case the king against GRIEPE innuendo may explain the meaning of a word or  sentence but can add a new term to the proposition S c Mod S c salk S c Carth  S c holt S c comb S c ld ray S c comy Rep information at commonlaw for wilful  and corrupt perjury which set forth that there be a trial in replevin in the  court of common plea between Richard and Corneford wherein the plaintiff to  maintain his title produce two deed of lease and release bear date the fifteen  and sixteenth of July which be witness by Richard stride who see the execution  thereof at Albemarle house about the time of the date thereof and that the  defendant be produce as a witness on the part of Corneford the defendant swear  that about the middle of July he be at Newnham quandan house peremptory or  urgent call Newnham in parochian de Plimpton sanct Mari in come Devon innuendo  where in fact the say Mr stride at any time in the say month of July non to be  at Newnham prd the defendant be find guilty and upon motion in arrest of  judgement the court give their opinion seriatim a see the history principle  and practice of the legal remedy by ejectment by Mr sergeant Runnington a the  award be first that all suit in law and equity between the party shall cease  second that the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff five pound three that if  the plaintiff do upon account prove certain article against the defendant that  then he shall pay so much as the plaintiff be damnified thereby fourthly that  if the plaintiff make out upon oath before a judge any disbursement lie out  for the defendant that the defendant shall pay they but that in case the  plaintiff do not prove these matter within a certain time limit then they  award general release b see bind v Garnet stram Dighton v whiting Lutw and kid  on award modern report er p Eyre justice I shall first consider whether the  word lie to be speak by the defendant be certain enough without the innuendo  to make they material to the point in issue and second suppose they not to be  so whether the innuendo will help it modern report first if a man swear false  in a thing which be immaterial it be no corrupt perjury a it be the injury do  to the party by the false oath that make the greatness of the crime by all the  case b it appear that to make perjury the false oath must be material to the  point in issue if stride be at Newnham will not hinder his be at Albemarle  house then there be no contradiction in his evidence and for aught appear  Newnham may be near Albemarle house and if so then it be not material the king  counsel insist that though on indictment on the statute it be necessary the  false oath shall be material to the point in issue yet be it not so on  indictment at commonlaw for there though the oath be immaterial yet if it be  false it be perjury but I do not understand this distinction for the statute  do not alter the nature of perjury but only inflict a great penalty disable a  man on a conviction thereupon to be a witness whereas at commonlaw the king  may pardon the gild and by consequence may wipe away the disability the case  of Howell Gwin c and Parriss case d be indictment at commonlaw second the  innuendo will not supply it for it be very unreasonable that when a man own  word will not imply perjury in themselves that another man construction shall  make they amount to it the case of the manor of Slaverton be very strong in  this matter e where there be sufficient matter before to which a innuendo may  relate there it may be ascertain thereby but now in this case there be no  precedent matter to which it may relate so that the innuendo be altogether  foreign and impose a sense on a man word which he never mean Turton justice of  the same opinion and he cite palmer side hetl roll Rep and say that it do not  appear to concern the matter in question or to be material it have be proper  to have ask he what Newnham he mean and so to have bring it to a certainty but  since it be not so the innuendo will not help it and for that he cite I roll  Abr Bulst vent Yelv Bulst hob hut Rokeby justice accord all matter charge in  matter of crime ought to be certain this be a crime concern a place but the  charge be not certain where the place be holt chief justice accord I be  persauded in my conscience that he be guilty of a wilful and corrupt perjury  and if I can by modern report any rule of law have give judgement I will in  speak to this matter I shall consider first the insufficiency of the  information omit the innuendo and so it be no more than if he have swear  stride be at Newnham aforesaid second with the innuendo three I shall consider  the assignment of the perjury itself whether the perjury must not have a  particular relation to the Newnham mention in the innuendo first if the  innuendo have be omit it have not be good for Newnham must be understand a  will hamlet or place out of a will if you will ascertain a will you must show  in what county it be for otherwise it be but a individuum strolling which be  so very plain that there needs no authority for it but however I quote these  two Henry Henry it be true in some case the will must be in that county by  intendment in which the action be bring as if trespass be in Middlesex and the  place be lie in Islington general