c. For this Ordinance is against Magna Charta ca. 29. Nullus liber homo imprisonetur which act hath been confirmed divers times viz. thirty times and the assent of the plaintiffe cannot alter the Law in this case But it was resolved that the Major c. might inflict reasonable penaltie but not imprisonment which penaltie ought to be Levied by Distresse for which offence an action of Debt lyeth and the plaintiffe in this case had judgement Jeffrays case Michaelis 31 32. en Bank le Roy. fol. 66. WIlliam Jeffray Gent. brought a prohibition against Abraham Kenshley and Thomas Forster Churchwardens of Haylesham in Com' Sussex for that they sued him in Court Christian before Doctor Drury for certaine money imposed upon him without his assent for repaire of the Church That the Church-wardens with the assent of the greatest part of the Parishioners juxta quantitatem qualitatem possessionum reddit ' infra dict' parochiam existent Determined and agreed to make a taxation for repaire of the said Church and that notice of such assembly was given in the Church at which day the Church-wardens and greater part of the Parish which were there assembled made a taxation viz. every occupier of Land for every acre 4. d. c. Geffray dwelt in another Parish and declared that the Parishioners of every Parish ought to repaire their Church and not the Church of another Parish Cooke of councell with the defendant demurred in Law and after many arguments a Writ of consultation was granted And it was resolved that the Court Christian hath conusans de reparatione corporis sive navis Ecclesiae Britton who writ in 5. E. 1. And in the Statute of Circumspecte agatis but in Rebus manifestis errat qui authoritates legum allegat quia perspicuè vera non sunt probanda It was also resolved that although Geffray did dwell in another Parish yet for that he had Lands in the said Parish in his proper possession he is in the Law Parochianus de Haylesham But it was resolved that where there was a Farmor of the same Lands the Lessor that receiveth the rent shall not be charged but the Inhabitant is the Parishioner and the receipte of the rent doth not make the Lessor a Parishioner Diverse of the civill Lawyers certified the Court that the Church Wardens and a greater part of the Parishioners upon a generall warning assembled may make a Taxation by their Law and the same shall not charge the Land but the Person in respect of the Land for equality and indifferency and this was the first leading case that was adjudg'd reported in Our Bookes touching these matters and many causes after were adjudged thus and now it is generally received for Law The Lord Cheneys Case 33. Eliz.
AN EXACT ABRIDGMENT IN ENGLISH Of the eleven Books of Reports of the Learned Sir Edward Coke Knight late Lord Chiefe Justice of ENGLAND and of the Councel of Estate to His Majestie King JAMES Composed by the Judiciouâ— Sir Thomas Ireland Knight late of Grayes Inne and an Ancient Reader of that Honourable SOCIETIE Wherein is briefly contained the very substance and marrow of all those Reports together with the Resolutions on every CASE Also a perfect Table for the finding of the Names of all those Cases and the principall matters therein contained Very usefull for all men especially the Students and Practisers of that Honourable Profession Brevitas Memoriae Amica LONDON Printed by M. Simmons for Matthew Walbancke at Grayes Inne Gate and H. Twyford in Vine-court in the Middle Temple 1650. To the Reader Gentle Reader THE Abridger of these Reports was not onely a Learned Lawyer but also was very conversant with the Author of them For my part I was onely entreated by many Friends to view and correct the Copy from the Presse If any faults be you may blame the Printer If I should commend the Original work I should disparage the Author who all learned Lawyers know that never any man wrote like him and for the excellency of this Abridgement it hath in it the very pith and substance of the Reports at large and so I rest It is an abuse that the lawes usages of the Realm with their Causes are not written whereby they may be knowne so that they may be understood of all Mirrour Justice fol. 225. An exact Table of all the Cases in each severall Book The First Booke of the Lord Coke LOrd Buckhursts Case Pelhams Case fol. 1 Porters Case fol. 2 Altonwoods Case Capels Case Archers Case fol. 3 Bredons Case fol. 4 Corbets Case fol. 5 Shelleyes Case fol. 6 Albaines Case fol. 7 Chudleighs Case fol. 8 Anne Mayowes Case fol. 11 The Rector of Chedingtons Case fol. 12 Digges Case fol. 14 Mildmayes Case fol. 16 The second Booke of the Lord Coke MAnsers Case fol. 19 Goddards Case Thoroughgoods Case fol. 20 Wisemans Case fol. 21 Lanes Case fol. 22 Baldwins Case fol. 23 Case of Bankrupts fol. 24 Bettisworths Case fol. 24 Doddingtons Case fol. 25 Sir Rowland Heywards Case fol. 26 Bishop of Winchesters Case fol. 29 Arch-Bishop of Canterburies Case fol. 31 Sir Hugh Cholmleyes Case fol. 33 Buckleyes Case fol. 34 Beckwiths Case fol. 36 Winningtons Case fol. 37 Westcots Case fol. 38 Tookers Case fol. 39 Lord Cromwels Case fol. 40 Binghams Case fol. 45 The Third Booke of the Lord Coke THe Marquesse of Winchesters Case fol. 49 Copledikes