XII. And for preventing illegal imprisonments in prisons beyond the seas; be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that no subject of this realm that now is or hereafter shall be an inhabitant or resident of this kingdom of England, dominion of Wales or town of Berwick upon Tweed shall or may be sent prisoner into Scotland, Ireland, Jersey, Guernsey, Tangier or into any parts, garrisons, islands or places beyond the seas, which are or at any time hereafter shall be within or without the dominions of his majesty, his heirs or successors; and that every such imprisonment is hereby enacted and adjudged to be illegal; and that if any of the said subjects now is or hereafter shall be so imprisoned every such person and persons so imprisoned shall and may for every such imprisonment maintain by virtue of this act an action or actions of false imprisonment in any of his majesty's courts of record against the person or persons by whom he or she shall be so committed, detained, imprisoned, sent prisoner or transported, contrary to the true meaning of this act, and against all or any person or persons that shall frame, contrive, write, seal or countersign any warrant or writing for such commitment, detainer, imprisonment or transportation, or shall be advising, aiding or assisting in the same or any of them; and the plaintiff in every such action shall have judgment to recover his treble costs, besides damages, which damages so to be given shall not be less than five hundred pounds; in which action no delay, stay or stop of proceeding by rule, order or command, nor no injunction, protection or privilege whatsoever, nor any more than one imparlance, shall be allowed, excepting such rule of the court wherein the action shall depend, made in open court, as shall be thought in justice necessary, for special cause to be expressed in the said rule; and the person or persons who shall knowingly frame, contrive, write, seal or countersign any warrant for such commitment, detainer or transportation, or shall so commit, detain, imprison or transport any person or persons, contrary to this act, or be any ways advising, aiding or assisting therein, being lawfully convicted thereof, shall be disabled from thenceforth to bear any office of trust or profit within the said realm of England, dominion of Wales or town of Berwick upon Tweed, or any of the islands, territories or dominions thereunto belonging; and shall incur and sustain the pains, penalties and forfeitures limited, ordained and provided in and by the statute of provision and præmunire, made in the sixteenth year of King Richard the Second; and be incapable of any pardon from the king, his heirs or successors, of the said forfeitures, losses or disabilities, or any of them.

XIII. Provided always, that nothing in this act shall extend to give benefit to any person who shall by contract in writing agree with any merchant or owner of any plantation, or other person whatsoever, to be transported to any parts beyond seas, and receive earnest upon such agreement, although that afterwards such person shall renounce such contract.

XIV. Provided always, and be it enacted, that if any person or persons lawfully convicted of any felony shall in open court pray to be transported beyond the seas, and the court shall think fit to leave him or them in prison for that purpose, such person or persons may be transported into any parts beyond the seas, this act or anything therein contained to the contrary notwithstanding. XV. Provided also, and be it enacted, that nothing herein contained shall be deemed, construed or taken to extend to the imprisonment of any person before the first day of June one thousand six hundred seventy and nine, or to anything advised, procured or otherwise done relating to such imprisonment, anything herein contained to the contrary notwithstanding.

XVI. Provided also, that if any person or persons at any time resident in this realm shall have committed any capital offence in Scotland or Ireland or any of the islands or foreign plantations of the king, his heirs or successors, where he or she ought to be tried for such offence, such person or persons may be sent to such place there to receive such trial in such manner as the same might have been used before the making of this act, anything herein contained to the contrary notwithstanding.

XVII. Provided also, and be it enacted, that no person or persons shall be sued, impleaded, molested or troubled for any offence against this act, unless the party offending be sued or impleaded for the same within two years at the most after such time wherein the offence shall be committed, in case the party grieved shall not be then in prison; and if he shall be in prison, then within the space of two years after the decease of the person imprisoned, or his or her delivery out of prison, which shall first happen.

XVIII. And to the intent no person may avoid his trial at the assizes or general gaol delivery by procuring his removal before the assizes, at such time as he cannot be brought back to receive his trial there; be it enacted, that after the assizes proclaimed for that county where the prisoner is detained, no person shall be removed from the common gaol upon any habeas corpus granted in pursuance of this act, but upon any such habeas corpus shall be brought before the judge of assize in open court, who is thereupon to do what to justice shall appertain.

XIX. Provided nevertheless, that after the assizes are ended any person or persons detained may have his or her habeas corpus according to the direction and intention of this act.

XX. And be it also enacted by the authority aforesaid, that if any information, suit or action shall be brought or exhibited against any person or persons for any offence committed or to be committed against the form of this law, it shall be lawful for such defendants to plead the general issue that they are not guilty, or that they owe nothing, and to give such special matter in evidence to the jury that shall try the same, which matter being pleaded had been good and sufficient matter in law to have discharged the said defendant or defendants against the said information, suit or action, and the said matter shall then be as available to him or them to all intents and purposes, as if he or they had sufficiently pleaded, set forth or alleged the same matter in bar or discharge of such information, suit or action.

