sic e converso and so although the son be dead for the spiritual affinity remains and so is Curat of the Juror That the Juror hath married the Sister of the party That the Daughter of the Vncle of the Juror hath married the Vncle of the party Cousin to the Wife of the party These are good challenges although the Wife c. is dead if her issue be alive otherwise if she be dead without issue for then the cause of the favour is determined But 't is no challenge to say the Juror is Brother to one who married the Sister of the party nor that the Son of the party married the Sister of the Juror because these are not parties to the action In Attaint 't is a good challenge to the Juror that he hath married the Sister of the Wife of one of the petit Jury for the Alliance If a Juror declare the right of one party Principal for favour or give his Verdict before hand or take money this is a principal challenge But if he promise a party this is not a principal challenge but for favour If the Action depending betwixt the party Principal for malice and Juror be such as implyeth malice this is a good challenge but not if it imply no malice That the party hath an Appeal depending against the Juror or the Juror against him or Action of Battery That they are in debate and wrangling c. are good challenges Not actions of Debt or Trespass Quare clausum fregit c. Nor that the brother c. of the party hath actions against the Juror That the Juror was born out of the Kings Peremptory Ligeance for although he came into England an Infant and is sworn to the King yet he continues an Alien and that he is Alien outlawed for then he is not legalis homo are good challenges If the Juror says that he will pass for one For favour party because he knows the verity of the matter this is no challenge But if he says 't is for favour 't is a good challenge if the Tryors find he spoke for favour and not for truth In an actioon betwixt the King and a party King the Subject cannot take any challenge for favour as in an Indictment of Barretry c. the Defendant cannot challenge a Juror for favour to the King If the Record be in the same Court it How Challenges shall be taken of a Record need not be shewn but if it be in another Court it ought to be shewed or else 't is no principal challenge After the Array is affirmed there shall At what time they may be taken not be such challenge to a Juror which would have been a sufficient challenge to the Array As 't is not a good challenge that the Juror was impannelled at the denomination of a party for this had been a good challenge to the Array If a man challenge a Juror for non-sufficiency of Freehold and this is adjudged against him yet he may challenge for favour And this shall be tryed 10 H. 6. 18. If the Jury upon finding of the principal do not tax the Damages for which a Venire facias issues to the same Jurors to tax the damages the parties cannot take any challenge for a cause before the first Tryal But for a cause arising after they may And so against les primer Jurors The King cannot challenge a Iuror after King he is sworn unless it be for a Cause arising after he is sworn If the Defendant challenge the array In what cases he which challenges ought to shew the cause presently which is found against him or he release the challenge and the array is affirmed and afterwards he challenge a Iuror he ought to shew the cause presently But if there be two Defendants and one challenge the array and afterwards both challenge a Iuror the other shall not shew cause presently If any of the Iurors be sworn and there be not sufficient for which a Tales is granted and at the return one of the primer Iurors is challenged the cause ought to be shewed presently he being sworn before In an action between the King and a King common person as in an Indictment of Barretry presentment of nusance c. the Defendant if he challenges any Iuror must shew the cause presently But in an Inquest betwixt the King and a stranger the stranger need not shew the cause presently For in this case the King is as a common person of the Realm Cause ought to be shewed before the Tales be perused If both Parties challenge although for several causes as if one be for favour and Treat the other peremptory yet the Iuror shall be drawn without shewing cause It may be in an Inquest before the Sheriff In what Inquest a Challenge may be to enquire of waste both to the Array and Polls But not in an Inquest of Office as in a writ of inquiry of damages In a writ of Right a challenge may be to the Polls del 4 Chivalers return Not of Cosinage to the witnesses coming to try the deed in an Assise If one party challenge the Array which Tryal and Tryors of Challenges is affirmed and afterwards challenge a Iuror he ought to shew cause presently and this shall be tryed presently but otherwise of the other who did not take the Challenge to the Array The challenge of him who first challenged shall be first tryed Although the first be for favour and that of the others be riens deins H. If the Venue be of two Counties and both Pannels challenged the Esliors shall be one of one pannel and the other of the other If the array be challenged the Court to try the array may chuse two Tryors according to their discretion 20 Ass 15. 