Selected quad for the lemma: justice_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
justice_n	cause_n	court_n	king_n	3,548	5	4.0704	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34174	The compleat sheriff wherein is set forth, his office and authority, with directions, how and in what manner to execute the same, according to the common and statute laws of this kingdom, which are now in force and use, and the judgments and resolutions of the judges in divers late cases, in the several courts of Westminster, relating thereunto : likewise of vnder-sheriffs and their deputies, and where the high-sheriff shall be answerable for their defaults, and where not, &c. : together with the learning of bail bonds, with an explication of Stat. 23 H.6. cap. 10 and pleadings thereon : retorns of writs, remedies against non retorn and faux retorn, Habeas corpus, Venires, challenges and enquiry of damages, prisoners and prisons, execution by fieri fac, elegit, &c. : escapes, actions and pleadings therein, fresh pursuit, and other pleas, attachment, americament : actions, declarations and pleadings on the sheriffs nonfesance or male-fesance : customs of London, as to prisons, courts, process, sheriffs fees, extortion, sheriffs accompts, &c, : to which is added The office and duty of coroners.		1696 (1696)	Wing C5653; ESTC R1060	279,424	488

out of any other Court but out of which soever if the Authority of the Writ be-Executed either in Time or Place at the pleasure of the Gaoler or Prisoner ' its an Escape as being carried a month before the time and staying a month after also the Habeas Corpus being at a place and day certain ' it s no pretence of stay at any other places or ultra to search Writings or to speak with Witnesses and immediate is a convenient time without wilful delay so is Mod. Rep. 116 tho the Sheriff be not bound to bring the Prisoner the direct way yet he ought not to carry him round about a great way for the accomodation of the party if he do it is an Escape 3 Keb. 305. Lutterell and Mosedell's Case and Mod. Rep. 116. Mosedell's Case But upon this Point of the Prisoners being suffered Diversity to go at Large there is a diversity to be well heeded And that is Between one in Execution within the Franchise or County where the common Gaol is where the Office of Sheriff or Bayliff extends for there if the Sheriff c. assent that one in Execution shall go out for a time altho he retorn by the time or if he suffer him to go at Large by Bayl or Baston it is an Escape But when the Sheriff c. is commanded by Writ to have the Body at Westminster he may be a Keeper of him in another County as in the Case of Bennet and Halsey Mo. 3. Rep. 44. Boyston's Case The Plaintiff was taken in Execution by the Sheriff of B. and by an Hab. Corp he was brought to Smithfield by the Gaoler of B. and there at eight a Clock at night the Prisoner went into Southwark and none with him and there continued all night and the next morning he Habeas Corpus ad Recipiend ' retorned to Smithfield to his Keeper and there continued with him till the retorn of the Writ at which day he brought him to the Lord Chief Justices Chamber at Serjeants Inn and he retorned his Writ and the Chief Justice committed him to the Marshalsea and it was adjudged to be no Escape in the Sheriff so in Burton and Andrews Case Mo. Rep. Bennet and Halsey For the effect of the Writ is performed to have him there at the day and the Writ does not command him to bring him the usual way but to have his Body at the day and so if one be Sheriff of two Counties and had Arrested two by two several Capias in two Counties he may bring one into the other County to have them both at Westminster and may bring them the surest way If a Gaoler on an Hab. Corp ad Testificandum Habeas Corpus ad Testificand bring one whom he had in Execution to be a VVitness by Twisden it is an Escape and so has been adjudged In Rolls his time the Court was moved for an Hab. Corp. for a Prisoner in the Kings-bench that he might be a Witness in a Cause in Darby Shire at the Assises but it was denied but he said he knew it granted for one to be a Witness at a Tryal at Guild Hall but at the Charges and Peril of the party for whom he was to be a Witness if he Escape 14 Car. 1. B. R. And in 24 Car. 2. B. R. Adam's Case the Court granted an Habeas corpus for a Prisoner in the Marshalsea to Testifie in a Cause in Middlesex But Hale Chief Justice said He would never grant it in his Chamber being but a private Person and the party may escape which would be remediless Siderfin p. 13. Fitz-Jeffreys If one be in Execution in the Fleet or other The King cannot License one to go at Large place at the Suit of the King or of a Common person and the Warden or Gaoler by the Command of the Lord Chancellor or Treasurer suffer him to go into the Country with a Keeper to gather Money the sooner to pay the King and he goes accordingly and returns to Prison again yet this is an Escape as to the Common person for the King himself cannot License a man to go so at Large Dyer 12 13 Eliz. 297. If one be in Execution at the Suit of the King in the Fleet the Warden may suffer him to go to his Counsel with his Keeper But not so in the Case of a Common person Savill's Rep. p. 29. A man is in Execution for Debt and a Woman being Warden of the Fleet marries the Prisoner This is an Escape for that he cannot be his own Prisoner nor a Prisoner to his Wife So if the Sheriff or Gaoler marry a Woman that is in Execution for Debt Sir Gervas Clifton's Case cited 1 Leon. 237. in Offley and Saltington's Case was He being Sheriff suffered one in Execution and in his Custody to go and see a Play and the same was adjudged an Escape and the party could not be in Execution again This Case was referred by the King to the Habeas Corpus in regard of the Plague Judges Trin. 12 Car. 1. Whether in regard of the Plague Habeas corpora may be granted for the Prisoners in Execution in the Prisons of the Kings-Bench and Fleet upon Judgment in the Common-Bench and Exchequer and it was Certified by them to the Lord Keeper that if upon Habeas corpus granted the Gaoler suffers the Prisoners to go at Large with a Keeper or Baston that this is an Escape and that no Habeas corpus ought to be by the Law for this purpose which the King well approved of And in primo Caroli the Prisoners in the Fleet petitioned the Parliament that they may have Habeas corpora in the Vacation in respect of the great Plague in London but the Parliament would not assent to it because against the Law A Capias ad satisfaciend ' is served upon one who Execution served upon one who is Prisoner for Felony and then an Escape is a Prisoner for Felony and Indicted and Arraigned and found Guilty and afterwards Escapes Debt lies against the Sheriff for the Execution was well served upon him and altho' his Body was at the Queens pleasure yet he shall not take advantage of his own Tort but he shall answer the Suit or Execution of a Common person Cro. El. 165 517. 1 Leon. 87 236. Ognel and Paston The Sheriff delivers the Prisoner upon a void Delivery upon a void Audita Querela is no Escape Audita querela This is no Escape and there the Prisoner may be taken again in Execution Mo. 344. n. 479. Collins's Case But if a Scire facias had in it the words of Audita querela it s against Law and its an Escape if the Sheriff deliver the Prisoner upon it 1 Roll. Rep. 383. A forged Warrant of Attorney for Satisfaction One delivered upon a forg'd Warrant of Attorney for satisfaction is delivered into the Office where one is in Execution and the Marshal lets

Habeas Corpus ad respondend ' recipiend ' or faciend ' granted on the Pleas side for so the Court of the Kings Bench is divided in the practise of it that is to say into Criminal Causes between the King and the Party and Civil Causes between Subject and Subject Now an Habeas Corpus ad respondend ' is when any one is Imprisoned at the Suit of another upon a Legal Process in the Fleet or any other Prison except the Kings Bench Prison and a third person would Sue that Prisoner in this Court B. R. and cannot because he is not in Custody of the Marshal of this Court there he may have an Habeas Corpus to remove the Prisoner out of the Prison where he is into this Court to answer to his Action here This is called a Habeas Corpus cum causa and an Habeas Corpus cum causa doth remove the Prisoner for whom it is granted and all the Causes which are then depending against him for upon Habeas Corpus to an Inferiour Court to remove Corpus cum causa they ought to return all the Causes that are depending there concerning the Party that hath the Habeas Corpus if any of the Causes depending be above 5 l. Stiles Rep. 150. When an Habeas Corpus is Awarded and Bail taken though they be not Filed yet presently the Prisoner is discharged and his Sureties also in the Inferiour Court Cro. Jac. 203. Franley and Basset One was in Execution in the Fleet for a Debt recovered against him in B. R. he being before condemned in the Kings Bench for another Debt was by Habeas Corpus cum causa removed into the Kings Bench per Cur. in this Case he may acknowledge satisfaction for both Debts in B. R. he being in the Custody of the Marshal for both Debts If the Marshal suffer him to Escape he shall be charged for both the Debts Dyer 152 307. As for Retorns of Habeas Corpus What shall be a good Retorn on Habeas Corpus or Corpus cum causa An Habeas Corpus to remove one committed for Debt from one Prison to another may be granted Retornable immediate or indilate for this is only an Habeas Corpus ad Recipiend ' in the nature of it An Habeas Corpus is not a Record till it be Amendment Retorned and Filed and then it cannot be amended but it may be amended before it s Filed Whatsoever person or by what means soever Conclusion of the Retorn he was committed the conclusion of the Retorn ought to be Corpus tamen ejus paratum habo yet it cannot always be so 1 Leon. p. 70. An Habeas Corpus ad subjiciend ' is always intended Retorn by the Chancellor of Durham to him that has the Body tho' ad faciend ' may be circular as an Habeas Corpus was directed to the Chancellor of Durham that he make a Precept to the Sheriff to have the Body coram nobis apud Westm The Retorn is that the Chancellor issued a Precept to the Sheriff to return his Body before him and that the Sheriff returned paratum habet and it s not said the Chancellor had him here which is ill per Cur. for