case the king against roberts a information for extortion state that there be  a common passage and ferryboat over the river Mersey that the usual rate be  one penny for a man and horse and two penny for a score of sheep and that the  defendant be the common ferryman do between such a day and such a day extort  from diverse person unknown diverse sum of money exceed the ancient rate and  price of passage videlicet for carry over one man and a horse two penny and  for every score of sheep four penny c be bad for every extorsive take be a  separate offence and ought to be precise and distinct lie but here a number of  offence be accumulate under a general charge S c salk S c comb S c Carth S c  show S c holt information for extortion set forth that there be a common  passage and ferryboat c for transport of people and cattle c from such a place  c that the usual rate for the passage of a man and a horse be a penny and for  a score of sheep two penny c that the defendant be a common boatman do carry  at certain time several person and several score of sheep and that during that  time he do extort de a certain modern pardon for the use of the say boat in  pass over c videlicet pro transportatione pron  interrog  horse two penny and  pro quibuslibet twenty sheep England score of sheep four penny et such  sencundam raft dc the defendant be find guilty now several exception be take  in arrest of judgement first it be not say from who he extort those sum but  only de a certain pardon second no time certain be mention when the wrong be  do three it be not say how many score of sheep be carry over or that the  defendant carry any but only that he take for every score c for the defendant  this be like Martin van Henbecks case Leon Bulst a against who a information  be bring upon the statute of Henry c which require that all pipe of wine shall  be gauge c before they be sell and that so much of the price as it want in  measure shall be abate on pain to forfeit the value to the king modern er p  and the informer state that the defendant have sell several pipe of wine none  of which contain one hundred and twentysix gallon and that he have not abate c  but do not show how much be want in each pipe and for this reason judgement be  against the informer for the king it be not material to name the person from  who the defendant extort money it be sufficient if the number be set forth and  therefore a indictment that a cum twenty seven other engross c have be hold  good cro car b nay though the number shall not be set forth yet it seem well  enough because the crime be the take and when the fact be find it be not  material from how many he take the verdict find the take unlawful which can  not be if the cause have not be show the law be very nice in indictment till  my Lord dyer time but he hold that a indictment quod the defendant felon to  take in hand good cujusdam pardon be sufficient dyer c and the reason give by  the book be because the good may be carry into another county and so not know  who have the property so here the people may live in remote part who have be  carry over the river and the informer may not know who they be or whither they  be go modern as to the second objection that no certain time be mention c it  be say that be not material after verdict it may be a good exception upon a  demurrer as for instance the statute of James c require that a popish recusant  convict who shall conform and go to church shall within the first year after  his conformity and every year afterward receive the sacrament or otherwise for  the say first year he forfeit twenty pound the second year forty pound and  every year afterward sixty pound and if he do receive it one year and neglect  the next year and so once a year then for every year he be to forfeit sixty  pound a information be bring upon this statute cro car a set forth that the  defendant he himself to form be a recusant convict in due form of law but have  not receive the sacrament for three year c upon not guilty plead the informer  have a verdict and it be hold that the information be well enough though no  certain time of the conviction be set forth nor before who c but the court  allow it to be a good exception upon a demurrer then as to the three objection  it be not material to set forth the number of sheep because the take be the  offence which be find by the jury as aforesaid and the informer be a stranger  it be enough upon evidence to show the fact and not to set it forth particular  in the information as where a fishmonger be indict on the statute Edward c  repeal by Geo c b for engross fish she intention to sell they again contra  form to cause to stand c which be at unreasonable prince cro car c now though  a fishmonger can be within that statute or say to be a engrosser buy fish only  which be his trade so to do yet if he regrate that be buy fish in a market and  sell it again there or within four mile at unreasonable prince he shall be  within that statute be indict that he buy she intention ad revendendum contra  form to cause to stand which must be that he engross and do not sell for a  reasonable price for if he do it will have be give in evidence to the jury but  the fact be otherwise prove to they and therefore the certain matter need not  be set forth so a information cro James d per way corrupted parts bargainae et  cheviansiae fact the defendant do receive so much c now though the bargain be  not certain set forth yet the receipt be prove to the jury that be hold  sufficient modern as to van Henbecks case it do not appear by the report  whether judgement be give after verdict or upon a demurrer but be it as it  will his offence be against a statute whereas this be a offence at the  commonlaw a indictment against a inholder cro James e upon the statute of  Richard c and Henry c these statute be repeal by James c and f for that he to  step out common stabularius to sell to visit to put under infra house  mansionalem he be find guilty and it be move in arrest of judgement that sell  in his mansionhouse to visit to put under be no offence if it be not in a inn  and to his guest yet the indictment be hold good curian every take be a  several offence and extortion and here be a whole heap modern er p of offence  put together it may be as well say that a indictment for battery will be good  set forth that the defendant beat so many of the king subject between such a  day and such a daySee Michael v Neal Cowp hawk p c ch sect a the case cite by  the counsel for the informer will not warrant this judgement as to that upon  the statute of recusancy it be very uncertain because it be not say when the  defendant be convict or when he conform and therefore that be now hold to be  no law the other case of the fishmonger be ground upon the purview of the  statute against forestal and regrate she intention ad revendendum be well  enough and the defendant to excuse himself ought to have produce some evidence  at the trial to bring himself within the proviso of the Act videlicet that he  dwell within a mile of the sea and buy the fish to sell at reasonable rate the  judgement be stay then a motion be make that the defendant may be bind to the  good behaviour several affidavit be produce that he continue his extortion to  that time but it be deny