19 H. 6. 9. If an action be depending between the Juror What challenge they may try and one of the parties and for this he is challenged and the other says that this is brought by Covin the Tryors may try this for although the action is of record yet the Covin is not The Juror may be examined upon a voier Evidence dire to any challenge that is not to his dishonour but the Tryors are not bound by his Oath The tryors after they are sworn may go at large by assent of the parties until another day In trespass against two who plead to In what cases a challenge or affirmance by one shall serve for others issue and a Venire facias is returned although one accept the Array yet the other may challenge it and if it be found the Array shall be quashed against all So in an Appeal against Principal and Accessory for one shall not disinherit the other But in an Appeal by two if the Defendant challenge a Juror and one of the Plaintiffs agree to this the other shall not be received to say that this is by Covin but the
Lord of Parliament as a Baron Viscount Earl Marquess and Duke for these in respect of Honour and Nobility are not to be sworn on Juries and if neither party will challenge him he Propter honoris respectum may challenge himself for by Magna Charta it is provided Quod nec super eum ibimus nec super cum mittemus nisi per legale judicium parium suorum aut per legem terrae Now A Peer may challenge himself the Common Law hath divided all the subjects into Lords of Parliament and into the Commons of the Realm The Peers Peers and Commons of the Realm are divided into Barons Viscounts Earls Marquesses and Dukes The Commons are divided into Knights Esquires Gentlemen Citizens Yeomen and Burgesses And in Iudgement of Law any of the said degrees of Nobility are Peers to another As if an Earl Marquess or Duke be to be tryed for Treason or Felony a Baron or any other degree of Nobility is his Peer In like manner a Knight Esquire c. shall be tryed per Pares and that is by any of the Commons as Gentlemen Citizens Yeomen or Burgesses so as when any of the Commons is to have a Tryal either at the Kings Suit or between party and party a Peer of the Realm shall not be impannelled in any Case Secondly Propter Defectum Challenge Propter defectum 1. Patriae as Aliens born 2. Libertatis as Villains or Bondmen and so a Champion must be a Freeman 3. Annui sensus i. e. liberi tenementi First what yearly Freehold a Iuror ought to have that passeth upon Tryal of the life See before cap. 7. Quorum quilibet habeat 4. l. c. of a man or in a Plea real or in a Plea personal where the Debt or damage in the Declaration amounteth to 40. Marks Vide Littleton Sect. 464. Secondly this Free-hold must be in his own right in Fee-simple Fee-tail for term of his own life or for another mans life although it be upon condition or in the right of his Wife out of antient Demesne for Freehold within ancient Demesn will not serve but if the debt or Damage amounteth not to 40. Marks any Freehold sufficeth Thirdly he must have Freehold in that County where the cause of the action ariseth and though be hath in another it sufficeth not Fourthly if after his return he selleth away his Land or if Cesty que vie or his Wife dyeth or an entry be made for the condition broken so as his Freehold be determined he may be challenged for sufficiency of Freehold It seems before the Statute 2 H. 5. free-hold of any value was sufficient for there Freehold of 5. s. was sufficient 3. H. 4. 4. by that Statute in all Pleas real and personal where the Debt or damage or both together amount to 40 marks the Juror must have 40. s. Freehold In an Attaint they must be able to expend 20. l. per annum In an accompt upon the Receipt of 100. s. if he count to his damage 200. s. if the Juror hath but 20. s. or under 40. s. 't is sufficient because he shall not recover damages and so this is not within the Statuts 10 H. 6. 