it should be cujus Corpus paratum habeo in this Court 3 Keb. 229. the King against Pell and Offley Habeas Corpus was directed to the Steward and Cause of commitment shewed Marshal of the Marshalsea for H. the Marshal Retorns the said H. was committed to the Custody per mandatum Francisci Walsingham Mil ' principalis Secretar unius de privat ' Concilio Domini Regis This is insufficient because the Cause of Commitment is not set down in the Retorn Then it was amended and Retorned in this manner ex sententia mandato totius Concilij privati Domini Regis ità qd ' ejus corpus habere non possumus This per Cur ' is in sufficient also he ought to have concluded Corpus ejus tamen parat ' habeo Note Where the Party is committed by the whole Councel no cause of the Committment need to be shewed 1 Leon. p. 70. On Latitat the Sheriff Retorned that he had By Habeas Corpus to bring into Chancery Arrested the Defendant and that such a day and before the Retorn of the Latitat Habeas Corpus was to bring the Body into Chancery and there the Prisoner was Discharged the Retorn is good for the Sheriff is bound to obey the Kings Writs and he cannot compel the Parties to put in Sureties here in B. R. But it was ill done of the Master of the Rolls to Discharge him Per Curiam we have oftentimes persons here upon Habeas Corpus who are also Arrested by Process out of the Exchequer or of the Common Pleas but we will not Discharge them before they have found Sureties for their appearance and we cannot punish the Sheriff for the Habeas Corpus was first retornable before the Latitat But because the Retorn was à custodia nostra exoneratus fuit which might be intended as to the Cause in Chancery only and not for the Cause here for he hath not alledged that he was committed to any other in Custody the Sheriff was to amend his Retorn 1 Leon. 145. Cary Amendment and Dennis A Retorn of Habeas Corpus by the Warden of the Fleet was propter contemptum extra Cur ' Cancellariae It s not good 1 Rolls Rep. 92. General Directions for Writs of Habeas Corpus Error or Priviledge vid. Compleat Solicitor 106 and other Manuals On Habeas Corpus the Sheriff Retorns that the That the Justices committed him for a Fine Justices of Peace committed the Plaintiff for a Fine on Contempt for which the Court awarded him to remain in Prison till payment Siderfin p. 144. the King versus Mayo The Retorn on Habeas Corpus was a Protection Protection 1 Leon. p. 70. Searchers Case Note The Retorn of an Habeas Corpus ought Retorn to be Writ on Parchment to be Written in Parchment and not on Paper for the Retorn is to be Filed and made a Record of Court and all Records are to be Written on Parchment And therefore after the Retorn is Read and Filed in Court it cannot be amended But in Hob. p. 113. An Habeas Corpus was Retorned without the Sirname of the Sheriff and after Verdict amended It is agreed The Retorn of an Habeas Corpus Amendment Good to common intent need not be so punctual as a Plea because not made by Persons of such Learning as Pleas are but if they be good to common intent and substance it s enough Upon Habeas Corpus granted by the Kings Rule to bring in the Body Bench to the Warden of the Fleet to have here in Court the Body of D. W. the same Retornable at a day certain at which day the Warden of the Fleet did refuse to make his Retorn and to bring in the Body And the Court entred a

Retorning one exempt 1 Rol. Rep. 119. Action on the Case adjudged to lie against the Sheriff for Retorning one of a Jury who lived in a place which his exempt and Co. Mag ' chap. 382 130 447 488 461. Action on the Case lies against the Sheriff for Retorning a person exempt of a Jury The Sheriff must not Retorn magis remotos minus What Jurors the Sheriff must Retorn sufficientes magis suspectos by the Statute W. 2. chap. 38. and if he do the Plaintiff or Demandant shall recover Damages by the Statute if he be delayed and the Defendant if he lose his Land and Articuli super chartas gives double Damages to the Demandant The Sheriff by Statute W. 2. c. 38. must not Retorn Men decrepit senes ultra 70 annos hominos non in patria commorantes This Statute is a direct Prohibition in it self and therefore the Party grieved may have Action on the Act against the Sheriff without giving notice of Sickness Notice or Non-commorancy yet the use is to Sue out a Writ grounded on this Statute that he Retorn them not and notice by word is good if notice were requisite Co. 2 Inst 477. Peers of Parliament not to be Impannelled Remedy for undue Retorns Who is the party grieved that shall have his Action nor Tenants in Antient Demesne Where the Demandant or Plaintiff is delayed of his Suit by such Retorn of the Sheriff as magis remotos he shall by the Statute recover Damages against him or where the Defendant after he has lost his Land by the Oath of them so Retorned contrary to the Form of the Statute and after he doth convict them in an Attaint and so is restored he may then have his Action on this Statute for his Damages 2 Inst 448. sur Stat. W. 2. c. 38. If one dwell in Middlesex and had Freehold in the County of York over 40 l. the Sheriff of York may not Summon him to Middlesex to Try a Cause at the Bar in Westminster for Land in Yorkshire W. 2. c. 42. 1 Rol. Rep. 163. In a Writ of Right or any other Writ a Baron Peer of the Realm may excuse himself Action on the Statute W. 2. c. 8. for Retorning Men more remote or suspected Count and Bar inde Dr. Bonhams Case 8 Rep. 118. Upon a Tryal between a Peer and another Peer the Sheriff must retorn a Knight but if he do not and the Peer doth not challenge the Array but the Jury give a Verdict he shall not have advantage of this afterwards Lord Powes and Kertman P. 9 Car. A Jury was Empannelled of the Town of Southampton and called to the Bar and made default and the Men of that Town shewed to the Court a Grant made to the Inhabitants of that Town that no Retorn should be made of the Men of that Town to be of any Jury and prayed the allowance of their Charter and the Court appointed them to plead their Charter and so they did 1 Brownl p 36. If a Man has a Charter of Exemption and sheweth it to the Sheriff yet he may Retorn him for the Sheriff is not a Judge to allow or disallow his Charter but he must Sue out a Writ of allowance of his Charter and deliver the Writ to the Sheriff and shew his Charter to him and then if the Sheriff Retorn him Action on the Case lies against him On a Dorsetshire Tryal at the Bar on default of all the Jurors but three It appeared that She●iff countermands the Summons the Sheriff had by command of the Plaintiff countermanded their Summons against the Gree of the Defendant who now prayed a Tryal But this being impossible for the Court in such Case will not supply the Jury with a Tales de Circumstantibus No Tales de circumstantibus on Tryal at Bar. But they offered to Non-suit the Plaintiff on Record and conceived the Defendant should contribute to the payment of the Jury because they should remain indifferent Jurors 2 Siderfin 77. Hunt and Hollis Retorn of a Distringas for appearance of the President Defendant in the Hustings 2 Sanders 233. Retorn of a Jury by the Bedels of the four next Wards 2 Sanders 244. If the Sheriff Retorn but 40 l. which is the Issues Action case against the Sheriff for Retorning two several Issues usual Issues on Distring as Juratores the Court on prayer of the party cannot cause him to Retorn greater but only make a Rule that good Issues be Retorned But by Twisden Action on the Case lies against the Sheriff 1 Keb. 475. The Plaintiff ought to bring a Writ against the Sheriff on Averment against the Sheriffs Retorn of Issues Averment that he might have levied greater Issues and so the Court may increase them Note Before Stat. W. 2. c. 39. the Plaintiff could not aver against the Retorn of the Sheriff if he Retorned too small Issues for he is but an Officer in Court and has no day in Court to answer the Plaintiff party But now by 1 Ed. 3. the Plaintiff may aver what the value of the Issues be Rents of the Land Corn in the Grange What shall be said Issues Hay in the Barn all moveables except Riding furniture and Utensils of House Retorn of the grand Inquest Stat. 11 H. 7. c. 9. No Indictment shall be found by any persons named to the Justices without due Retorn of the Sheriff but by Inquest of lawful liege People Retorned by the Sheriff One Scarlet whom the Sheriff had not Retorned by confederacy betwixt him and the Clark who read the pannel procured himself to be sworn of the grand Jury with intent to indict his Neighbours maliciously and he did so he was adjudged an Justices may alter the Pannel Offender within this Law and by Statute 3 H. 8. c. 10. The Justices of Gaol Delivery or Justices of the Peace of whom one to be of the Quorum in open Court may alter the Pannel Retorned by the Sheriff to enquire of the King only by Addition or substraction of any of the Jurors so Retorned and they have power to command the Sheriff to put other in the Pannel according to their Discretion And the Sheriff ought to Retorn the Pannel so reformed upon the Penalty of the said Act. So that none can be of any Grand Inquest but by the Retorn of the Sheriff Coke 12 Rep. Rob. Scarlets Case Dalton 394. Note By the Statute of 4 5 of William and Mary all Jurors are not to have 10 l. per annum vide infra It is very needful for the High Sheriff to have a Book containing the Names of all the Freeholders in his County and their sufficiences that he may make the Pannells according to his Oath and better know Pledges and Sureties As for Issues lost for default of appearance scilicet by Jurors or by Tenant or Demandant the Sheriff may not levy till they shall be estreated under the

