HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0933 and id is 1 raw text is: MICH. 15 CAR. II. B. R.
statutes; and that for breach of any of them, they removed him: also all the law is
divided into temporal and ecelesiastick, and here is no pretense of suing in Spiritual
Courts, but only to visitors, which are set up as an intermediate jurisdiction, from
whom lieth no appeal, which is derogatory to the justice of the nation: every founder
may make laws, but the common law shall judge whither [612] they be broken, or
not, else it would set up an uncontrolable jurisdiction against the King, and would
shew a fayler in him. Hyde conceived this of visitors a branch of ecclesiastick laws,
as the Vice-Chancellors Court, which is a peculiar, that partakes much less of either
the common law or ecelesiastick. Adjornatur.
85. MUNDAY against MILLS. Ante.
Slander.
The plaintiff prayed nil capiat per billam for expedition, seeing the opinion of the
Court, that the words were not actionable, being not spoken of his trade of currier,
nor directly refer to it, as Slavers case Hill. 1655, Rot. 2552, C. B. the case of lime-
burners; where the defendant habens colloquium de querente, and of burning lime,
said the plaintiff was a cheating rogue, cheating knave, and a devil.
86. TOOK against LEDGIERD. In Dism. Br. 11.
Tythes.
The Court refused to grant prohibition on suggestion of modus to pay 4s. for every
days plowing of wheat, and 2s. for every days plowing of barly, for the incertainty :
but if the modus had been so much for every days work, with averment that its
certainly known, and how much it contains, it might be. But by Hyde, Wheat could
scarcely be so much worth, time out of mind.
87. KING against CHEDWICKE. Ante. Wednesday, No. 18.
Perjury.
The defendant in indictment at sessions in Middlesex, for taking away goods,
which on the evidence appeared to be in a trunk, and the perjury is assign'd in
swearing that the trunk was taken away from J. S. indicted, innuendo the trunk, with
the goods therein, were J. S. which after verdict is good enough, although the trunk
is not exprest in the indictment, nor that the goods were in the trunk, by Windham
and Keeling; Twisden contrh, conceived this substance, and not to be intended without
special averment, that the goods in the trunk were the goods in the indictment, which
Hyde agreed. Adjornatur.
[613] 88. WINCHCOMB against WINCHCOMB.
Error.
On writ of error brought by the defendant on judgment in ejectment, the plaintiff,
defendant in the writ of error, brings scire facias quare executionem non, to the intent
the defendant, plaintiff in error, might assign errors; to which the plaintiff in error
pleads, that the defendant ought not to have execution, because he is in possession
already by hab. fa. possessionem, which was only a new trick for delay, which, by
Williams, is good enough, the plaintiff being to have execution ; but per Curiam, Its
only a device, the scire facias being only to the intent that the defendant may assign
errors, and there can be no such plea to it in stay or delay of execution.
89. DEAN AND CHAPTER OF PAULS against CAPELL.
Bail. Execution § 5. March, 74, pl.
Williams prayed special bail on 3 Jac. 8, in error on judgment in debt upon bond,
to pay such sum and sums of money as shall be declared due by the dean and chapter
1 142
1 HEBLE, 612.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0933&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)