Case fol. 53 Heydons Case fol. 54 Borastons Case fol. 56 Left out Dowties Cass and Sir Willam Harberts Case Walkers Case fol. 58 Butler and Bakers Case fol. 61 Ratclifts Case fol. 68 Bontons Case fol. 71 Sir George Browns Case fol. 72 Rigewaies Case fol. 73 Lincoln Colledg Case fol. 74 Pennants Case fol. 77 Westbies Case fol. 80 Deane and Chapter of Norwich's Case fol. 81 Fermors Case fol. 83 Twines Case fol. 86 The Case of Fines fol. 89 The Fourth Book of the Lord Coke VErnons Case fol. 95 Bevils Case fol. 98 Actions of Slander the Lord Cromwels Case fol. 101 Cutler and Dixons Case fol. 102 Sir Richard Buckley and Woods Case fol. 103 Stanhop and Blyths Case fol. 104 Hext Justice of Peace against Yeomans fol. 104 Birchleyes Case fol. 105 Weaver and Caridens Case fol. 105 Stukley and Bulheads Case fol. 106 Snagg and Gees Case fol. 106 Baton and Allens Case fol. 106 Anne Davies Case fol. 106 Jeames Case fol. 107 Oxford and his wife against Crosse fol. 108 Sir G. Gerrard Master of the Rolls against Mary Dickinson fol. 108 Barhams Case fol. 109 Britteridges Case fol. 110 Palmer and Thorps Case fol. 111 Coppi-hold Cases fol. 111 Brownes Case fol. 111 Rivets Case fol. 113 Deale and Rigdens Case fol. 113 Bullock and Dibleyes Case fol. 113 Gravenor and Teds Case fol. 114 Fitch and Huckleyes Case fol. 114 Clark and Pennifathers Case fol. 114 P. 26. of the Queene fol. 115 Rous and Arters Case fol. 116 Murrell and Smyths Case fol. 116 Kite and Queintons Case fol. 117 Melwich and Luters Case fol. 118 Neales Case fol. 120 Clifton and Molineux Case fol. 120 Taverner and Cromwels Case fol. 120 Hubbard and Hamonds Case fol. 121 Westwick and Wyars Case fol. 122 Bunting and Lepingwels Case fol. 123 Downes and Hollakins Case fol. 124 Harm and Sayes Case fol. 125 Shaw and Tompsons Case fol. 126 Hoe and Taylors Case fol. 126 Frenches Case fol. 127 Foyston and Crachrodes Case fol. 128 Myttons Case fol. 129 Bozouns Case fol. 130 Terringhams Case fol. 132 Cases of Appeales and Indictments Brookes Case fol. 135 Wetherell and Darly's Case fol. 135 Youngs Case Walkers Case Heydons Case fol. 136 Hume against Ogle Hudson and Lees Case Syers Case fol. 138 Bibiths Case Vauexs Case fol. 139 Wrote and Wigges Case fol. 140 Waits Case fol. 142 Hill 30. of the Queene Ognels Case fol. 143 Rawlins Case fol. 145 Wardens Commonalty of Sadlers Case fol. 148 Forse and Hemblings Case fol. 149 Harlakendens Case fol. 150 Fulwoods Case fol. 152 Hindes Case fol. 154 Boroughes Case Palmers Case Hollands Case fol. 156 Case of Corporations fol. 157 Digbies case fol. 158 Nokes case Sir Andrew Corbets case fol. 159 Southcots case fol. 160 Luttreles case fol. 161 Druries case fol. 162 Slades case fol. 163 Adams and Lamberts case fol. 164 Actons case fol. 166 Dumpors case fol. 167 Bustards case fol. 168 Beverleys case fol. 169 The Fifth Booke CLaytons case Elmers case fol. 171 Jewels case Lord Mountioyes case fol. 172 Justice Windhams case Brudenels case fol. 173 Hensteads case Ives case fol. 174 Saunders case Rosses case fol. 175 Countesse of Salops case fol. 176 Case of Ecclesiasticall persons Covenants c. concerning Leasees Assurances c. fol. 177 Slingsbyes case Rosewels case fol. 180 Higginbottoms case Stiles case Sir Anthony Mayns case fol. 181 Laughters case Hallings case Matthewsons case fol. 182 Lambs case Broughtons case fol. 183 Deane and Chapter of Windsors case Sir Thomas Palmers case fol. 184 Earl of Rutlands case fol. 185 Cases of Executors Russels case Middletons case Harrisons case fol. 188 Piggots case Princes case fol. 189 Caulters case Hargraves case Pettifers case fol. 190 Robinsons case Reades case fol. 191 Ployters case fol. 192 Walcots case Baynhams case Gardiners case Bishops case fol. 193 Teys case fol. 194 Dormers case Rowlands case fol. 195 Countesse of Rutlands case Godwels Case Nichols case Bohuns case fol. 196 Freemans case Gages case Cookes case fol. 197 Franklins case Gilbert Littletons case Drywoods case fol. 198 Vaughans case Wyrrels case Biggens case fol. 199 Halls case Pages case fol. 200 Knights case fol. 201 Specots case fol. 202 Fosters case fol. 203 Gooches case fol. 204 Sparries case Case of By-Lawes Chamberlain of Londons case fol. 205 Clerks case Jeffrayes case fol.
former acts of limitation as W. 1. ca ' 38. W. 2. ca ' 2. doe not exclude a seisin sufficient at common Law And the Statute saith Actuall possession or seisin which Seisin is eyther actuall or in Law Resolved that the act doth not extend to such a rent or service which by common possibility cannot happen within sixty yeares as homage fealty for the tenant may live beyond or to cover the Hall or to goe in Warre so of a Formedon in Discender for tenant in taile may live sixty yeares after discontinuance and though In facto he dyes and the issue doth not pursue his Formedon yet he may have it at any time and the seisin of the donee was not traversable so of homage and other casuall services though the Lord might have had seisin So if the Lord release to the tenant so long as I. S. hath heires of his body though sixty yeares passe yet he may distraine for Impotentia excusat legem and there may be a tenure by homage c. and yet never done as if the Land be conveyed to a Maior