Islington shall be intend to be in Middlesex  but in collateral matter as in this case it be otherwise all court must take  notice of county but not of particular will S so that if Newnham be uncertain  and you assign the perjury at Newnham aforesaid it be all uncertain second the  innuendo can supply that uncertainty for the innuendo signify a Inst b Bulst    cro hob roll Rep Yelv roll Rep c style d Yelv e cro modern report er p  otherwise than be signify by the oath what be swear do not at all import Mr  stride be at Newnham in Devonshire Newnham by common intendment be a will and  the innuendo be of a house no innuendo can supply the defect of any certainty  that be necessary before for a bare and naked innuendo signify nothing unless  the word themselves import the same or there be some certain fact to which it  may be apply or from whence it may be infer that the man mean the thing  without the help of a innuendo there be a very good account in   of the use of  a innuendo if the word be actionable it will serve to explain and be of the  same use as prod the case of mile v Jacobs a and the Anonymous case cro which  be the king v bowl the roll whereof I have use and find it to be accord to the  report and be exact our case and there be sure as much certainty require in  information and indictment as in action on the case b it will be extraordinary  that a man shall not be liable in a action for damage for what he mean and yet  be liable to be convict on perjury on a information if stride have bring a  action for slander his title to Newnham and lie it in this modern report  manner as this information be it will be nought but he shall say that he be  seize in fee of a certain house call Newnham in Plimpton in the county of  Devon and the defendant speak these word Mr stride have no title to Newnham  innuendo Newnham predictam that have be good for it be a sufficient averment  and will have relation to what be allege before here you will perjure a man  not for what he swear but for what he mean and yet a innuendo be never put in  issue or anybody put to prove it for it be but a consequence of a certain  matter allege before if it have be say that there be a debate in the common  plea about stride be at Newnham in Plimpton in Devonshire then this  information where in fact c have be good or if it have say that stride of  Newnham in Plimpton c be produce as a witness that Griepe have swear he be at  Newnham where in fact non to be at Newnham prd that have be good because there  be something precedent to which it may relate a for innuendo be no averment  but only a relation and there be nothing for it to relate to as to the  assignment of perjury you shall have say where in fact non to be at Newnham  prd seu ad once other locum sive hamlettum peremptory or urgent call Newnham  then the assignment of the perjury have bear some proportion with his swear  objection it appear by his swear that Newnham be some place different from  Albemarle house and be swear in contradiction to stride evidence as to that I  think a false oath any way conducive to the matter in issue or a guide to the  jury though it be but circumstantial be perjury but for anything that appear  this be no contradiction to stride evidence for Albemarle house and Newnham  may be near one another if it be matter that tend to the discovery of truth  though but a circumstance as that such a one wear a blue coat whereas be wear  a red it be perjury but if he tell a impertinent story nothing to the purpose  then it be not so b if a man speak to the credit of a witness which be not  direct to the issue yet if false that be perjury it be further object that the  innuendo shall be reject as surplusage but that can be for by the where in  fact you have put the case on his not be at Newnham in Plimpton c and so have  make the innuendo significant modern report and therefore it can be leave out  they object further that there be a verdict but that can help for it be  against the rule of law to put a man intent in issue and what can be prove or  put in issue the verdict can find a hob b   light a snow v snow roll Abr pl  Allen b at a trial the question be upon money lend and it be object that it be  improbable the plaintiff be a cautious man shall lend such a sum without a  note a witness be produce to prove that he have lend a great sum to a person  then in court without a note which person swear be do not and upon motion to  file a information of perjury against he for the oath the court hold it  reasonable mich Ann in b r note to former edition modern report er p then as  to this be a information at commonlaw there be no reason why that shall not be  as certain as if it be on a statute the statute make no new offence but only  give a new punishment in those case to which it extend perjury at commonlaw be  a infamous fact before any statute make the first of which be Henry the  punishment by statute be much the same as at commonlaw but in some instance it  vary by statute if a man pay twenty pound he shall not be set in the pillory  but at commonlaw he may and be fine a great sum it be part of the judgement by  the statute that he shall be disable from be a witness and that the king can  pardon but the same certainty be require in both therefore let judgement be  arrest