case the king against pocock the court will not grant a information for say of  a justice of the peace he be a rogue and a forswear rogue  S c stram one  Bartholomew have a colt steal go along with pocock the defendant to Mr ken a  justice of peace in Berkshire in order to have a warrant against the felon and  though he make oath to the theft the justice refuse to grant his warrant in  conversation at a publichouse after this pocock ask Bartholomew whether Mr ken  be a swear justice Bartholomew answer yes or certain he will not act as such  to which pocock reply why then he be a rogue and a forswear rogue upon which  word a information be move for against pocock Mr solicitor general to make the  rule absolute cite the case of the king v Derby Carth comb Mod a where a  indictment be hold to lie against a person for say of a justice of peace he be  a buffleheaded modern fellow understand not law and have not do justice to my  client because such word do not respect the person of the justice of peace but  relate to he as be be a public magistrate and subordinate to the government  and therefore such defamatory word be a reproach to the supreme governor to  who magistrate be entrust and from who they derive their authority and it can  be deny that word reflect on the government be punishable at the suit of the  king by a information lee chief justice there be great difficulty with I  whether this information can be grant in point of law the case of king v Derby  be a case of the same nature with the present and it be there hold that a  information shall go but in the case of the queen v Wrightson salk a which be  subsequent to the case of king v Derby and be very much litigate and speak to  by the best counsel and contradict by no case since be a different  determination the word there be speak of modern er p a justice of peace in  discourse concern a warrant grant by he that he be a fool a ass and a coxcomb  for make such a warrant and he know no more than a slickhill upon a demurrer  to a indictment for these word the court at first upon the authority of king v  Derby incline to think the word indictable but afterward determine they be not  so and express deny the case of king v Derby to be law the court go upon this  distinction that where defamatory word be speak to a justice of peace in the  very exercise of his office there they be indictable and consequent subject to  a information because they be a impediment to justice a breach of the peace  and a immediate reproach to the government for appoint a unfit person to a  office which so material concern the administration of justice but where a  person reflect upon a justice of peace for a act already do though do as a  justice of peace it be only a breach of good manner and he be not subject to a  information for the justice be in such case consider as a private person and  his remedy be by bind the party to his good behaviour or by a action on the  case the present case refer to a act do videlicet the refuse Bartholomew a  warrant so that although word of defamation be speak of a justice of peace as  such yet they be not subject to a information unless speak to he in the actual  discharge of the duty of his office and at the time of his do some particular  act as justice the case of the queen v Wrightson go very much upon that of the  queen v soley Ann b who be indict for these word he be not fit to be a justice  for if a man be before he he will give it right or wrong where his affection  be and it be rule the indictment lie not page justice of the same opinion  chapel justice it have be endeavour to difference this case from that of the  queen v Wrightson by say that the word modern speak in that case relate only  to the understanding of a justice of peace but here they affect his honesty  and integrity but I be of opinion this make no difference for the government  be equal reflect upon for put a fool in office as a knave and I be of the same  way of think with my Lord chief justice wright justice there be a material  difference where word be speak to a justice of peace himself and where to a  three person in conversation for the Iatter be not so open or so great a  insult as the former in the case of the king v BarrowTrinity term Geo a a  justice of peace commit a person for coin for which barrow say the justice be  a rogue and a rascal and I can prove he so and it be hold that he be not  indictable but if the word have be speak to the justice of peace himself and  at the time of exercise his office they will have be indictable because a  breach of peace let the rule be discharge modern michaelmas term the  thirteenth of George the second in the king bench sir William lee Knt chief  justice sir Francis page Knt sir Edmund probin Knt sir William chapel Knt  justice Dudley rider Esq attorneygeneral John strange Esq solicitor general