c. or other Corporation aggregate of many they hold by fealty yet they cannot doe it A Writ of Escheate Cessavit Rescous are not within the Act for in them the seisin is not traversable but the tenure and in the Escheate and Cessavit they demand the Land and can lay no seisin and the Act extends onely to those Writs where the demandant or his Ancestors might have had seisin So Note Land shall escheate though there be no seisin of the services within the time of limitation for the Seigniory remaines though seisin wants so if the tenant cesse and the Land be not overt and sufficient to his distresse the Lord shall have a Cessavit though he wants seisin of the services Resolved if nothing be arreare and the Lord distraines the tenant may make rescous or if he be so often distrained that he cannot manure his Land he may have an Assise De souent distres but for such tortious distresse where nothing is arreare the tenant shall not have Trespasse Vi armis against the Lord for this is prohibited by the Statute of Marleb ca ' 3. See the Booke at large in what case an incroachment of more rent by the Lord then he ought to have shall be avoyded in what not Resolved that though a man hath beene out of possession of Land by sixty yeares yet if his entry be not taken away he may enter and bring any possessory action of his owne possession for the first clause doth not barre any right but prohibits that none shall have a Writ of right c. of the possession of his ancestors c. but onely of a seisin within sixty yeares the first and second clause extend onely to seisin auncestrell the third to an action of his owne possession not to entry the fourth to avowry the fifth to a Formedon c. Note Reader out of this that when the tenant hath done homage and fealty which the Lord may inforce him to doe this shall be a seisin of all other services as to avowry though the Lord nor those by whom he claimes had seisin within sixty yeares Actions of Slaunder The Lord Cromwells Case 20º of the Queene fo 12. THe Lord Cromwell brought an Action De Scandalis magnatum against D. Viccar Tam pro domina regina quam pro seipso upon the Statute of 2. R. 2. ca ' 5. The Defendant said to the Plaintiffe It is no marvell though you like not of me for you like of those that maintaine sedition against the Queenes proceedings the Defendant justifies specially that he being Viccar of N. the Plaintiffe procured I. T. and I. H. for to preach there who in their Sermons inveyed against the Booke of common prayer and affirmed it to be superstitious upon which the Viccar inhibited them for they had not license nor authority to preach yet they proceeded by the incouragement of the Plaintiffe the Plaintiffe said to the Defendant Thou art a false Varlet I like not of thee to whom the Defendant said It is no marvaile though you like not of me for you like of those innuendo the aforesaid I. T. and I. H. that maintaine sedition Innuendo seditiosam illam doctrinam against the Queenes proceedings Resolved in this case that the Statute aforesaid concerning the King the Judges Ex officio ought to take notice of it as they ought of all Statutes that concerne him Resolved that the justification is good for in case of slaunder the sence of the words is to be taken which may appeare by the occasion of speech Sensus verborum ex causa dicendi accipiendus est et sermones semper accipiendi sunt secundum subjectam materiam And here the sence of the words appeares and his meaning in speaking them and that he did not intend any publique or violent sedition as the word of it selfe imports and God defend that the words of one by a strict and grammaticall construction should be taken contrary to the manifest intent as in an Action for calling the Plaintiffe murderer 't is a good justification that the Plaintiffe confessing that he had killed diverse Haires with Engines the Defendant said Thou art a Murderer and the Defendant shall not be put to a generall issue when he confesses the words and shewes that they are not actionable as in maintainance the Defendant may justifie lawfull mainteinance whereupon the Plaintiffe replyed that the Defendant dixit c. Verba praedict de iniuria sua propria absque tali causa upon this they were at issue and after agreed Cutler and Dixons Case 27. and 28. of the Queene fo 14. IF one exhibite certaine Articles to a Justice of peace against one declaring divers great abuses and misdemeanours c. to the intent to bind him to the good behaviour In this case the party accused shall not have any action upon the case for it is in pursuite of ordinary justice and if such actions were permitted none would complayne for feare of infinite vexation Sir Richard Buckley and Woods Case 33. and 34. of the Queene fo 14. WOod exhibited a Bill in the Starrechamber against Sir R. B. and charged him with divers matters examinable there and with other matters not determinable there as that he was a maintainer of Pyrates and Murtherers and a procurer of Pyracies upon which Sir R. B. brought this action c. Resolved that no action lyes for matter examinable there though 't was meerely false because that 't was in course of justice Resolved that an action lyes for these words not examinable there for 't is not done in course of Justice and great inconvenience would follow if matters may be inserted in Bills exhibited in so high and honourable a Court in Slaunder of the parties and they cannot answer there for their purgation nor have their action for purging themselves of the crimes and recover damages for
