case William paul and christopher clithero esqr plaintiff sir John shaw bart  defendant in error that January prisage be a ancient duty in specie on good  import and may be grant away by the crown but good Chargeable with this duty  be not thereby exempt from the payment of other duty on the trial of a action  of indebitatus assumpsit bring in Michaelmas term by the plaintiff against the  defendant for the sum of pound the jury find a special verdict state that the  plaintiff be lessee or farmer under sir W wellers patent from the crown of the  duty of prisage wine which be a ancient duty belong to the crown of one tun of  wine for every ship import tun and under and of two tun for every ship import  tun or above Payable brown er p in specie both by englishmen and denizen and  to be take one tun before the other behind the mast that the defendant sir  John shaw be collector of the duty on wine import into the port of London and  that the sum for which the action be bring be deposit in his hand to the  intent that if the prisage wine be Chargeable with the new subsidy of tonnage  a duty lie by a act W c then the same shall remain in his hand for the queen  use but if those wine be not so Chargeable that then the money shall be  restore to the plaintiff that prisage wine have pay several duty videlicet the  impost lie by the act of James c the additional impost by the act of will m c  and the duty of pound per tun Payable by the act of W c and that these several  duty have constant be submit to and pay by the farmer of the prisage the jury  also find the act of tonnage make car c and a particular clause therein which  declare and enact that prisage wine ought not to pay tonnage or custom and  shall not be charge with the payment of any custom subsidy or sum of money  impose upon wine by that act or any thing therein contain brown the single  question upon this verdict be whether prisage wine be Chargeable with the new  or second subsidy lie by the act of W and after argument the court of  exchequer on the that November give judgement Mr baron price dissent that  prisage wine ought not to pay this duty to reverse this judgement a writ of  error be bring in the exchequer chamber and the case have be several time  argue before the judge of the court of queen bench and common plead and they  have take time to consider of it in Hilary term give their opinion that  prisage wine ought to pay the duty therefore the judgement of the court of  exchequer be reverse accord whereupon the plaintiff bring a writ of error in  parliament to reverse this judgement of reversal and on their behalf it be  admit that prisage wine have pay the old impost of James the additional impost  of W m and the pound per tun upon French wine W but then it be insist that the  two former duty be lie upon the farmer of the prisage wine by express word and  that they acquiesce under the latter duty because it be consider rather as a  prohibition than a duty that by the act car which grant a subsidy of tonnage  and poundage it be declare and enact that prisage wine ought not to pay  tonnage or custom and a far subsidy of tonnage be grant by W for two year and  threefourths the prisage wine be all the time hold and allow to be free and  exempt from that subsidy that in the act W on which the present question arise  there be the same clause of relation to car as in W respect the rate the  collection and the allowance and that the additional subsidy be demand for  prisage as well as other wine only under the general word in the late subsidy  act that every tun of wine import by way of merchandise shall pay the subsidy  that prisage wine can not be say to be import by way of merchandise because  they be take after the importation and break of bulk out of the wine import  and be thus in their own nature a custom it be incongruous to have a custom  out of a custom but if that can be it must be by special and not by general  word that James c and all the former statute which give tonnage and poundage  have the same general word and yet at no time for above year be custom ever  demand for prisage wine though they be almost always in farm during that  period about the year be the first demand of custom for prisage wine that can  be find but then the farmer prevail and have the custom take allow he out of  his rend this custom be again demand about the year but the parliament in  declare that prisage wine ought to pay no tonnage or custom and resolve that  the custom which have be take of the farmer shall be deduct out of his rend  that after the restoration brown the parliament be of the same opinion as  appear by the last clause in the act of car and therefore and as the plaintiff  have already upon great consideration obtain a judgement in their favour it be  hope that judgement will be affirm and the reversal thereof reverse on the  other side it be contend that the general word of the act W extend to all wine  videlicet over and above all subsidy of tonnage and poundage over and above  all additional duty and imposition whatsoever due or Payable brown er p for or  upon any wine good or merchandise there shall be raise levy and pay one other  subsidy call tonnage for and upon all wine etcetera but that the proviso in  the act car give the exemption to prisage wine extend only to the duty which  be impose by that act and it will be absurd to construe this exemption to act  not then in be so as to discharge any duty grant by subsequent act that in the  act W there be no proviso for exempt prisage wine more than any other wine and  the clause in that act refer to the act car relate only to the method of  collect this new duty as the tonnage and poundage be to be collect for the  benefit of the crown by that act but can not introduce any exemption without  express word for that purpose which be not to be find in the act that in the  act of James there be a particular clause say that the merchant importer shall  not be charge with the duty arise on prisage wine but that the same shall be  pay by the farmer of the prisage wine and there be the same clause in the act  of car c which plain show the judgement of both those parliament to be that  prisage wine be Chargeable with the duty impose by those act for though they  do not by express word charge the duty yet they take notice that the duty be  charge and settle by who those charge be to be pay shall it be object that  prisage wine do not pay the duty impose by the act of coinage car c and that  therefore they ought not to pay the duty impose by the act W it may be answer  that the coinage duty be give over and above all former duty it be apprehend  by the collector of those duty that prisage wine be not charge with that  additional duty because in truth they be at that time charge with no former  duty yet that matter never receive any judicial determination save only when  the act W give those additional duty over and above all former duty and it be  agree that at that time prisage wine as well as other wine pay three several  former duty the word over and above most plain lie the additional charge on  they as to the objection that the subsidy lie by this act be on wine import by  way of merchandise and that prisage wine original belong to the crown can not  be say to be so import it be answer that the whole cargo be import by way of  merchandise and brown the former be to take the prisage wine after importation  but that the word import general and import by way of merchandise be use  promiscuous in the several act above mention for one and the same thing and be  consequent of equal force and signification no great weight can be lie upon  those expression that the deposit which at the time of the commencement of the  present action amount only to pound be now increase to pound and upward and  shall the plaintiff in this case prevail it be just to be apprehend that they  will then carry on their claim of exemption to the duty give by the act W m  and W for which there will be the same pretence as in this case though they  have be long since submit to and pay and then the crown may be oblige to  return out of the custom pay very large sum of money to the increase of the  public debt and therefore it be pray that the judgement give in the exchequer  chamber may be affirm accord after hear counsel on this writ of error it be  order and adjudge that the judgement give for the reversal of the judgement in  the exchequer shall be affirm and that the say writ and transcript annex shall  be remit to the court of exchequer to the end that the say sir John shaw may  have execution upon the say judgement in like manner as if no such writ of  error have be bring into the house jour vol p brown er p