Blackstone the king v the mayor OF heydon and other court will not set aside  upon motion a plea of false addition in a information in the nature of quo  warranto SC I will motion to set aside plead in abatement to au information in  nature of quo warranto against the mayor and two alderman of Heydon the mayor  plead he be not a esquire as style in the information but a gentleman the  alderman that they be not gentleman but one of they a barber the other a  grocer it be object that these be sham plead for there be no occasion for any  addition so that if mistake it be only surplusage sir John strange show cause  that addition be necessary on indictment in order to sue one to outlawry Inst  and equal necessary on information which be for matter indictable No  difference between a information for usurpation and for a misdemeanour  usurpation at commonlaw punish by fine and imprisonment but by statute these  information be allow and less strictness be not necessary on the statute than  at commonlaw king and Bennet I a Shaftesbury case Geo information in nature of  quo warranto and acquittal motion for a new trial oppose because it be a  criminal prosecution say on the other side it be a civil suit refer to the  twelve judge who be equal divide two of each court king this be a criminal  suit because a crownoffice suit in ware of hackney case l process of outlawry  go against he the court consider the usurpation as a crime else they will not  fine the defendant king and Jones m of the borough of Grampound h Geo  information in nature of quo warranto plea not a proper addition set aside  because no affidavit annex to the plea not because a have plea king and  Wightwick Hayor of Romney same plea as the present the court refuse to set it  aside upon motion sir Thomas Bootle in support of the rule argue that at  commonlaw no addition be necessary first require by stat Henry and it may be  question if these prosecution fall under this statute consider what the  judgement here be videlicet to seize the office No outlawry can be consequent  upon it Blackstone true there may be a capias pro fine but Inst in a assize of  novel seize and capias pro fine thereon it be say that it do not come within  the stat Henry of addition n this be not a personal action nor a appeal  process of exigent do not lie here No case cite to show it bro addition Inst  in return of rescous though process of outlawry lie yet the statute extend not  to it because the statute relate only to the original writ in the king and  Wightwick the plaintiff have reply and not move as now to set it aside in the  first instance as a sham plea these plead will bring in all the mischief that  the statute Ann oh be make to prevent their validity may be determine on  motion as well as on demurrer the defendant have appear general and by such  appearance they have wave all advantage of this exception lee CJ I bear and  detest all frivolous plead but I never will make too much baste in determine  matter which may be of consequence to the subject perhaps the merit may as  well come before the court on motion as demurrer but I shall desire to look  into the practice of the court and particular the king and Wightwick postea  lee CJ wright and foster be agree that the plea can not be set aside on motion  and cite Sandwich and Lascelles t Geo but denison I incline to overrule it the  whole court express their abhorrence of this kind of plea and Blackstone er p  Writh say they may consider such behaviour in the fine if the merit shall turn  out against the defendant p I stram king in r v Francis TR the court say that  of late year a quo warranto information have be consider mere in the nature of  a civil proceed and that there be several instance since the case in strange  in which a new trial have be grant this be proper a criminal method of  prosecution as well to punish the usurper by a fine for the usurpation of the  franchise as to oust he or seize it for the crown but have long be apply to  the mere purpose of try the civil right seize the franchise or ousting the  wrongful possessor the fine be nominal only Bla command be a kind of civil  proceed there ought to be do great fine set on the party Bac Abr information a  by Ann c S the Ann c and all the statute of Jeofails be extend to quo warranto  information l ld raym m stram n but Lord coke say that a cap pro fine and  exigent do lie oh Ann c and see Geo c p from the report in I will it appear  that the court refuse to set aside the plea on motion that afterward a  demurrer be put in to the plea and in give judgement thereon lee CJ say he be  of opinion that this case be not within the statute of addition and judgement  be give by the whole court that the defendant respODdeat ouster and Lord  Dacres she crok Elizabeth be there cite and see grey v Sidneff b p Deshons v  head east as to the want of a addition in a declaration Com dig abatement f