the wrong but that the said Bill shall remaine alwayes of record to their infamy and here no murther or piracy can be punished upon any Bill exhibited in English but he ought to have beene indicted and therefore he hath not onely mistaken the Court but also the nature of exhibiting the Bill hath not appearance of any ordinary course of justice but no action lyes upon an appeale of murder returnable in the Common Bench for though the Writ is not returned before competent Judges who may doe justice yet 't is in nature of a lawfull Suite namely by Writ of appeale wherefore judgement was given for the Plaintiffe And in a Writ of error in the Chequer Chamber brought by Wood 't was resolved that Sir R. B. might have had a good action but here because the action was not upon the Bill exhibited at Westminster but because he said in the County of S. that his Bill was true In auditu quamplurimorum without expressing the said matters in particular so that it was not any Slaunder judgement was reversed Stanhopp and Bliths Case 27. of the Queene fo 15. MAster Stanhopp who was a surveyor of the Dutchy and had divers Offices and was a justice of peace Hath but one Mannor and that he hath gotten by swearing and forswearing Resolved that the action doth not lye for they are too generall and words which charge any one in an action in which damages shall be recovered ought to have convenient certainty and he doth not charge the Plaintiffe with swearing c. and he may recover a Mannor by swearing c. yet not procuring or assenting to it Resolved if one charge another that he hath forsworne himselfe no action lyes First because he may be forsworne in usuall communication Quia benignior sensus in verbis generalibus seu dubijs est praeferenda Secondly it is an usuall word of passion and choller as also to call another a Villaine a Rogue or Varlet these and such like will not mayntaine Action Boni judicis interest lites derimere But if one say to another that he is perjured or that he hath forsworne himselfe in such a Court c. For these words an Action will lye Hext Justice of Peace against Yeomans 27. of the Queene fo 15. FOr my ground in H. Hext seekes my life and if I could finde one J. H. I doe not doubt but within two dayes to arrest Hext for suspicion of felony Adjudged that no action lyes for the first words 1. Because he may seeke his life lawfully upon just cause and his land may be holden of him 2. 'T is too generall and the Law inflicts no punishment for seeking of his life but adjudged that the action lyes for the last words for for suspicion of felony he shall be imprisoned and his life in question Birchleys case 27. 28. of the Queene fo 16. THe Defendant said to B. Clerke of the Kings Bench and sworne to deale duely without corruption you are well knowne to be a corrupt man and to deale corruptly Adjudged that the action lyes 1. Because the words Ex causa dicendi imply that he hath dealt corruptly in his profession Et sermo relatus ad personam intelligi debet de conditione personae 1. This touches the Plaintiffe in his oath 2. The words Scandalize him in the duty of his profession by which he gets his living Skinner of London said that Manwood was a corrupt Judge adjudged actionable Resolved in this case that if the precedent parlance had beene that B. was a usurer or executor of another and would not performe the will and upon this the Defendant had spoken the words following no action would lye Weaver and Caridens case 37. of the Queene fo 16. AAjudged that no action lyes for saying that the Plaintiffe was detected for perjury in the Starre-chamber for an honest man may be detected but not convicted Stuckley and Bulheads case 44. and 45. of the Queene fo 16. ADjudged that an action lyes for saying Master St. he was a Justice of peace covereth and hideth felonies and is not worthy to be a Justice of peace for this is against his oath and his office and a good cause to put him out of Commission and for that he may be indicted and fined Snagg and Gees case 39. of the Queene fo 16. THou hast killed my wife and art a traytor Adjudged that the action will not lye for the wife was in life as appeared in the Declaration and so the words vaine and no scandall otherwise if shee had beene dead Eaton and Allens case 40. of the Queene fo 16. HE is a brabler and a quarreller for he gave his Champion counsell to make a Deed of gift of his goods to kill me and then to fly out of the Country but God preserved me Resolved that the action will not lye for the purpose without act is not punishable and though he may be punished for such conspiracy in the Star-chamber yet this is by the absolute power of the Court not by ordinary course of Law Observe well this case and the cause and reason of this Judgement Anne Davies case 35. of the Queene fo 16. THe Defendant said to B. a Suitor to the Plaintiffe and with whom there was neare