be Sheriff in or other Justice having Power or Authority to make any Writs unto you by the Law of the Land or any Justice of Newgate Ye shall make your Bayliffs of the true and sufficient Men in the County Ye shall be dwelling in your proper person within your Baliffwick for the time ye shall be in the same Office except ye be otherwise Licensed of the King Ye shall not Let your Sheriffwick nor any Bayliffwick thereof to Farm to any Man Ye shall truly set and return reasonable and due Issues of them that be within your Bayliffwick after their Estate and their Honour and make your Pannells your self of such persons as be most next most sufficient and not suspected or procured as it is ordained by the Statutes and over this in eschewing and restrainder of the Mans-slaughters Roberies and other manifold grievous Offences that have been done dayly namely of such as name themselves Souldiers and by other Vagrants the which continually increase in number and multiply so that the Kings true Subjects may not be safe yea Ride nor go to do such things as they have to do to their intolerable hurt and hindrance Ye shall truly and effectually with all diligence possible to your Power execute the Statutes as the Statutes of Winchester and of Vagabonds These things all ye shall truly keep as God ye help Note That there was an Addition in this Crok Car. p. 25 26. Sir Ed. Coke's Case Oath by the Statute of 5 R. 2. and 2 H. 4. c. 15. viz. That he should seek to repress all Errors and Heresies commonly called Lollards and should be assistant to the Commissaries and Ordinaries in Church matters And this was objected by Sir Ed. Coke after he had been Lord Chief Justice of both Benches and made Sheriff of the County of Buckingham when he had a dedimus potestatem annexed to a Schedule in the first year of Charles the first And ever since they have been left out because Lollardism then was the true Antipapal Religion as is now professed And he made other Objections one whereof was that some parts of the Oath are not by any Statute and its a Maxim That none but the Parliament can appoint None but the Parliament can appoint an Oath an Oath But it was resolved by the Judges that this Oath being appointed and continued divers years by direction of the Statute altho' without the express Authority of any Statute Law yet may well be continued for the publick benefit Note As to the Statute of Winchester the Justices of Peace have eased the Sheriff of much trouble And by the Statute of 39 Eliz. cap. 4. all former Statues for the punishment of Vagabonds are Repealed The Oath of the Sheriff of Oxford and Berks and also of Cambridge and Huntington YOV shall Swear That well and truly ye shall Serve the King in the Office of Sheriff of Oxford and Berks. And the Kings Profit c. ut supra usque So help ye God And also ye shall Swear That the Masters and Scholars of the Vniversity of Oxford and their Servants from injuries and violences Ye shall keep and defend by all your Strength and Power and the Peace in the said Vniversity as much as in you is ye shall keep And that you shall give your Councel and Help to the Chancellor and Scholars of the same Vniversity for to punish the disturbers and breakers of the Peace there after the Priviledges and Statutes of the said Vniversity at all times when it shall be needful And also ye shall put your help withal your Strength to defend the Priviledges Liberties and Customs of the said Vniversity And that ye shall receive all such Oaths of your Vnder-Sheriffs and other your said Ministers of your said County of Oxford as soon and anon as ye shall be at the the Castle or at the Town of Oxford in presence of any that shall be thereto deputed by the said Vniversity to the which things the King will that your said Ministers be by you acted and compelled As God you help The like Addition to the Oath of the Sheriff of Cambridge and Huntington mutatis mutandis If the New Sheriff be not in London he may take his Oath by dedimus potestatem directed to any two Justices of Peace of the same County one to be of the Quorum or to any other Commissioners The Cities and Towns in England which have Sheriffs are as follow The City of Bristol 2 Coventry 2 Canterbury 1 York 2 Exon 2 Glocester 2 Leichfeild 1 Lincoln 2 London 2 Norwich 2 Worcester 1 The Town of Kingston upon Hull 1 Southampton 1 Nottingham 2 Poole 1 Newcasle on Tine 1 The Return of the Dedimus by the Commissioners is thus VIrtute istius Brevis nobis direct ' tali die Anno recepimus Sacrament ' infranominat ' A. B. Vicecom ' Warr ' tam de offic ' Vicecom ' in dict' Com' Warr ' bene fidelit ' faciend ' juxt ' formam cujusdam Schedulae praesentibus ann ' quam Sacramentum specificat ' in Actu Parliament ' Anno Regni Dominae Elizabethae nuper Reginae Angliae c. primo fact ' secundum tenorem Brevis Schedulae Brevis proed ' similit ' annex ' prout Breve istud in se exigit requirit The Sheriff must take the Oath and Sacrament as is now usual for all Officers and Ministers of Justice Stat. Car. 2. and the Oaths appointed by the Statute of William and Mary In the general Case of the Sheriffs of England when the King makes a new Patent tho' the Ancient Sheriff had his Office but durante ●eneplacito presently a Writ of de Comitatu Commisso Writ of Discharge which is commonly called a Writ of Discharge or a Writ de exoneratione officij shall issue the form Vide supra And then another Writ is directed to the Ancient Sheriff for the delivery of his County and Rolls Writs c. to the New Sheriff These were two Writs formerly but now they are included in one Vide supra The next thing is the New Sheriff at or before his first County Court must take over from his Predecessor all his Prisoners and Writs precisely by view and by Indenture to be made between them wherein all the Causes which he has against every Prisoner must be set forth and delivered or else the New Sheriff is not charged with them as in Westbies Case Now before I say more as to the Delivery I I shall shew you what Actions of the Old Sheriff or his Officers shall be good and to what time Now the Old Sheriff of a County is Sheriff until the New be Sworn altho' he be Chosen for it is the taking of his Oath that doth compleat Till what time the old Sheriff or the new Sheriff may Act. Crok El. 12 Fitz Case More 186. More 364. St. John's Case Cro. El. 440. Boucher and Wiseman him in his Office And

2 Keb. 838. Green and Jones A Plaint being before the Bayliffs of Bury they directed a Warrant to the Under-Bayliffs to take the party Ita quod habeant Corpus ejus coram Ballivis ad prox ' Cur ' tenend ' tal ' die The Under-Bayliffs arrested him and committd him to Prison sub Custod ' Def. S. T. The Action on the Case lies not against the Defendant for the Prisoner was not Committed to him by any Lawful Authority it was Ita qd ' but not to Commit him And the Action lies against them if they have him not at the Day Cro. El. 743. Baldry and Johnson If Execution be directed to a Sheriff to make Lord of the Franchise to answer for his Baylif● Execution within a Liberty and the Sheriff directs his Warrant to the Bayliff who does it and after is a Fugitive and not able to answer for it the Lord of the Franchise shall answer for it and shall be liable to answer for his Bayliff 2 Brownl 50. There are other sorts of Bayliffs which are Bayliffs of Fee and are Officers of Fee within their Jurisdiction and Precinct And for the Execution of Process there the Sheriff shall not write or send his Precept to these Bayliffs as to a Bayliff of a Franchise but as to the Bayliff of Gildable and the Sheriff shall return his Answer Dalt 543. and make his Retorn as if the Sheriff himself had served the Process and the Retorn thereof shall be in the Name of the Sheriff and shall not make mention of the Bayliff of Fee But if such a Bayliff will not Execute the Process a Non omittas shall go out to the Sheriff The Mirror of Justices saith thus If the Mirror of Just lib. 4. Bayliff of a Franchise does not make Execution of a Retorn of the Sheriff the Sheriff may enter into the Franchise and the King shall recover the Seisin and so that shall become Guildable which before was Enfranchised CHAP. V. Of the County Court The Nature of it It s Jurisdiction as to the Sum it holds Plea of Of the time and place The Forms of the Original Process Of Execution there Of the County Clerk Of Replevin The Sheriffs Office and demeanour therein and the Retorns thereof what are good or not Pone Withernam The manner of Replevying The Retorno habendo Second Deliverance Property Pledges in Replevin The Form of the Entry of the Plaint The Form of the Precept in Replevin The Form of the Bond for Security Of Accedas ad Curiam Recordari fac ' Loquelam Of the Writ of Justicies Of the Sheriff Tourn Jurisdiction and Pleadings Of the County Court c. THis Court is no Court of Record but only a Court Baron and the Suitors are Judges But in a Redisseisin the Sheriff is Judge by the Statute of Merton cap. 3. and a Writ of Error lieth of his Judgment The County-Court is incident to the Office Incident to the Office of Sheriff of Sheriff and so is the Entry of all Proceedings there and therefore if the King grant the Office of Clerkship of the County Court to M. and constitute J. S. Sheriff of the same County it s a void Patent tho' it be granted when the Sheriffwick is vacant yet the new Sheriff shall have it And in all Writs directed to the Sheriff concerning the County-Court the King saith In Comitatu tuo and in Retorns of Exigents made by him he saith Ad Comitatum meum tent ' In False Judgment it is said In pleno Comitatu tuo 4 Rep. Mitton's Case 4 Inst 266. Recordari facias Loquelam c. Sub sigillo tuo c. Also in a Precept of Tolt to remove a Plea out of the Court Baron into the County Court it is Summoneas c. qd ' sit ad Comitatum meum And it is the Sheriffs Court tho' the Suitors are Judges The Style of the Court is Buck's Curia prima Comitatus E. L. Mil ' Vicecomitis Comitat ' praedict ' tent ' apud B. c. And the next Court Curia secunda and so forth Tho' it be said commonly that the Suitors By Prescription the Sheriff may be Judge are Judges yet by Prescription the Sheriff may be Judge as it was in Car. 2. There is a Court called Curia Comitatus in the County Palatine of Durham and the Sheriff is Judge And tho' in the County Court the Suitors are Judges yet by Prescription it may be held before the Sheriff 2 3 Ed. 6. c. 25. Vid. Stat. Mod. Rep. 172. As a Court Baron by Special Prescription may be held Coram Seneschallo So in Norton's Case Indictment was brought of Perjury in a Plea depending in the County Court in Action on the Case for 3 l. Errors assigned were First It is not said how the Plea was depending as by Justicies or Plaint Entred And Secondly It is said in the County Court held coram the Sheriff Sectatoribus and saith not per Consuetudinem quae Curia concessit 3 Keb. 370. Dom ' Rex and Norton The Jurisdiction of the County Court This Court holdeth no Suits of Charters for Lands or for Inheritance or to make several Plaints upon one entire Debt nor any Action to compel one to render an Account tho' it be under 40 s. because the Sheriff cannot assign 2 Inst 380. Auditors who are Judges of the Record and the County Court is no Court of Record And they cannot hold Plea of any Debt due by Record In Action of Trespass there holden no Force shall be supposed It holdeth no Plea of Debt or Damages to the value of 40 s. or above but by Justicies he may Vid. infra Nor of any Trespass Vi armis because a Fine is due therein to the King and no Court 2 Inst 311. can assess a Fine but a Court of Record Yet if the Debt be 40 s. or above and the Plaintiff will acknowledge in his Declaration the receipt of so much as to bring it within 40 s. in this case the Plaint is good But he cannot Id. ibid. split a Debt into several Actions and if he do the Defendant may plead the same to the Jurisdiction of the Court or may have a Prohibition to stay that Indirect Suit or move for Attachment against the Steward It is holden once every Month upon a Day Time certain the Month being computed according to 28 Days and the Reason is because of the Writs of Exigents which must be Proclaimed there 9 H. 3 c. 3. 2 Ed. 6. c. 25. Vide tit Outlawries The County Court is kept once a Month at a Day certain because the Kings Writs of Exigents are to be Proclaimed there and the Exigent is to be directed to the Sheriff in this Court and he upon the Exigent doth proclaim or call the parties Sued in Courts above to render their Bodies c. or else to be out of the King's Protection And the Coroners are to