XXI. And because many times persons charged with petty treason or felony or as accessories thereunto are committed upon suspicion only, whereupon they are bailable or not according as the circumstances making out that suspicion are more or less weighty, which are best known to the justices of peace that committed the persons, and have the examinations before them, or to other justices of the peace in the county; be it therefore enacted, that where any person shall appear to be committed by any judge or justice of the peace and charged as accessory before the fact to any petty treason or felony or upon suspicion thereof, or with suspicion of petty treason or felony which petty treason or felony shall be plainly and specially expressed in the warrant of commitment, that such person shall not be removed or bailed by virtue of this act, or in any other manner than they might have been before the making of this act.

232. Forfeiture of Charter of London

(1683. 8 State Trials, 1264, 1265.)

Reply of the Lord Chief Justice to the Argument on Behalf of the Corporation

BUT

UT this is one thing, Mr. Pollexfen, that I would say to you upon your argument, what a grievous thing would it be, if so be the being of a corporation might be forfeited or dissolved, because say you, it is possible that all the corporations in Eng

land may be dissolved because they may have committed such things that may be forfeitures. We must put the scales equal on both sides. Let us then consider on the other side, whether, if so be that it should be taken for law, that a corporation is indissoluble or cannot be dissolved for any crime whatsoever, then those two things do not follow; - First, you will shut out the king's Quo Warranto, let him have what reason he can for it, or let them do what they will and in the next place, you have set up so many independent commonwealths. For if a corporation may do nothing amiss whatsoever, what else does follow, for now I am not upon the point whether this corporation has done any act that is amiss, but considering your argument in general, when you make it a thing of such ill consequence that a corporation should be forfeited by any crime; but I say now, to put in the other scale the mischiefs that would follow, if so be by law a corporation might not be dissolved for one fault or another: But let them do what they would, it should still remain a corporation. Then it is plain, they are so many commonwealths independent upon the king, and the king's Quo Warranto is quite shut out, that is mighty considerable.

Judgment

The next term, viz. Trinit. 35 Car. 2. (Chief Justice Saunders dying the day of the judgment given, or the next day after) Mr. justice Jones, justice Raymond, and justice Withens, being in court, justice Jones pronounced the judgment of the court, and justice Raymond and justice Withens affirmed, that chief justice Saunders was of the same opinion with them, and that they all agreed.

1. That a corporation aggregate might be seized. That the statute 28 Ed. 3, cap. 10, is express, that the franchises and liberties of the city, upon such defaults, should be taken into the king's hands. And that bodies politic may offend, and be pardoned, appears by the general article of pardon, 12 Car. 2, whereby corporations are pardoned all crimes and offences. And the act for regulating corporations, 13 Car. 2, which provides that no corporation shall be avoided for anything by them misdone or omitted to be done, shows also that their charters may be avoided for things by them misdone, or omitted to be done.

2. That exacting and taking money by the pretended by-law,

was extortion, and a forfeiture of the franchise of being a corporation.

3. That the petition was scandalous and libellous, and the making it and publishing it a forfeiture.

4. That the act of the common council was the act of the corporation.

5. That the matter set forth in the record did not excuse or avoid those forfeitures set forth in the replication.

6. That the information was well founded.

And gave judgment, That the franchise should be seized into the king's hands, but the entry thereof respited till the king's pleasure was known in it. Justice Raymond and justice Withens declare, that they were of the same opinion in omnibus.

And accordingly, after entry made by Mr. Attorney, That as to the issue joined to be tried by the country; as to the claiming to have and constitute sheriffs; as to the having the mayor and aldermen to be justices of the peace, and to hold sessions, 'quod ipse pro Domino Rege ulterius non vult prosequi;' Judgment is entered.

Relates to the person

233. Hales' Case: The Dispensing Power

(1686. Chief Justice Herbert. II State Trials, 1302.)

Chief Justice. In the case of Godwin and Hales, wherein the defendant pleads a dispensation from the king, it is doubted, whether or no the king had such a prerogative? Truly, upon the argument before us, it appeared as clear a case as ever came before this court: but because men fancy I know not what difficulty, when really there is none, we were willing to give so much countenance to the question in the case, as to take the advice of all the judges in England. They were all assembled at Serjeant's Inn and this case was put them, and the great case of the sheriffs was put; whether the dispensation in that case were legal, because upon that depended the execution of all the law of the nation? And, I must tell you that there were then ten upon the place, that clearly delivered their opinions, that the case of the sheriffs was good law, and that all the attainders grounded upon indictments found by juries returned by such sheriffs, were good, and not erroneous; and consequently, that men need not have any fears or scruples about that matter. And in the next place, they did clearly declare, that there was no imaginable difference