an agreement of marriage I know Davies daughter well she did dwell in Cheapside and a Grocer did get her with childe and the Plaintiffe declared that by reason thereof the said B. refused to take her to wife Resolved the action lyes for a woman is punishable for a Bastard by 18. of the Queene ca. 3. And though that fornication c. is not examinable by our Law because done in secret and uncomely openly to be examined yet the having a Bastard is apparant and examinable by the said Act. Resolved if the Plaintiffe had been charged with nude incontinency onely the action lyes for the ground of the action is temporall viz. the defeating of her advancement in marriage By Popham an action lyes for saying that a woman Inholder had a great infectious disease by which shee loses her guests Banister and Banisters case 25. of the Queene Resolved that an action lyes for saying to the sonne and heire that he was a Bastard for this tends to his disinherison but resolved if the Defendant pretend that the Plaintiffe is a Bastard and he himselfe right heire no action lyes and this the Defendant may shew by way of barre Jeames case 41. 42. of the Queene fo 17. THe Defendant said to B. Hang him innuendo praedict J he is full of the pox innuendo the French pox c. Resolved two things are requisite to have an action for slander 1. That the person scandalized be certaine 2. That the scandall be apparent by the words themselves And therefore if a man says that one of the servants of B. is a notorious felon or traytor an action lyes not if he have more servants and innuendo cannot make it certain
he lost his Common the Jury found that the Defendant did not put in the Beasts but they of themselves depastured there 1. The Jury have found the substance of the issue for the Plaintiffe the depasturing there and it is not materiall if he put them not there 2. This Action lyeth for the Commoner for he may distreine damage feasant and it may be that with strong hand he is hindered to distreine and so if he shall not have this Action he is remedilesse 2. A Commoner who had freehold in the common shall have an Assize Ergo a Copy-holder shall have this Action 3. The wrong ought to be so great that the Commoner loose his Common as a Master shall not have an Action for beating his Servant without losse of his Service and it appeareth not to the Court that there are more Commoners then he and if there be yet an Action lyeth because each had private damage and it is not like to a common Nusans which shall be punished onely in a Leete if there be not speciall damage but be the Trespasse never so little the Lord may have an Action of Trespasse The Lord Sanchars Case 10. Jacobi fol. 117. For procuring the Murther of John Turnor Mr. of Defence 1. REsolv That a Baron of Scotland shall be tried by Commons of England 2. The Indictment of the accessory in one County to a Fellony in another County by the Statute of 2. E. 6. c. 24. shall recite that the fellony was done in the other County for an Indictment is no direct affirmation of the fact 3. The Justices of the Kings Bench are within these words of the Statute Justices of Gaole-delivery or Oyer and Terminer for they are the supreame Judges of Gaole-delivery 4. The Lord Sanchar cannot be in the Terme-time Arraigned in Midd. before Justices of Oyer and Terminer because Justices of Oyer and Terminer shall not sit in the same County where the Kings Bench is but the principalls were Arraigned in L. in the Terme-time because this is another County 5. There needs not be 15. dayes for the returne of the Venire facias upon an Indictment in the same County where the Kings Bench is otherwise in another County 6. Because there is no direct proofe that the Lord S. commanded one of the principalls but that he associated himselfe to one who was commanded the best way is to arraigne him as accessory to him whom he commanded but if he be Indicted as accessory to two and found accessory to one of them this is good The word Appeale in the Statute of W. 1. c. 14. is to be intended generally Viz. By Indictment by Writ or Bill c. and attainders is to be intended upon any such accusation Ergo if upon any such accusation the principall be attainted erroneously the accessory may be arraigned because the attainder is good untill it be reversed but if the Accessory be Hanged and after the Attainder against the principall is reversed the Heire of the Accessory shall be restored to all which his Father lost either by entry or Action By 5. H. 4. cap. 10. none shall be imprisoned by Justices of Peace but in the Common Gaole whereby it appeares that Justices of Peace offend who commit Fellons to the Counters in L. and other Prisons which are not Common Gaoles Cases in the Court of Wards Anthony Lowes Case 7. Jacobi fol. 122. A. L. Tenant of 59. Acres parcell of the Mannor of A. by chivalry and Suite of Court to B. whereof A. was parcell and both A. and B. were parcell of the Duchie of L. out of the County Palatine holden formerly of the King in Chivalry in Capite and of another House there holden of A. by fealty and rent H. 8. grants the rent by release to him and confirmeth his estate in the said Lands by fealty onely and grants to him the Mannor