sued out no Original to warrant it he is excusable but he must take notice at his peril of the Person and Goods that he Arrests for he is not to examine whether the Original be sued out or not But if he arrest J. S. instead of J. N. he does it without Warrant Capias against G. and E. B. affirms himself to be E. and is taken yet this shall not excuse in false Imprisonment the same Law of a Commission of Rebellion Hardress 323. Thurbane Case As concerning priviledged or protected Persons let us see who are priviledged from arrests or not Here I shall briefly say something of a Nonomittas of the Office and Authority of the Sheriff on it Stat. W. 2. c. 39. gives it For when Bayliffs of Liberties had retorn of Writs upon a Mandate to them they would do nothing Now a Remedy is given by this Stat. commanding the Sheriff qd ' non omittat propter aliquam Libertatem quin exequatur Praeceptum Dom ' Regis 2 Inst. 451. And If a Bayliff make an insufficient Retorn a Non omittas shall be granted 2 Roll. Rep. 336. Attachment is a Non omittas in it self ergo the Sheriff may break the House to take the Person 1 Rep. 18 33. 5. Rep. 92. Form of pleading Non omittas Cap ' ad Satisifaciend ' and on Mandavi Ballivo Retorn Arrest and Escape Vid. 2 Sand. 98. Pleading Non Omittas Fieri fac ' upon Mandavi Ballivo retorned 1 Sand. 304. Peers of the Realm are Priviledged so Dutcllesses Peers and Countesses by Discent or Marriage as in the Countess of Rutlands Case There the Sheriff was excused by the Writ tho' it appears in that she was a Countess Coke 6 Rep. for the Officer ought not to dispute the Authority of the Court But Cap ' upon Contempt as Rescous c. lies against a Peer Dalt 104. The Body of a Peer may be taken in Execution upon a Statute if he had not Goods nor Lands extendible Dalt 105. Ministers in the Church are priviledged from Clergy Arrest Artic ' Cler ' c. 3. 1 R. 2. c. 15. 1 Mariae c. 3. Wiltshire Undersheriff was imprisoned by the Kings Servant Lord Chamberlain for arresting Sir George Hastings Servant to the King upon a Cap ' Utlagat ' Litt. Rep. 65. Wiltshires Case Per Cur ' He may well arrest him for it is at the Suit of the King himself and he is sworn to serve it And by all the Judges of England he who procured the Commitment of the Under-sheriff ought to pay all the Charges and Expences And it is adjudged in 1 Keb. 40. The Kings Servant is not so Priviledged from arrests but that the Sheriff ought to retorn his Writ unless he shews his priviledge on the Arrest The Queen or Queen Dowagers Servants are not priviledged In the King and Moultons Case the Court declared their Opinion to be That none of the Kings Servants in Ordinary can be arrested without notice first given to my Lord Chamberlain who cannot priviledge any perpetually but in convenient time must either remove such or make them pay their debts but if the Bayliffs without notice do arrest any such the Messengers of my Lord Chambelain cannot rescue the Prisoner by Letter the Arrest being lawful nor by Warrant but the Party is punishable for his contempt for no man can know the Kings Servant by his Face but he may shew his Priviledge on the Arrest They also conceived the Warrant of my Lord Rescue Chamberlain to the Messenger to take all persons that detain such Prisoner is a Rescue and against Law and is to be only against the Plaintiff that sued for the Bayliffs had the Kings Warrant to arrest and had no notice before the Arrest that he was the Kings Servant This was Sir George Hamiltons Case one of the Privy Chamber 2 Keb. 3. If a Parliament man be arrested on Mean Parliament may Process or taken in execution it 's proper for the Parliament when they meet to discharge him for in Sir Rich. Temples Case the Justices doubted whether they could do it or not Twisden demanded why he did not sue his Writ of Priviledge out of Chancery upon the retorn of his Election Siderfin 42. 2 Keb. 3. Sir R. Temples Case Clergy-men called to the Convocation have the same priviledge a Parliament-men have Dier fo 60. By the Court of Chancery one was discharged Chancery Priviledge from an Arrest being done as he came to put in his Answer 1 Rep. in Ch. 92. p. 22. There is a Chancery-priviledge from Arrest and priviledge in other Courts for Officers and Attorneys As to Protections the 2d Instit p. 56. upon Protections Stat. is very full All Protections that are not Legal which appear not in the Register or warranted by our Books are expresly against the branch of Magna Charta 1 Inst 131. Nulli differemus justitiam As a Protection under the Great Seal granted to any man directed to the Sheriff c. commanding him that they shall not arrest him during a certain Time at such a mans Suit which hath words in it per Prarogativam quam nolumus esse arguendam 2 Inst 56. This Protection was adjudged to be void In respect of the Warrant what is good or not to justifie Arrest Or where Arrest shall be lawful or justifiable by force of a Warrant or not and where its good without shewing the VVarrant A Warrant made to three conjunctions divisim this being a Warrant for execution of justice may be sufficiently executed by two 2 Rol. Rep. 137. VVhite and VV. Usher So a Sheriff makes a Warrant to four cuilibet eroum qd ' ipsi caperent Two of the four take him it 's good Yelv. p. 25. King and Hobbs For Warrants of this kind are not to be resembled Diversity between Warrants to Warrants or Authority to make or take Livery A Warrant to two men joyntly to Arrest another either of them may do it Cok. Litt. 181. Vide Crok El. 913. Mesme Case The Sheriff upon a Bill of Middlesex makes his Precept to the Bayliff of VVestminster to arrest J. Ferrers Kt. ubi revera he was not Knight but Baronet this was not a good Warrant and Warrant false as to Misnomer the Deputy Bayliff being killed by Sir John's Servant it was not found murder in the Servant because his Warrant was not good and upon the Tryal he was acquitted Jones p. 346. the King and Ferrers The Sheriffs Bayliffs cannot execute a Writ directed to the Sheriff without the Sheriffs Warrant and if he do he is liable to an Action If the Writ comes out of the Kings Bench then the Warrant must be Ita qd ' habeam Corpus ejus coram Dom ' Rege c. If out of the Common Pleas then it must be Ita qd ' habeam Corpus ejus coram Justiciariis Dom ' Regis c. VVhere the VVarrant ought to be shewed or not

on Latitat and in B. C. on Original Bail in the Kings-Bench is because the Cause of Action does not appear upon the Latitat by which the party is Arrested but it is made appear by the Declaration but in the Common Pleas where they proceed upon Original the cause of Action does appear Now one that is in Execution in Custody of One in Execution in Custody of the Marshal not compellalable to find Bail if another Action be brought against him Aliter in the Fleet. Who shall take Bail In London the Marshal of the Kings-Bench is not compellable to find Bail if another Action be brought against him but if he be in the Fleet on Execution and an Action be brought against him in the Kings-Bench he must either be Removed and Committed to the Custody of the Marshal or else he must put in Bail to the Action It is the Common Course of London upon Plaint before the Sheriffs and a Precept to the Serjeant to Arrest one the Sureties shall be found and offered to the Sheriffs not the Serjeants So in Inferiour Mayor's Courts Widow and Clark's Case Therefore in False Imprisonment the Defendant pleads the Custom of London That on Entry of a Plaint in London a Serjeant may by Parol or otherwise Arrest the Defendant to answer the Plaintiff and shews That J. S. entred a Plaint in the Compter against the Plaintiff and that he was a Serjeant and Arrested him and carryed him to the Compter till he found sufficient Bail The Defendant confesseth the Custom the Entry of the Pleint and Arrest and that he offered Security to the Sheriff and of this he gave Notice to the Defendant and yet he carried him to the Compter The Defendant demurrs Per Cur ' The Serjeant upon tender of Bail to the Sheriff is not bound to set the party at Large unless the Sheriff send a Warrant testifying this to him Joue's Rep. 226. Percivall and Salmon If a Capias for the Good Behaviour be directed Capias for the Good Behaviour to the Sheriff by the Justices of Assize and upon this the Sheriff makes a Warrant to J. S. to take him who took him accordingly and the party tenders J. S. sufficent Bail for his Appearance and J. S. refuseth it and keeps him in Custody This makes him not a Trespasser ab initio for 't is not his Office to take Bail but the Sheriffs 2 Roll. Abridg. 