18. for the sufficiency of Jurors See Rolls tit Tryal 648. A man seised of the Mannor of Dale enfeoffs a stranger upon condition to pay yearly to J. S. and his Heirs 40. s. Rent J. S. dies seised of this Rent and then his Heir takes it Yet the Heir hath not sufficient Freehold Land to the value of 40. s. is given to Husband and Wife and the Heirs of their two bodies begotten who have issue a son the Husband gives the Land by fine to an estranger and his Heirs and dies the Wife enters and dies seised the son hath not sufficient Freehold to be a Juror A man seised of Land to the value of 40. s. within the County of Mid. and of Land to the value of 12. within the County of Sussex and grants a Rent-charge of 40. s. issuing out of all the said Land to a stranger in fee the Grantee hath sufficient Freehold to be a Juror in both Counties See many speculative cases upon this subject in Williams his Reading upon the Statute 35 H. 8. cap. 6. 4. Hundredorum First by the common Challenges propter defectum hundrrdorum Law in a Plea real mixt and personal there ought to be four of the Hundred where the cause of action ariseth returned for their better notice of the cause for Vicini vicinorum facta praesumuntur scire And now since Littleton wrote in a Plea personal if two Hundredors appear it sufficeth and in an Attaint although the Jury is double yet the Hundredors are not double Secondly If he hath either Freehold in the Hundred though it be to the value but of half an Acre or if he dwell there though he hath no Freehold in it it sufficeth Thirdly if the cause of the action riseth in Hundredors divers Hundreds yet the number shall suffice as if it had come out of one and not several Hundredors out of each Hundred Fourthly if there be divers Hundreds within one Leet or Rape if he hath any Freehold or dwell in any of those Hundreds though not in the proper hundred it sufficeth Fifthly if the Jury come de Corpore Comitatus or de proximo Hundredo where the one party is Lord of the No Hundredors Hundred or the like there need no Hundredors be returned at all Sixthly if a Hundredor after he be returned sell away his Land within that Hundred yet shall he not be challenged for the Hundred for that his notice remains otherwise as hath been said for his insufficiency of Freehold for his fear to offend and to have Lands wasted c. which is one of the Reasons of Law is taken away Seventhly he that challengeth for the Hundred must shew in what Hundred it is and not drive the other party to shew it Eighthly his Challenge for the Hundred is not simpliciter but secundum quid for though it be found that he hath nothing in the Hundred yet shall not he be drawn butremain praeter H. that is besides for the Hundred and albeit he dwelleth or have Land in the Hundred yet must he have sufficient Freehold Note This challenge for want of Hundredors must be given in writing presently and the other party is to demurr thereto if opposed If a challenge be that there is not any Hundredor returned it may be averred to the Court that there is not any sufficient within the Hundred which is not within the Fee of the Plaintiff although this be not returned by the Sheriff and this be found true by Tryors the Array shall be affirmed 45. Ass 1. If the King be made party by aid prayer and sufficient Hundredors do not appear nor are returned yet the Pannel shall not be quashed but a Tales of Hundredors shall be returned But
c. R. P. Esq late Sheriff of the said County of E. from the same Office of Sheriff of that County was duely amoved and the said King now by his Letters Patents haâ—h Committed unto one T. P. Knight the Custody of the said County of E. by pretence of which said Letters Patents the said J. P. now remaineth Sheriff of that County which said T. P. of A. at A. aforesaid took to his Wife Anne of the Blood of M. now the Wife of him the Plaintiff that is to say the Daughter of R. D. the Son of W. D. Knight Father of Anne Mother of the said M. now Wife of him the Plaintiff which said T. P. Knight and A. had Issue betwéen them A. P. yet alive and in full life remaining at A. aforesaid and this he is ready to prove c. And out of that cause he prayeth a Writ of the Lady the now Queen of Venire fac to try the said Issue in form aforesaid joyned to be directed to the Coroners of the said County and because the said Defendant doth gain-say and doth not grant that to be true therefore notwithstanding the same Challenge a Command Challenge gain-said is to the Sheriff that he make to come Twelve c. of the Visne of B. by whom c. Easter Term 38 H. 8. Rot. 558. And hereupon Challenge to the Array because the Coroners made the Pannel at the Denomination of the Plaintiff the Defendant doth Challenge the Array of the Pannel of the said Iury because he saith That that Pannel was made and arrayed by A. and C. Coroners of the said County at the Denomination and in favour of the Pannel of the said Plaintiff and this he is ready to verifie and requesteth