of A. Tenendum by fealty and rent It was Objected that when the King grants the Seigniory to his Tenant the ancient Seigniory is extinct and a new one that is best for the King created Viz. Chivalry 2. When he extinguisheth services parcell of the Mannor of A. this shall be holden as the Mannor of A. is that is by Chivalry But resolved that the 59. acres and house shall be holden by fealty onely and as to the said Objection the release of the King doth not extinguish service which is inseparable to a Tenure that is fealty but all others are gone and true it is when the K. grants and expresseth no tenure it shall be by Chivalry but when the Land moveth from a Subject and the Tenure is changed the new Tenure shall be as neere the ancient as may be as Feoffee of Tenant in Frankalmoigne shall hold by fealty onely and here although they grant the services yet he limits the grantee to doe fealty A Knights fee is not to be taken according to the quantity but the value of the Land as 20. l. per annum and a Hide of Land is as much as a Plough can Plough in a yeare Reliefe is the fourth part of the annuall value that is of a Knight five pound of a Baron a 100. Markes of an Earle 100. l. of a Marques 200. Markes of a Duke 200. l. The Eldest Sonne of E. 3. called the black Prince was the first Duke in England and Robert Earle of Oxford in the Raigne of R. 2. was the first Marques and the Lord Beaumont was the first Viscount created by K. H. 6. Floyers Case 8. Jacobi fol. 125. BAron and Feme seized of Lands holden in Chivalry in right of the Feme in Fee levy a Fine to one who grants and renders to them and the heires of the Baron and levy another Fine to their use for life the remainder to their three Sons in taile one after another the remainder in fee to the heires of the Baron the K. shall have neither wardship of body nor Land 1. Resol That is out of the Statute of 32. H. 8. cap. 2. if he who had the fee dye c. in respect the estate by the first Fine did not continue and this although both the Conveyances are voluntary 2. The King shall not have wardship of the third part because it is not for advancement of the Wife for in the first Fine the Land moved from her and shee had no more by the second Fine then by the first 3. In regard the particuler estate is out of the Statute no wardship accrueth to the King by advancement of him in the remainder but if a revertioner upon an estate for life convey it to the use of his Wife this will give wardship of the body of the heire for he in revertion is tenant if a Lease for life be the remainder to two and to the heires of one he who hath the fee dyeth his heire shall not be in ward if the heire of one joyntenant who had the fee dye of full age living the tenant for
them and after Judgement was given for the Plaintiffs Whistlers Case 10. Jacobi fol. 62. Vpon a speciall Verdict BEfore the Statute of Praerogativa Regis cap. 15. by the grant of the King of a Mannor all appendants without naming them passe and the Statute excepteth Knights Fees Advowsons and Indowments but all other appendants now passe without naming them and so doe Advowsons passe in case of restitution for the Statute speaketh of Grants and in Grants also without expresse mention by the words Adeo plené integré c. See other good matter there touching this Subject The Church Wardens Case of Saint Saviours in Southwark fol. 66. QUeene Elizabeth leased the rectory to the Church-Wardens of St S. for 21. yeares and after leased to them for 50. yeares in consideration of the payment of 20. l. and surrender of the Letters Patents by the Church-Wardens Modo habentes ad presens possidentes and the speciall Verdict found that they paid the 20. l. and that they delivered the Charter in Court to be cancell'd and that they paid the Fees but that no Vacat was made yet the grant is good for it appeares that the intent was not to make a surrender in deed because he saith Modo possidentes but a surrender in Law by acceptance of the second Letters Patents and although a Corporation cannot make a surrender in deed yet they may make a surrender in Law 2. Although an actuall surrender is requisit they have done all which belongs to them by delivery of the Chartar and payment of the fees and the Cancelling belongs to the Court. 3. Although it was recited that 20. l. was paid yet it needs not to be found for it is but in the personalty and is affirmed by the King to be paid and is also executed See Barwicks Case 5. Report 93. The Case of the Marshalsea 10. Jacobi fol. 68. In false Imprisonment AN Action upon the Case upon an assumpsit is brought in the Marshalsea whereas no party was of the Kings House the Plaintiffe recovered the Defendants arrested the Plaintiffe by a precept in the nature of a Capias ad satisfaciendum and he brings false Imprisonment and judgement given against the Defendants 1. Resolved the Steward and Marshall at the Common Law hath two Authorities One generall as Vicegerents of the Chiefe Justice in his absence within the Verge Another as Judges of the Marshalsea This last was limitted to Debt and Covenant where both are of the House and to trespasse Vi armis where one is but not if it concerne Land and because they have