Barnardiston king b the king against archer and other how far the justice of  peace belong to a corporation shall be say to have a jurisdiction or not  exclusive of the justice of the county at large on rule to show cause why a  information in the nature of a quo warranto shall not be grant against the  defendant for hold and adjourn a session in the borough of Warwick Mr Abney  say that the foundation upon which the former rule be maintain be that only  the charterjustices have a power of act in the borough of Warwick and not the  justice for the county at large but he conceive that the justice at large have  such jurisdiction equal with those of the borough he do agree that this town  be incorporate in the year and by that charter the townjustices be appoint but  there be no exclusive clause in that charter which take away the jurisdiction  of the justice at large and therefore by the authority of the case of saint  Alban in the time of Henry the seven the justice at large may still act within  this borough as well as they can before but their case be much strong for  since this charter a statute be make in will which by express word give they a  power of act as justice and hold session within the borough equal with the  justice appoint by the charter this be a statute that be make soon after a  fire that happen in Warwick to encourage the gentleman of the county to come  and reside in it he do agree that it be a private statute but they have a copy  of it print by the king printer which will be good evidence even at nisi prius  and the court of common plea be of that opinion a term or two ago in a case  that come before they but suppose this point shall be against they he say the  fact which the defendant do be not sufficient to show that they act as justice  he do agree that there be a session for the borough hold at which the  defendant be present as well as the charterjustices a question come before  they concern a rate which they be of opinion ought to be adjourn a doubt arise  whether it shall be adjourn to the saint of February or the that of April  follow the majority even of the charterjustices be of opinion that it ought to  be adjourn only to the saint of February however they rise up in some heat the  book of the court be carry away on a sudden and the defendant only give  direction to one man to enter a minute of the adjournment and to another to  make a adjournment in pursuance of it and even then Brainsford the first of  the senior alderman and who be of the quorum be present and last he conclude  that suppose all this shall be against they the present application be not  proper he say if the court shall be of opinion that the charterjustices have a  jurisdiction exclusive of the justice at large the corporation be interest in  this matter the corporation therefore may maintain a action against the  defendant for intrude into their franchise and that be a much more proper  remedy than this which have be take Mr strange argue on the other side and say  as to the con Barnardiston king b struction of the charter he conceive that  the justice at large be exclude by it the charter appoint that the present  mayor the precede mayor the recorder the three senior alderman and certain  other of the alderman shall be justice within the borough for the time be of  which the mayor and the recorder and one of the three senior alderman shall be  one these affirmative Barnardiston king b er p word in the charter imply a  negative that no other shall be justice and therefore be it not for the  statute there can be no pretence for other justice join with they in hold a  session the stress of the argument therefore that have be make arise from that  statute and he submit it there can be no colour for say that the justice at  large can hold a session without the presence of one of the justice appoint by  the charter to be of the quorum and little reason be there to maintain that a  session can be hold without the presence of another charterjustice as well as  of he that be of the quorum if so there can be no pretence to say that that be  a legal session where the present act be do for it be agree on all hand that  no other charterjustice be then present but one that be of the quorum the  question therefore will resort to this whether what they do be a judicial act  and upon the fact as state on the other side he submit it clear to be so and  with regard to the last objection he say there be no occasion to consider  whether the corporation can maintain a action or not if what he have say  before be true that the defendant have usurp a franchise which do not belong  to they there can be no sort of doubt but the king may call they to a account  for it the chief justice say that where there be no exclusive word in a  charter the justice at large may act within the borough but can act as justice  for the borough they can therefore hold a session for matter arise in it for  which reason if the present question have depend single upon the construction  of the charter without the assistance of the statute he shall have have no  sort of doubt but a information will lie for the justice at large hold a  session within it the great question therefore depend upon the construction of  that statute and as to that he do indeed think that the presence of one of the  charterjustices appoint to be of the quorum be still necessary to constitute a  session but yet his opinion be that one of the justice at large together with  such quorum justice may well make one he think therefore that suppose it shall  be admit that what the defendant do together with that quorum justice do  amount to a judicial act yet still the court ought to discharge the rule but  his opinion be that in reality it be no such act for the act of the court be  do before when the majority vote for adjourn it till the d of February and the  order a minute of it to be enter be what any stranger may have do and the  actual adjournment be only in consequence of it as to the remedy that have be  take he own it will have be a proper one provide a case have be lie before the  court suitable to require it but as he be full persuade that this be  Barnardiston king b not such a one and as the corporation may take the other  remedy that have be mention he be of opinion the rule ought to be discharge  the rest of the judge concur in the same opinion and the rule be discharge  accord