562. Adam's Case Neither the Sheriff nor any Justice of the Bail for one taken by Cap ' Excom ' Peace cannot Bail one taken by a Writ of Cap ' Excommunicat ' But he is Bailable by the Kings-Bench 1 Bulstr 122. Hall and King Capias must be taken out and sealed and delivered to the Sheriff against the Bail before he can be taken by a Testatum in another Testatum County and because in Robinson's Case it was never deliverd to the Sheriff but all Retorned in one Term the Execution was set aside 2 Keb. 424. Robinson's Case The Scire facias against the Bail usually is left Scire fac ' against the Bail Retorn four days with the Sheriff before the Retorn of it but if it be not it is well enough 2 Keb. 229. Barle and Potter Judgment in a Scire facias against Manucaptors Retorn of Scire fac ' against the Manucaptors the Bail is liable by the Judgment and if they be Freeholders in the same County where the Recognizance is made then they must have notice and time because the Scire facias may be Retorned But if they be Strangers the Sheriff is not bound to warn them or give notice Notice but Retorn Nihil on both together for this is but of favour to the Bail who at their peril ought to bring in the Principal In Action brought against the Baron and Where the Husband must put in Special Bail for his Wife or not Feme and the Husband is only Arrested yet the Husband must put in Bail for his Wife if the Name of the Wife be in the Writ else he is not bound to put in Bail for her for it is the Writ that warrants the Bail Pract. Reg. 43. Yet in 1 Keb. 241. the Husband is not bound to put in Special Bail for his Wife if she be not Arrested but he must appear for himself and his Wife and must find Special Bail for himself 1 Keb. 241. Nevill and Cage Note Where Bail is put in De bene esse as in a Judges Chamber the Plaintiff cannot Sue the Sheriffs Bond till it be refused or set aside but he ought to except against it in the Judges Chamber 2 Keb. 478. But I think he may except against it after within a certain time According to an Old Rule it was within 20 days Of Bail Bonds The Explication of the Statute of 23 H. 6. This Statute is frequently pleaded in our Books and many Cases about the Nature of this Statute and the Retorns and Pleadings thereupon we meet with which if methodically digested would be the better and more clearly explained Let us see how the Law was at Common Law and before the making of this Statute At Common Law if the Sheriff had taken any man by the Kings Writ he must not be Breve de homine Repleg ' delivered but by Breve de homine replegiando and he was not compellable to take Bail of any 2 Sand. 60. But this Statute compels him to take Bail and the design of the Statute is to provide against the Extortion of Sheriffs who would not deliver them without great sums Cro. El. 808. Sir George Clifton Now the Statute prescribes the Form and that Design of this Stat ' the Sheriff under colour of his Office should not oppress the party to make him any other Obligation for the Statute makes the Obligation void for not pursuing the Form but not in the Matter thereof This Statute was made for the Prisoners benefit for the mischief before was That the Sheriff not being compellable to bail him would extort Money to bail him Mod. Rep. 228. Now this Statute hath Three Branches as it is in Dive and Manningham's Case Plowden 1. Commandment and Authority to the Sheriff to let to Bail ' such persons as are Mainpernable So it extends to Coroners Stewards of Franchises Bayliffs Keepers of Prisons c. 2. A Restraining branch That they shall not let to Bail such persons as be in their Ward by Condemnation Execution Capias Utlagat ' or Excommunication Surety of the Peace and such as shall be Committed by special Commandment of the Justices nor Vagabonds 3. The third is to make Obligations void taken in any other form than the Statute limits That no Sheriff nor any of his Officers and Ministers aforesaid shall take or cause to be taken or make any Obligation for any Cause aforesaid or by colour of their Office but only to themselves of any person nor by any person which shall be in

Law that the Plaintiff had no Cause of Action the Court gave Judgment against him for the Obligation is void by the Letter of the Statute for it makes void Obligations taken in other manner which extends to avoid Obligations for Bailing those which are contained in the second Branch as those in Execution c Plowd 66 67. Dive and Manningham But as for the Conclusion of the Plea the Condition was That the Defendant should appear in B. R. to Answer in a Plea of Trespass and satisfie the Damages The Defendant pleads the Statute of 23 H. 6. that the Bond was made for his Enlargment and Issint non est factum The Plaintiff demurrs Specially upon the Conclusion of the Plea which ought to be Judgment Si Actio and agreed the Plea to be ill Allen p. 85. Leech Davies The Defendant and L. were joyntly bound Judgment confessed on Escape to Sir J. Lenthall for the true Imprisonment of W. and there was a Warrant of Attorney to Confess Judgment on the Escape of W. Glyn moved to set aside the Judgment being a way for Ease only and Judgment entred without Trial of the Escape But per Cur ' It is to be entred on Action brought which is brought and the parties are at Issue But Sir J. Lenthall assigned his Security to the Creditor which per Cur ' is well enough and there appearing no Fraud they refused to set aside the Judgment 1 Keb. 815. Sir John Lenthall versus Lord Landois The Marshal takes Bond of one in Execution The Rules of the Kings-Bench to be a True Prisoner who Escapes Action is brought against him and well for the Bond is good The Marshalsea was Ruled to be enlarged and this shall be called Within the Rules and if the Marshall take a Bond to tarry there it is good Latch 143. Sir G. Reynell versus Elworthy Poph. 165. fine Sir G. Reynel's Case But a Bond to the Marshal c. to save harmless from Escapes is void and within the Statute because it is not a Bond that he shall continue a True Prisoner Vide the Condition Record and Pleadings 1 Sand. 160 161 162. Lenthall and Cooke 2 Keb. 422. Id. Casus The Marshal ought not to take Bond for Bond for Chamber-Rent void Chamber-Rent this is to come in in Allowance Fees The Warden nor other Gaoler cannot impose what Rents they will on Chambers 3 Keb. 102. Bond and Mosedale 3 Keb. 133 603. Duckenfield's Case A Bond or Covenant for Fees is void but a Bond for Fees Bond for True Imprisonment is not void primâ facie without Circumstances c. 3 Keb. 133. Mosedale and Middleton A Bond for Chamber-Rent is void by Common Law because the party is restrained contra voluntatem and shall be Imprisoned till payment Also the Statute extends to the Marshal only for such Bonds as they may take virtute Officii Latch 10. Epsom Case Upon a Statute acknowledged and Extent sued the Sheriff takes Bond of 20 l. for payment of 10 l. his Fee and this was before the Liberate It s a void Bond 1. Because he takes the Bond before the Liberate 2. He took his Wages before he did his work 3 Keb. 678. Ellis and Nelson Vide infra tit Fees Note A Promise is within the Statute as well Promise as a Bond. But it is where the Bond or Promise is made by the Prisoner himself or some other for him And therefore in an Action on the Case the Defendant promised the Plaintiff That if B. a Special Bayliff at his Nomination arrested A. at his Suit on Cap ' ad satisfaciend ' and suffered him to Escape he would not sue the Plaintiff this is not within this Statute 1 Leon. 132. Palmer and Smalbrook But Hobart in Norton Sim's Case saith Covenant is not within this Statute that is because it was not a Bond for performance made in the behalf of a Prisoner as Beaufage's Case is Hob. p. 13. As to Assumpsits and Considerations about delivering Prisoners in safe Custody saving harmless from Escapes permitting to go at large Vid. infra Sub tit Escape in fine By the Statute of 13 Car. 2. c. 2. persons arrested Where the Sherist is not to take 60 or 40 l. Bail by Process out of the Kings-Bench or Common Pleas not expressing the Cause of Action in the Writ Bill or Process and which are bailable by the Statute of 23 H. 6. c. 10. shall give Bail Bond not exceeding the Sum of 40 l. and upon Appearance at the Retorn he shall discharge such Bail Bonds And if the Plaintiff do not Declare before the End of the next Term after Appearance then he shall be Nonsuit and Judgment and Costs shall be against him But this Statute extends not to Arrests upon Capias Utlagat ' Attachment or Rescous Contempt or Priviledge nor to popular Action or Action on any Penal Law except for Tythes Indictment or Information Now if the Sheriff in such Personal Actions do take a Bond of 150 l. where it ought to be but 40 l. the party shall have an Action upon the Statute against the Sheriff but the Bond is not void This was the Case of a Coroner 2 Keb. 387 311. Foster and Closon And therefore Villars and Hasting's Case where it saith The Statute doth not restrain him from any Sum is good Law but with this Caution That Action lies against him if he exceed 40 l. de placito debiti generally upon this late Statute Cro. Jac. 286. In what other Cases the Sheriff may Bail or not The Sheriff cannot bail one Committed for Felony except it be by the Kings special Writ directed to him for that purpose A man Indicted for Trespass or any the like Offence before Justices of the Peace and thereupon Committed to Prison may upon the Kings Writ be Bailed by the Sheriff to appear at Sessions Upon a Supersedeas the Sheriff may bail a man Sued or Indicted c. whereupon a Capias or Exigent shall be awarded against him and the party thereupon is Imprisoned CHAP. VIII Of Retorn of Writs and when they may be Retorned General Rules and Maxims of Retorns What Writs must be Retorned and what need not What shall be a good Retorn of Writs or how Retorns shall be made in respect of the Person that makes the Retorn as Sheriffs Bayliffs of Franchises c. In respect of the Forms and where insufficient Retorns are aided Where Retorns shall be void for the Uncertainty or Repugnancy What shall be a sufficient excuse for the Sheriffs Non-retorn of a Writ and what not What Acts Process or Appearance shall be good before the Retorn The Penalty on the Sheriff by the Court for Non-retorn A Retorn is but a Certificate made by the Sheriff or Bayliff to the Court from whence the Writ issued of that which they have done touching the Execution of the same Writs There is a difference between the Teste and Retorn of Writs A Retorn