that the same Pannel may be quashed And the said Plaintiff saith That the said Pannel by the said Coroners was well and equally made and not at the denomination nor in favour nor in promotion of the said Plaintiff whereupon the said Iustices by the consent of the said Parties did choose and assign D. and E. two of the said Iury now appearing to try the said Challenge which said Tryors being elected and tryed say upon their Oaths That the said Pannel was well and faithfully made and arrayed by the said Coroners and not at the denomination neither in favour nor in promotion of the said Plaintiff whereupon the Iurors of the said Iury being called tryed and sworn say c. A Precedent of Challenge to the Array May it please you Mr. Baron This Enquest you ought not to take for that Sir John Ramsden Knight Sheriff of the County of York who did retorn the Pannel betwéen the said A. Plaintiff and B. Defendant is Cosin to the Plaintiff c. and shew how of Kinn c. and so where the Challenge is for lack of Hundredors or other principal Challenge put it down c. and this he is ready to averr whereof he prays Iudgment and that the said Pannel be quashed Or thus And now at this day S. c. comes the aforesaid J. S. Plaintiff and J. B. Defendant by their Attorneys and the Iurors also impannelled and demanded did come and thereupon the said J. B. doth Challenge the Array of the Pannel aforesaid because c. This must be put in Writing but under Counsels hand where the Challenge is to the Poles it is in short way by a Verbal Challenge see the learning of this is excellent and copious in our Books A Precedent of a Plea after the last Continuance And now at this day c. comes such a one Defendant by J. C. his Councel and saith This Action the Plaintiff against the Defendant ought not to maintain for that after the Quindene of the Holy Trinity last past from which day until such a day in Michaelmas Term next unless the Iustices of Assizes before come such a day c. the Action aforesaid is continued c. the Plaintiff by his Déed dated c. did Release c. and shew the Matter what it is whether in abatement in Bar dilatory or peremptory as the Case is c. and this he is ready to averr Note Brook in his Abridgment tit Continuance 61. 83. says That after the Inquest is awarded to inquire of Damages The Defendant cannot plead a Plea Puis le darrein Continuance because he hath no day in Court to Plead The day of Nisi prius and day in Bank are all one so that a Release made betwixt these days cannot be pleaded in Bank but it seems that a Release made betwéen the day of the Venire facias retorned and the Writ of Nisi prius awarded and the day of the Nisi prius may be pleaded at the day of the Nisi prius but not after the Verdict 21 H. 6. fo 10. Bro. tit Jour c. 31 tit Continuance 76. 42. 27. 13. A man shall have but one Plea after the last Continuance for the Plaintiff shall not be delayed ad infinitum 16 H. 7. 11. Bro. tit Continuance 59. 41. 45 46. 5. 21. After the Inquest taken by default and before Iudgment the Defendant came and pleaded an Arbitrament made after the last Continuance And by the Opinion of the Court he had no day in Court to plead this Plea and 't was said That he could Plead no Plea in such Case but as Amicus Curiae and of matter apparent he shall be received otherwise he must resort to his Audita Quaerela 21 H. 7. 33. Broke ibid. 38. But if the Iury remain for default of Iurors the Defendant may plead a Release c. at the day in Bank Puis le darrein Continuance although he did not offer it at the Nisi prius otherwise if the Iury had béen taken at the Nisi prius 22 H. 6. 1. Broke ibid. 30. If it be pleaded at the Nisi prius the Court Record the Plea and discharge the Inquest and give day to the parties in Bank Bro. ibid. 34. 8. In Debt after Issue joyned the Defendant at the Nisi prius pleaded Payment of part after the latter Continuance in Abatement And the Iury being discharged and the Plea adjourned in Bank for that no place of Payment was pleaded the Plaintiff had Iudgment to recover his Debt because after Issue joyned no Respondes ouster can be awarded L. 5. E. 4. 139. Aleyn's Reports 66. in the Case of Beaton and Forrest Now although when difficulty arises in the Evidence the matter is most commonly of late found specially and Demurrers on the Evidence are seldom used yet in asmuch as it is sometimes done and that our Practicer may be prepared with an Authentick Precedent for that purpose I shall transcribe one out of Coke's Entries fo 134. viz. Postea die loco Infra ContentÌ„ Coram â—ss Postea Jacobo Dyer Milite Capitali IustitiatÌ„ DomÌ„ Regine de Banco Nicolao Barham uno servientÌ„ dictÌ„ DomÌ„ Regine ad legem IusticÌ„ ipsius DnÌ„e Regine ad