the generall authority at will and the other for life they draw many cases to the Marshalsea which ought to be in other Courts Their Jurisdiction by Fleta Lib. 2. cap. 2. Infra metas hospitij continentes 12. Leucas in circuitu And the Statute of 13. R. 2. c. 3. limits the 12. miles to be accounted about the Kings Tonnell 2. The reasons wherefore this speciall authority was given them were 1. Because the Suite there is by Bill by reason of their Priviledge which cannot be elsewhere 2. In respect of the necessity of attendance of the Kings Servants 3. If Strangers shall be suffered to sue there one Carman would sue another Carman there In aula Regis which were undecent but the generall authority vanished by the Act of 28. E. 1. c. 5. which Ordained that the Chancellour and Justices of the King should follow him therefore in Praesentia Majoris cessat c. and about 4. E. 3. the Court of K. Bench became Resident 3. The Statute of Articuli super Chartas is as much as an explanation of the great Charter and the Charter of the Forrest and not introductory of a new Law and the third Chapter of that act explaines the Jurisdiction of the Marshalsea as before and if he hold plea otherwise a prohibition lyeth and the party shall have an Action upon the Case as a consequent upon the Statute 4. That part of the Statute which giveth them Jurisdiction in trespasse shall be intended trespasse Vi armis 5. This action lyeth against the Defendants because the Court had not Jurisdiction and so have not done it by command of the Judge otherwise if the Court had Jurisdiction but proceedeth Inverso ordine or erroneously as if a Capias be awarded against an Earle c. one who is Indicted before Justices of the Peace cannot approve 1. Because he cannot assigne a Coroner 2. Because it is out of their Commission if a Court Leete be holden at another day then it ought to be the proceeding is Coram non judice otherwise it is of a Court Baron 6. R. 2. Action upon the Statute Plac. ultimo in the point that judgement in the Marshalsea when none of the parties is of the K. house may be avoided by plea without any Writ of Error which proveth that it is void Leonard Loveis Case 11. Jacobi fol. 78. In ejectione firmae for 8. acres c. L. L. seised of diverse Mannors in socage and in chivalry In Capite maketh a feoffement to diverse uses in an Indenture precedent whereby he limits to himselfe for life without impeachment of wast and to the use of his Lessees and devisees the remainder to his second Sonne in taile c. the reversion to himselfe with power of revocation after he purchaseth 8. acres in socage and revoketh as to certaine Mannors holden in socage and deviseth them and the 8. acres to his Eldest Sonne and the heires Males of his body for 500. yeares provided that if he alien otherwise then for yeares determinable upon the deaths of three persons or lesse number rendring the old rent or die without issue Male then to his second Sonne in taile with proviso to make Leases according to 32. H. 8. onely L.L. dyeth the Eldest Sonne enters into the 8. acres and dyeth leaving one Daughter who Marrieth R.D. who enters into the 8. acres c. second Sonne dyeth having L. L. who enters upon R. D. and leaseth to the Plaintiffe who enters upon whom the Defendant enters and ejecteth c. and if the entry of L L. the Lessor was congeable or not was the Question and it was adjudged that his entry was not lawfull and judgement was given against the Plaintiffe in this Case diverse points resolved some at the common Law and some upon 32 and 34. H. 8. of Wills 1. Resolv if a man seised of three acres of equall value one holden in Capite and giveth that and one of the other to his younger Sonne in taile he cannot devise any part of the third Acre because he had executed his power and if he purchase other Land in socage he can devise but two parts of that by reason of his reversion in Capite expectant upon the estate taile Object that the K. was once satisfied of the wardship by the Statute in respect of the Acre holden and the reversion thereupon shall not hinder the
4. In this Case by grant of the reversion generally or of the Tenements the Trees passe for the inheritance of all the Land passeth and thereby the Trees annexed to it the disseisee by his entry shall have the Corne upon the ground as well as the Grasse by relation of continuance of possession but this relation is not of effect to have a trespasse against any but the first disseisor for in fictione juris semper aequitas existit and the emblements shall be recovered in damages 5. In the Case at Barr by exception of the Trees power is reserved to the lessor or his servants to enter and show the Trees to the Vendee Cuicunque aliquis quid concedit concedere videtur id c. 6. The plea in Barr is insufficient for he showeth that there was another joyntenant for life not named in the Writ and demands Judgement if action which is an unapt conclusion 2. The Plea is double one to the Writ another to the Action 3. He pleads the entry of the lessees for life which is surplusage 4. Hee averreth not that the Trees which were sold were nor Dotards which are excluded out of the exception but that they de jure pertinebant to R. L. which