Rule to bring in the Body of B. W. the next day Sub Poena 20 l. and so are all Presidents of Felony and Treason Note If it appear that the Committment is good and there is good Cause the Court remands the Prisoner if it is not good they Discharge him if it be doubtful they Bail him The Sheriff may suggest that the Party will Who to pay the Charges of the Retorn not pay his Charges of Retorn of Habeas Corpus ad faciend ' recipiend ' which is at the Suit of the Party But contra in Habeas Corpus ad faciend ' subjiciend ' which is at the Suit of the King he must Retorn at his Peril 1 Keb. 272 280. the King versus Armiger And on Habeas Corpus to remove any Prisoner the Sheriff must Retorn the Writ and the Court will allow his Charges here So in the Case of the Steward of Upon Habeas Corpus the Officer ought to bring the Prisoner to the Court and the Court shall tax Charges and compel payment if the Officer and Prisoner or Plaintiff cannot agree or payment be not made according to the Agreement Sir Tho. Jones p. 178. Error on a Scire fac ' on the Sheriffs Retorn being an Original Suit lies not in the Exchequer Chamber but Error on Scire fac ' Quare Executionem non hath been constantly allowed to lie there 2 Keb. 833. Jones and Anderson The Form of the Retorn Languidus Detent ' in Prisona attamen Corpus ejus c. The Causes of the Caption and Detention Retorned vide Dalton cap. 63. that he was taken in Execution by the late Sheriff c. that he was Imprisoned by a Justice of Peace his Warrant Retorn of a Certiorari per Viscount The Sheriffs of London appeared in Court in their proper person upon a Rule of Court to shew Cause why they did not grant out Execution upon a Judgment given in their Court or else to make a sufficient Retorn of a Certiorari directed to them because they had made three insufficient Retorns Stiles p. 444. A Certiorari was directed to the Sheriff to certifie whether the Conisor in a Recognizance had an Heir Jones p. 319. CHAP. XII How many sorts of Juries Of Retorns and by whom Retorned what manner of persons shall not be Retorned on Juries and how they shall be Discharged Where when and how persons exempt shall have Action against the Sheriff for Impannelling them Of returning trop petit Issues Of levying the Issues Of other Erroneous proceedings and misdemeanors of Sheriffs about Jurors What Estate every Juror must have by the late Statute of 4 5 W. M. Of Challenges The several sorts and causes of Challeng and what are good or not and when to be taken Of Enquiry Of Tryals betwixt Party and Party Jurors are of two Sorts Juries to Enquire are grand Juries at Assizes or the Quarter Sessions So Juries Retorned before Justices of Peace to enquire of Riots Forcible Entries and Juries Retorned before Commissioners of Sewers or upon the Statute of Bankrupts Coroners c. and Inquisitions taken before the Sheriff and all these the Sheriff is to Summon except Bankrupts Qu. Now upon every Tryal in personal Actions the Sheriff must Retorn two Hundredors at least Cok. Litt. 1 25 158. As for the number of Jurors Retorned vid. Dalton 86. Retorn of Jurors If it be conceived an indifferent Jury will Jury Retorned by the Secondary not ●e Retorned in the Country the Court on motion will order the Sheriff to attend the Secondary of the Office with the Book of his Freeholders to have an indifferent one Retorned Pract. Reg. 163. So it was done in Pooles and Markham Case Stiles 477. because the Plaintiff in a former Tryal between the Parties had Feasted four of the Jury and had Feasted some of the Jury that were Retorned upon that Tryal and the like was done in Coxes Case 15 16 Car. 2. B. R. because Cox who was Intitled to the Reversion had forbid Rent to be paid by the Tenants and took on him the defence of the Ejectment brought against the Tenants was of Kindred to the Sheriff and Undersheriff and Trustee for them But in another Cause 17 Car. 2 B. R. The Court on Certificate of a Judge that Verdict was given contrary to Evidence would not allow that the Sheriff should bring in the Book of Freeholders to the Secondary for the ill Example but ordered the Sheriff should Retorn a good Jury in the new Tryal Upon motion that the Cause to be Tryed at the Bar is of great consequence the Court will make a Rule for the Sheriff to Retorn 48 Jurors upon the Jury Pract. Reg. 163. When a Tryal is to be for a thing which concerns Who to Retorn the Jury the Undersheriff there the High Sheriff shall Retorn the Jury aliter if the Tryal concerns the High Sheriff the Undersheriff shall not Retorn the Jury but the Coroners Pract. Reg. 164. What manner of persons shall not be Impanelled on 8 Rep. 5. 3. 6 Rep. 108. 9 Rep. 49. Juries and how they shall be Discharged and where they shall have Actions against the Sheriff for Impannelling of them The Sheriff ought not to Retorn Priviledge Exemption to be exempt from Juries but he ought to Summon and shall not be liable to an Action Siderfin p. 243. The King and Percival the Case was Venire fac ' was awarded to the Sheriff of the City and County of Canterbury to Retorn a Jury here at the Bar and upon the Distringas the Sheriff Retorns this to be an Antient City and County and that the King had granted to them an Exemption not to serve in any Jury out of their City except in Cases of High Treason and by express words that they should not serve coram ipso Rege Per Cur ' First The Retorn is ill Because if it were in the power of the Sheriff to Retorn Priviledge he cannot do this upon the Distringas or Habeas Corpus as he did here because by the Retorning of the Venire viz. That there are 24 prob ' Legales homines he had concluded himself there being also Pledges upon every such Retorn Secondly That the Sheriff may not Retorn so Priviledge of Exemption when to be clai●ed at any time but ought to Retorn them Summoned and the Parties ought to come here and then every person who had cause of Priviledge ought to calim here in person and not the Sheriff for them More 883 30. Wallers Case Siderfin 293. The King and Percival The Court awarded an alias Distringas in regard the Sheriff cannot vary from the first Venire Retorned but must have the same Men Keb. 867. mesme Case And no Action lies against the Sheriff upon their Delivery of the Writ of Exemption Hardress Rep. 389. mesme Case But in the Town of Darby and Foxleys Case Action on the Case against the Sheriff for

vivariis or which shall be found in Arrears in Account before they be attainted Vide 1 Ed. 3. c. 7. My Lord Coke in his 3 Inst 35. extreamly inveighs against Racks It is true the punishment is amazing but as the sins of every Age grow more impudent so their penalties ought to be more severe And if we will translate our Neighbouring Nations Villanies we ought to imitate their punishments especially for Offences publick and which go to the ruin of a Nation I will put a common Instance At this present our current Trade is almost spoiled by our Noncurrent Money and he that shall break open a Bakers Window to take a Sixpeny Loaf to supply meer Nature shall be as severely treated as ' he that Clips and Counterfeits the Coyn I mean a little dry Hanging serves for both for as to the Sledge its insignificant And we shall conclude It will never be otherwise unless the Breaking on the Wheel and dying by piece-meal sometimes used in other Countries may terrifie Spectators and those to whom it is Reported ut poena ad paucos c. Tho' there is no person that has a greater Veneration for our Common Law than my self yet I conceive I may say the spreading and new Villanies of our Nation are chiefly owing to our undistinguishing punishments He that takes but Half a Crown on the Pad shall be hanged and deservedly and he that Blasphemes his God Murders his Father and commits a Rape upon his Mother shall e'en make his Exit with a few wry wet Looks and a little Swing or two Which punishment I must needs observe is almost grown into Contempt by the major part of Criminals I need but mention the notorious Case of Felton and the late Story of the barbarous Midwife By our Law it is plain A Prisoner in Execution shall not be in Fetters but for Criminal Causes But to return to my purpose A Prisoner while he is such is under protection of the Law and accordingly is to be used And therefore where a Prisoner by duress of the Gaoler comes to an Untimely End it is Murder in the Gaoler 3 Inst 52 91. And the Law implies Malice in him in respect of the Cruelty And therefore if a man dye in Prison the Coroner ought to sit upon him to the end it may be enquired if he came to his death by the duress of the Gaoler or otherwise 3 Inst 91. 52. If the Sheriff or other Officer where he ought to Hang the party attainted according to his Judgment and his Charge will against the Law of his own wrong Burn or Behead him c. the Law in this case implies Malice in him By the Statute of 14 Ed. 3. c. 10. If a Keeper or Under-Keeper of Prisons by too great duress of Imprisonment or by Pain make a Prisoner become an Appellor viz. an Approver against his Will its Felony Every Imprisonment is in Law duritia duress a little addition to it by the Gaoler is too great duress in this case There is a remarkable Case in 3 Bulstrode The Court was moved by Sir G. Reynell against one of his Prisoners who had much misbehaved himself offered to Escape and had endangered the killing of one of his Servants and that he had spent Ten pounds after him and he would have had the Court to have fined him But per Cur ' We will not do it you must keep him in arcta custodia in Irons and you may Indict him for these Misdemeanors and by that way you may have him Fined 3 Bulstr 245. Sir G. Reynell's Case The payment of a Debt by a Prisoner to a Payment of the Debt to ● Gaoler Gaoler is not good and therefore in Debt the Defendant pleads That he was a year in Execution and the Plaintiff could not be found whereupon he paid the Money to the Gaoler The Plaintiff replies That he was to be found at D. absque hoc that he absented eo animo to keep the Defendant in Prison And the Defendant to this Demurs because the Marshal may dye and no Recovery can be by the Defendant against the Marshal if he do not pay it over But the Court gave Judgment for the Plaintiff it being not reasonable to pay Money to the Gaoler for the Plaintiff whether he will or not And also they thought it too hard for the Plaintiff to prove payment or to prove Assets in the hands of the Marshall's Executors 3 Keb. 748. Taylor and Baker Sir Tho. Jones's Rep. mesme Case Where the Imprisonment is unlawful the Prisoner is not to pay for his Diet 1 Roll. Rep. 329. Oliver's Case Note If a Prisoner is in Execution and the Gaoler or Sheriff dye he is in abeyance and custody of the Law 3 Rep. Westby's Case A Gaoler is not bound to deliver his Prisoner who is Discharged by the Court until he pays his due Fees A Prisoner acquitted of Felony the Gaoler may take Twenty pence which is called a Bar Fee Every Sheriff Bayliff of Franchise and every other person having Authority of keeping Gaols or of Prisoners for Felony shall certifie the Names of every such Prisoner in their keeping at the next General Gaol-delivery in every County or Franchise where such Gaol is there to be Kalendred before the Justices of the Delivery of the same Gaol whereby they may as well for the King as the party proceed to make delivery of such Prisoners according to the Law on pain of Five pounds 3 H. 7. 