is not formall but upon all the matter there appeared sufficient cause to give Judgement against the Plaintiffe and therefore by the rule of the Court Quaerens nil capiat per billam The Case of the Taylors of Cloaths c. of Ipswich 12. Jacobi fol. 53. THe Taylors of I. make an Ordinance that none shall exercise the Trade in I. if he have not been an Apprentice for seven yeares and if hee doe not appeare before them to be approved upon forfeiture of five Marks and for breach of it bring debt the Defendant pleads that he was reteined by A. P. to be a domestick Servant and that he made Garments by his command 1. Resol At the Common Law none may be prohibited to exercise any Trade although he hath never been an Apprentice and be ignorant but if he misdoe any thing an action of the Case lyeth 2. This Ordinance for so much as is not prohibited by the Statute of 5. Eliz. is against Law for after seven yeares Apprentiship he may exercise his Trade without allowance of any 3. The Statute of 5. Eliz. doth not prohibite the private exercise of any Trade in a Family therefore this is out of the said Ordinance 4. The Statute of 19. H. 7. cap. 7. doth not corroborate any Ordinance against Law if it be allowed but the allowance dischargeth the penalty of 40 l. for putting in use any ordinances which are against the Prerogative of the King or the common profit of the people and Judgement was given Quod querentes nil caperent per billam Edward Savells Case 12. Jacobi fol. 55. AN Ejectione firmae lyeth not of a Close but it must be of a certaine number of Acres and the nature of them must be shewed A Writ shall not abate for want of order Viz. Of a House before Land c. and judgement was stayed Benthams Case 12. Jacobi fol. 56. IF damages or costs are omitted or not well assessed by the Jury if the Plaintiffe release them he may have his judgement and it shall not for that be reversed Insufficient assessement of damages and no assessing is all one Doctor Fosters Case concerning Recusants 12. Jacobi fol. 56. AN Information was preferred against a Recusant by an Informer Tam pro domino rege quam pro seipso before the recusant was convicted for 220. l. that is 20. l. a Moneth for a 11. Moneths absence from the Church c. And judgement given against the Defendant 1. Resolved that he may be convicted to satisfie the Statute of 23. Eliz. in this same Suite and convicted shall be taken for attainted for he shall forfeit nothing before judgement 2. The Branch of distribution in the Act of 23. Eliz. extendeth as well to the clause of penalty for recusancy as to that of hearing or saying Masses for it is all one to say shall forfeite and shall forfeite to the King 2. Diverse acts of Parliament give the penalty to the King and yet after make a distribution thereof to another who will sue as 3. H. 6. cap. 3. 3. H. 7.3 3. He against whom judgement is given upon demurrer or default or otherwise is convicted within the Statute for he is attainted which implieth it for it is so found by the Judges so by the Statute of 8. H. 6. treble damages are given where a disseisin is found to be with force this extends to a judgement by Nihil dicit or default 4. The Statute of 28. Eliz. doth not take away the Statute of 23. which giveth liberty to the informer c. for 1. It is made for more speedy execution of it 2. It doth not alter the suite of the party but of the King and leaveth the Informer as he was before 3. The Act of 28. giveth not the penalty to any new person for it was given to the K. by 23. Eliz. 4. The Statute of 28. extends onely to Indictments and toucheth not informations 5. The Defendant is not within 28. Eliz. if he be not convicted at the suite of the K. Ergo this is left as before 6. Because the Statute is in the affirmative and they may stand together but the Statute of 28. alters the Statute of 23 in this that it confineth Suites against Recusants in the K. Bench or Assizes c. which clause extends as well to the suite of the informer as of the Queene and the Statute of 35. Eliz. and 3. Jacobi inlarge the Jurisdiction as to Suites of the K. and touch not the suite of the party 5. The Statute of 35. taketh not away the Action popular given by 23. for it was made to give more speedy remedy and not to take it away a feme Covert is within the Statute of 23. and 1. Eliz. but before the Statute 35. Eliz. if a Feme Covert had been indicted of recusancy the forfeiture should not have been levyed of the goods of the Husband because he was not party thereunto otherwise in an Information or Debt brought by the informer and in that that the Statute of 35. is that the K. shall recover all the paines c. in such sort c. this alters the remedy onely as to the Queene for now shee may proceede by action as for recovery of any other Debt by the Common Law in such manner as 1. H. 7. c. 1. giveth a Formedon against Parnor of the profits c. also 35. Eliz. is in the affirmative and although it giveth the penalty of 20. l. by the Moneth yet it taketh not away 1. Eliz. which giveth 12. d. for every Sonday and Holy day and where this Statute saith that the conviction shall be in the K. B. or at the Assizes yet the Justices of Peace and others authorized by 23. may take