3. If the Gaoler shall suffer an Escape the High Sheriff or Gaoler are chargeable therefore CHAP. XVI When one may be said to be in Execution or not And when without Prayer or not In what Cases the Sheriff may break open an House to do Execution or not To what Sheriff and of what place and County shall Execution be Awarded Of a Cap. ad satisfaciend ' for what and against whom it lies and the Sheriffs Demeanor therein and Retorns thereupon Of Execution When one may be said to be in Execution or not When one shall be in Execution without Prayer of the Plaintiff or not IF a Man recover Damages in Action on the Case against J. S. in the Kings Bench the said J. S. being in Custod ' Mareschal ' yet he shall not be in Execution on this Judgment altho' it be within the year before Prayer of the Plaintiff for the Marshal may not take notice of every Where a Man Comittitur Judgment against every Prisoner but upon Prayer of the Plaintiff a Comittitur shall be entered upon the Roll and then he is in Execucution but if the Defendant being taken in Execution be brought on by Habeas Corpus and then an Entry of the Com●●●tur is made in the Book of the Office its Go●● Hill 12 Jac. B. R. Sir Henry Bellows and Hanford 2 Rolls Rep. 112. If a Man recover in B. C. Debt and Damages against J. S. and had Judgment altho' that J. S. be

He rescoused To say he rescued him out of the Custody of the Bayliff is not good him out of the Custody of his Bayliff but out of the Custody of the Sheriff But it is good if it were by the Bayliff of a Liberty Retorn of a Rescous was not quasht for saying in custodia for è custodia but because he saith cepit arrestavit and not in custodia habuit it was quasht for an Arrest may be only by word 2 Keb. 177. The King against Claypoole and p. 227. The King against Sympson Exception was to the retorn of a Rescous because it was è custodia ballivi mei Sed non allocatur for there is veritas legis veritas facti and if either be alledged its sufficient therefore it s as good as if it had been è custodia mea But Keeling held it ill because a Retorn must answer the Law and the difference has alwas been between a Sheriffs Bayliff and a Bayliff of a Franchise And according to the Opinion of Keeling is Dyer 7 El. 241. Dyer 241. 39 H. 6. 42. 2 Roll. Rep. 263 354. If the Sheriff retorn in Banco a Rescous made to his Bayliff Errant by these words viz. Virtute istius brevis c. mandavi ballivo meo Itineranti c. qui mihi sic respondit quod arrestavit c. shewing the year day and place and that a Rescous was made c. This Retorn is not good because this Arrest is the proper Arrest of the Sheriff and no credit is to be given to the Bayliff Errant Mich. 8 Jac. in Scaccario Kent and Heltway's Case But per Cur. such a Retorn in Banco Regis is good enough because the Presidents of the the Court are accordingly and such Retorn by a Bayliff of a Franchise in B. R. is good Tho' its faid 2 Roll. Rep. 78. the Sheriff ought to retorn Rescous made to him and not to his Bayliff yet in truth the Force is made to his Bayliff but it is according to the different course of the Courts Two Exceptions were taken to the Retorn of a Rescous 1. Feci Warrant ' but saith not sub sigillo Officii Non allocatur because he saith feci Warrant ' directè and it s not a Warrant unless it be sub sigillo 2. It was not retorned That it was extra custod ' of the Sheriff but of the Bayliffs Sed non allocatur for the Custody of the Bayliffs Virtute warranti of the Sheriff is the Custody of the Sheriff Sir Tho. Jones Rep. 195. Penfold's Case A Rescous was retorned in this manner by the Sheriff viz. in the Recital of the Arrest he said Mandavi ballivo c. qui virtute praedicti Warranti arrestavit c. and after shews the Rescous Exception was He Commands his Bayliffs to In the Retorn he makes no mention of his Warrant Arrest and saith That by virue of the said Warrant they did Arrest c. and makes no mention of any Warrant but of his Command to them Had this been to a Bayliff of a Liberty it had been good but not to those which are Bayliffs Itinerants But per Cur ' he cannot Command a Bayliff of a Liberty but by his Warrant The Clerk of the Crown said The Common Form is Feci quoddam Warrantum but to a Bayliff of a Liberty it is Mandavi A General Warrant to a Bayliff of a Liberty viz. for all Arrests is good but not to a Bayliff Itinerant by Haughton But by Sir James Ley Chief Justice Tho' the Common Form be Feci quoddam Warrantum yet this tantamounts For the Mandate of the Sheriff to the Bayliff is the Bayliffs Warrant However a Rescouser as to this cannot take advantage but shall be fined to the King 2 Roll. Rep. 263. The Sheriff retorns a Rescous and recites The time and place where the Warrant was made not shewed in the Retorn where a Latitat was to him directed c. he made his Warrant to the Bayliff who arrested W. and that G. made the Rescous It was held to be good tho' he doth not shew the time and place of the Warrant 2 Roll. Rep. 255. Webb and Withers A Rescous was Retorned in this Form by the Sheriff CEpi corpus praedict A. idem A. fuit in custodia mea virtute brevis praedict quousque B. C. D. Vi armis tali die anno in E. F. ballivos meos insultum fecere vulneravere male tractavere A. de custodia mea adtunc ibidem rescussere And two Exceptions were made 1. He doth not shew any Warrant made to Mention no Warrant the Bayliff Per Cur ' The Prisoner is alledged to be in custodia of the Sheriff and the Rescous to be from him and therefore need not speak of the Warrant and this that is spoken of the Bayliff is Surplusage 2. The Rescous is not well retorned because Rescous retorned without Vi armis the Battery is alledged to be Vi armis Per Cur ' This is Surplusage and the Rescous is not retorned to be Vi armis Latch p. 184. Quaere If a Rescous may be retorned without Vi armis But this Case is more truly reported by Rolls Retorn quasht If a Sheriff retorn That he by force of a Capias took the Body of J. S. ipsum habuit in Custodia quousque J. D. J. N. Vi armis such a day insultum fecer ' in W. S. W. N. his Bayliffs praedict J. S. adtunc ibidem è custodia sua rescusser ' praedict J. S. seipsum rescussit This is not a good Retorn because it doth not shew that the Bayliffs had any Authority to Intermeddle And to lay a Rescous without Vi armis is not good and the Vi armis goes to the first Clause only Pasch 3 Car. 1. Wilcox's Case 2 Roll. Abr. 457. The retorn of a Rescous was quasht for these Exceptions 1. It is said Feci Warrantum meum Thomae Taylor and does not say Tho. Taylor was his Bayliff 2. He doth not say for what Cause he made his Warrant And so it appears not whether it was lawful or not Stiles Rep. 159. In a Cap. Utlagat before Judgment the Sheriff retorned That J. S. and J. N. rescoused the party It s good without addition For no Statute nor Book will compel the Sheriff to give Additions in this Case And the Rescousers which were present were Committed to the Fleet Winch. Rep. p. 10. If the Sheriff retorn That the party himself simulcum J. S. J. N. made the Rescous It was said it was not good because there is not any Averment that J. S. and J. N. rescued him And if it Insensible Retorn had been that J. S. simulcum N. rescusserunt A. it is not good against J. S. because it is rescusserunt which is Insensible Mich. 14 Car. 1. B. R. Retorn of a Rescous was excepted to

Althams's Case Estrepment The VVrit of Estrepment is a Prohibition to do VVast and lies in two Points Where lies 1. VVhen a Man having an Action depending as a Formedon VVrit of Right c. sues to inhibit the Tenant for making VVast during the the Suit and this is either Original and may be sued out of Chancery or Judicial granted out of the Court where the Plea dependeth 2 Inst 328 329. 2. VVhen the Demand is to recover Seisin of the Land in Question and before Execution sued by Habere fac ' Possessionem for fear VVast be made before her Possession he Sues this VVrit And a Man can recover Damages for no more than is contained in his Count. There is likewise when fear is that Wast will be done to prevent it a Prohibition directed to the Sheriff not to permit Wast to be done And the Form vid. 2 Inst 299. The Sheriff may resist the committing of Wast and may Imprison if he cannot otherwise hinder it 3 Bulst 199. And he may take the Posse Comitatus to hinder it Posse comitatus In Wast Estrepment was awarded and upon Affidavit that the Writ of Estrepment was delivered to the Sheriff and that he gave notice to the Party and yet he continues to make Wast Attachment was awarded 1 Brownl 168. Attachment If the Tenants of the Land notwithstanding notice of a Writ of Estrepment directed to the Sheriff commit Wast this is no Contempt and Contempt the Court will not commit them because it was not immediately to them as it might have been Hob. 85. Earl of Cumberland's Case Note If the Sheriff be Plaintiff in the Action of Wast the Writ of Estrepment shall Issue to the Coroners But this Writ of Estrepment is rarely used and in such cases Injunctions out of Chancery are frequently granted It seems Estrepment lies not in a Writ of Error of a Judgment in Partition Siderfin 367. The Sheriffs Office in the Writ de Excommunicato Capiendo The Sheriff needs not bring the Body into the Kings Bench at the day of the Retorn but shall only Retorn the Writ thither with Declaration briefly in what manner he hath served and executed the same 5 El. c. 23. If the Sheriff shall Retorn non est Inventus then a Capias shall be awarded with Proclmation therein commanding the Sheriff in the County Court or at the Assizes or Quarter Sessions to make open Proclamation ten days before the Retorn at least that the Party yeild his Body to Prison in six days And after the six days the Sheriff c. shall make Retorn what he has done thereupon c. the Offender to forfeit 1 ol for such default and so a Capias shall go infinitè with like Proclamation And a forfeiture of 20 l. for every other default to be Estreated presently Sat. 5 El. c. 23. If the Offender yield his Body the Sheriff shall presently commit him to Prison without Bail If the Sheriff make an untrue Retorn that the Party has not yielded his Body on any Proclamation made where indeed he has yielded c. he shall forfeit to the party grieved 40 l. The Writ of Excommunicat ' Capiendo must be taken out of Chancery and recorded in the Kings Bench before it be delivered to the Sheriff 1 Keb. 613. 5 Eliz. c. 23. Lewes versus Stephen son Neither a V● Laica removenda nor Excommunicat ' Capiendo were retornable before the Statatute of 5 El. c. 23. 3 Bulst 92. He that is certified into the Chancery by the Bishop to be Excommunicated and after is taken by Force of the Kings Writ of Excommunicat ' Capiendo is not Bailable by the Sheriff or Gaoler by the Kings Writ But if the Party offered sufficient caution de parendo mandatis Ecclesiae ' in forma Juris then should the Party have the Kings Writ to the Bishop to accept his caution and to cause him to be delivered And if the Bishop will not send to the Sheriff to deliver him then he shall have a Writ out of Chancery to the Sheriff to deliver him Or if he be Excommunicated for a Temperal cause or for a matter whereof the Ecclesiastical Court hath no conusance he shall be delivered by the Kings Writ without any satisfaction 2 Inst 188 189. Retorn of Sheriff as to Clarks VIrtute istius brevis mihi direct ' Justic ' infra script certifico qd ' infra nominat ' T. H. Clericus est beneficiat ' in Episcopatu London nullum habens Laicum feodum in balliva mea ubi potest su●mon nec est inventus inead A. B. Armig ' Vic' The Sheriff Retorneth That the Parson ante adventum brevis or post receptionem brevis or before the Retorn of his Writ had resigned his Benefice Et qd ' non habet nec habuit bona neque catalla infra c. It s a good Retorn In Trespass or Debt against a Clark Nihil habet is a good Retorn In Action brought against one wherein a Capias lies Ex gr in account the Sheriff Retorns qd est Clericus Beneficiat nullum habens Laicum feodum in which he may be summoned In this Case the Plaintiff cannot have a Capias to take the Body of the person but he shall have a Writ to the Bishop to cause the person to come and appear But if he had retorned qd ' Clericus est nullum habens Laicum feodum then is a Capias to be granted to the Sheriff because it appeared not by the Retorn that he had any Benefice so as he might be warned by the Bishop his Diocesan and no Man can be exempt from Justice But in the Case of the King where he is party the Sheriff cannot Retorn Clericus Beneficiat ' nullum habens Laicum feodum as on Distress for Issues lost on a Juror 2 Inst 4 627. If a Scire fac ' be brought upon a Recognizance or upon a Judgment in a VVrit of Annuity and the Sheriff Retorn that the Defendant is Clericus Beneficiat ' nullum habens Laicum feodum c. the Plaintiff shall have a VVrit to the Bishop to warn the Defendant and upon warning or two Nihils retorned and default made or if he appeareth and sheweth no matter wherefore Execution should not be granted then a Writ shall be awarded to the Bishop to levy Execution de bonis Ecclesiasticis Retorn of a Writ of Entry The Count was of a third part of a Mesuage and one Stable Petit cape was awarded to the Sheriff and he makes his VVarrant to a Bayliff of a Liberty he Retorns quod cepit in manus Domini Regis the said Mesuage and saith nothing of the Stable And for this cause Judgment was reversed Jones Rep. p. 357. Taite and Heynes In a VVrit of Entry sur Dissesin it was adjudged Error because the Sheriff retorned not the Names of the Summoners or Veyors Cro. Eliz. 557. Merris's Case Retorn of a Writ of Assize The Defendant pleaded

shew the time and place of the Arrest was That the Defendant should not let at Large any Prisoner arrested without the Sheriffs Warrant The Plaintiff shews the Defendant had let such a Prisoner at Large at Westminster c. it is good without shewing the time and place of the Arrest For the Escape is the Material part of the Covenant and the manner of the Arrest is not in Question and whether he were legally taken or imprisoned was not material when he was suffered to go at Large Siderfin p. 30. Jenkin's Case The Condition of the Bond was Whereas For a Bayliff of an Hundred to make true Retorn of all his Writs Pleading S. was Sheriff of Surrey and made T. Bayliff of the Hundred of B. Now if he should execute his Office c. and make true Retorn of all Writs directed to him then c. Defendant pleads on Oyer particularly performance to all Plaintiff Replies Process was directed to him to levy Issues on J. S. and that he made his Warrant to T. to Execute the same which Warrant he did not Retorn On Demurrer Judgment was against the Plaintiff because he did not shew that the Issues were to be Levied in the Hundred of B. For tho' the words are general to make Retorn of all Warrants directed to him yet it was to be understood of such only as were to be Executed in his own Hundred of which he was Bayliff Allen p. 10. Slaughter and Day 2 Sand. 414 415. mesme Case cited there Debt on Bond by Under-sheriff to defray the Expence of the High-sheriff and Performance To pay the Expence of the High-sheriff pleaded Plaintiff Replies J. S. recovered in Charges in carrying the Prisoner from Chelmsford to London not shewing it was done by virtue of Habeas corpus Defendant Rejoyns This was by private Agreement Plaintiff Demurs because it was not Concluded to the Country Per Cur ' There must be a Compulsion shewed by Habeas corpus to the Sheriff of Essex without which he cannot deliver him over to another Sheriff and then there is an Allowance upon the Account in the Exchequer in case of Transporting being Signed by the Judges And the Court gave leave to Discontinue 3 Keb. 448 Lewen and Allcock As to the Form of the Indentures and Covenants between the High-sheriff and Under-sheriff vide Dalton Greenwood of Courts and several other President Books CHAP. XXXIII Of Sheriffs Accompts AS for the Periods of Time wherein the manner of the Sheriffs Accompting to the King have been altered by Acts of Parliament and Practice you may peruse a Learned Treatise of the late Lord Chief Justice Hales touching Sheriffs Accompts You find there how the King's Farms were anciently Answered by the Sheriffs and the manner of the Collecting of the Kings Revenues of the County Now that which was Firmi Comitatus were the Vicountiel Rents and they came under various denominations viz. Blanch-Rents Albo firmae Praestatio pro pulchrè placitando Visus Frankpledg ' Redditus ad Turnum Certum Letae and these were in time contracted to a sort of Annual Revenues And the uncertain Annual Revenue was called Proficuum Comitatus which in ancient Times was considerable when most Law-Suits were Transacted in Counties and in Hundred Courts Fines Issues and Amerciaments in those Courts and in those elder Times they were considerable The Farm of the Bailywick of one County was let at 100 l. per Annum temp H. 3. but by Stat. 27. H. 6. c. 10. the Sheriff is restrained from Letting his Bailywick to Farm But these were formerly and now are answered at two Terms in the year Michaelmass and Easter and are called proferae Vicecomitis or Sheriffs proffers But it is as it were a Mock-payment now being so inconsiderable most Causes being tryed in Superiour Courts for upon Account he generally has all his Proffers paid and allowed to him again Vide ●he Statute of 4 H. 5. 2. 34 H. 8. c. 16. Since the Statute of 34 H. 8. c. 16. the Sheriffs might discharge themselves of the Casual Charges or Annual uncertain Charges and most ordinarily after this Statute did discharge themselves of the entire Firmae de proficuis Comitatus and they ascertained to the Court that there were no such profits beyond the charge in collecting them or that the charge of keeping the County Court the Tourn and Hundred Courts which were the things that made up the Firma de proficuis surmounted the benefit And this Making appear was no other than the Oath of the Sheriff and the Statute gives him that benefit Yet tho' the Sheriffs did use to discharge themselves by their Oaths of the entire Fermae de proficuis Comitatus and of a great part of the Vicountiels yet till Anno Dom. 1650. these entire Farms were constantly written out in Charge to the Sheriff upon the Summons of the Pipe tho' it was but a piece of Formality But now the Firmae de proficuo Comisat ' is wholly put out of the Charge of the summons of the Pipe by an Order made in the Exchequer 1650 which is followed to this day By the Act in Car. 2. Entituled An Act for the preventing the unnecessary delays of Sheriffs in passing their Accounts No Sheriff shall be charged in Account to answer any illeviable Seisure Farm Rent or Debt or other thing which was not writ in Process to him or them to be levied wherein the persons of whom or the Lands or Tenements out of which together with the Cause for which the same shall be so levied shall be plainly and particularly expressed but shall be thereof wholly discharged without Petition Plea or other trouble or charge whatsoever If the Sheriff shall seise the Goods of one that is Outlawed c. and does not accompt for the same the Owner of the Goods may have Action of Trespass upon such Seisure and shall recover the Goods or the value thereof in Damages For the Sheriff must plead that he has accounted for them otherwise he shall be a Trespassor ab initio Note The Sheriff is Accountable in respect of his Office but if he be made sine Computo he has by this the Profits to his own use 1 Roll. Rep. 183. O. N. in the Exchequer makes the Sheriff Debtor to the King and the Debtor himself Debtor to the Sheriff Hob. 206. Speake and Richard's Case CHAP. XXXIV Of Coroners How the Coroners must be chosen and the Credit the Law gives to them and how when they shall be discharged The Demeanours as to Outlawries Coroners Inquest Of Coroners c. THe Office of Coroner ever was and yet is 4 Rep. 41. Heydon 8 Rep. 41. Gr●nly's Case 5 Rep. Specot's Case 4 Rep. 45. Wrote's Case 9 Rep. 31. Strat. Mar. 5 Rep. 108. de Wreck 10 Rep. Denband St. 28 Ed. 3. c. 6. Elect. of ●oroners Vid. 4 Inst 271. Mag. Ch. 17. cap. W. 1. c. ●0 Artic. super Chart. c. 3. Eligible in full County by