case goddard against smith declaration in case on conspiracy for a false and  malicious indictment of barratry whereof he be acquit Middlesex to wit be it  remember that heretofore that be to say in the term of the holy Trinity last  pass before our lady the queen at Westminster come Richard Goddard by Henry  wright his attorney and bring into the court of our say lady the queen then  there his certain bill against Richard smith and Christopher Preston in the  custody of the marshal c of a plea of trespass upon the case and there be  pledge of prosecute namely John do and Richard roe which say bill follow in  these word that be to say Middlesex to wit Richard Goddard complain of Richard  smith and Christopher Preston in the custody of the marshal of the Marshalsea  of our lady the queen before the queen herself be for that to wit that whereas  the say Richard Goddard be a good true faithful peaceable and honest subject  and liege man of our lady the now queen and be of a good name fame reputation  conversation behaviour and condition and as a good true faithful peaceable and  honest liege man and subject of the say lady the now queen be without any  scandal imputation or reproach atid have not behave or demean himself at any  time from the time of his nativity hitherto as a barretor or disturber of the  peace of the say lady the queen nor be in suspicion of the like crime among  bis neighbour and other subject of the say lady the queen to who the say  Richard Goddard be know and by reason of his honest and quiet conversation  aforesaid for the whole time aforesaid lawful and honest gain and acquire  great credit and esteem and also diverse great gain and profit from his  neighbour and other subject of our say lady the queen with who the say Richard  Goddard bad commerce for the support of himself and his family nevertheless  the say Richard smith and Christopher not ignorant of the premise but contrive  and malicious intend not only to deprive he the say Richard Goddard of his  good name fame and esteem aforesaid but also to bring he the say Richard  Goddard into ignominy and public disgrace that by reason thereof the subject  of the say lady the queen may without themselves from the fellowship of he the  say Richard Goddard and may altogether cease and desist from deal and have  commerce with he in any mariner on the thirteenth day of September in the  first year of the reign of the say lady whether now queen of England c at the  parish of saint James Clerkenwell in the county aforesaid then and there have  have a conspiracy between themselves false and malicious to cause the say  Richard Goddard to be indict as a barretor and public disturber of the peace  of the say lady the queen without any cause or colour of such crime be commit  by he the say Richard Goddard modern er p they the same Richard smith and  Christopher at the parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid in prosecution and  execution of their malicious intention and conspiracy aforesaid at the general  quartersession of the peace of our lady the queen hold for the county of  Middlesex at hicks hall in saint John street in the county aforesaid before  John Bennet Henry Hawley and Joseph Offley esquire and other their fellow  justice of the say lady the queen appoint to keep the peace in the county  aforesaid and also to bear and determine diverse felony trespass contempt and  misdemeanour in the same county commit false and malicious cause and procure  the say Richard Goddard with intent to defame the same Richard Goddard without  any lawful or true cause to be indict by the name of Richard Goddard late of  the parish of saint James Clerkenwell in the county of Middlesex yeoman for  that the same Richard Goddard on the first day of January in the first year  abovesaid and diverse other day and time as well before as afterward at the  parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid have be and then be a common barretor  and a common daily and public disturber of the peace of the say lady the now  queen and also a common and turbulent slanderer and Sour of quarrel and  discord among his quiet and honest neighbour so that be move procure and stir  up diverse contention and controversy and also brawlings quarrel and fight at  the parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid and elsewhere in the say county  of Middlesex among diverse liege subject of the say lady the queen to the  great disturbance of the peace of the say lady the now queen to the evil  example of all other in the like case offend and against the peace of the say  lady the now queen her crown and dignity c and do false and malicious  prosecute and cause to be prosecute the say indictment against the say Richard  Goddard until the say lady the now queen cause that indictment afterward for  certain reason to come to be determine before her and the sheriff of the  county aforesaid be command that he shall not omit c but cause he to come and  answer c and he the say Richard Goddard afterward to wit in the term of saint  Michael in the second year of the reign of the say lady the now queen in the  court of our lady the queen before the queen herself the same court be at  Westminster be accord to the law and custom of this kingdom of England in a  due and lawful manner thereof discharge by pretence of which say premise  against he the say Richard Goddard by the say Richard smith and Christopher  Preston in form aforesaid publish do exhibit and prosecute the same Richard  Goddard be not only very much hurt and injure in his good name fame credit and  reputation aforesaid and disquiet and weaken in his body but be also force to  expend and lie out diverse large sum of money in and about acquit and  discharge himself of the say indictment and defend his innocence to the very  great discredit and extreme impoverishment of he the say Richard Goddard and  to the damage of the say Richard Goddard of twenty pound and thereupon he  bring suit c and now at this day to wit Monday next after three week from the  day of saint Michael in this same term till which day the say Richard smith  and Christopher bad leave to imparl to the say bill and then to answer c  before our lady the queen at Westminster come as well the say Richard by his  say attorney as the say Richard smith and Christopher by Edmund butler their  attorney and the say Richard and Christopher defend the force and injury when  c and say that they be in no manner guilty of the premise above lie to their  charge as the say Richard Goddard above complain against they and of this they  put themselves upon the country and the say Richard Goddard likewise c  therefore let a jury come thereupon before our lady the queen at Westminster  on Monday next after the morrow of soul and who neither c to recognize c  because as well c the same day be give to the party aforesaid there c Goddard  v smith smith er report date case goddard against smith a declaration for  malicious indict the plaintiff for barratry without probable cause state that  he be in due manner thereupon discharge be not maintain by evidence that he be  discharge by mean of a nolle attendance enter by the modern er p  attorneygeneral but if he have plead not guilty and the attorneygeneral bad  confess the plea that will have maintain the declaration SC salk SC salk SC  Mod SC holt case for malicious indict he of barratry without probable cause  set forth that he be debt is owed modus ind unload at the trial to prove the  declaration the plaintiff produce a nolle beyond attendance by the  attorneygeneral holt chief justice doubt whether this evidence maintain the  declaration and strong incline that it do not reserve it for the opinion of  the court and be say that the enter a nolle attendance be only put the  defendant without die and so far from discharge he from the offence that it do  not discharge any further prosecution upon that very indictment but that  notwithstanding new process may be make out upon it and sure it be hard to  allow a man who get off by a nolle attendance to maintain all action for a  malicious prosecution indeed if he have plead not guilty and the  attorneygeneral have confess it that will have do but he who get off upon a  nolle attendance do not modern at all get off on the merit of the cause and to  maintain a conspiracy it be necessary to lie and prove a acquittal   a so in a  action for sue for a great sum in order to hold to extravagant bail the  plaintiff must show what become of that cause in order to maintain his action  and so be my Lord Hobart but this here be not so much as a nonsuit for the  indictment stand still in force and the attorneygeneral must make new process  upon it when he please but he remember a cause about twenty year ago in which  Wyndham justice direct for the plaintiff on the same point and say he think it  hard even at that time Montague urge that it be attorney owner queen Self e  ind non vult beyond attendance so he will have the ind to go to the fact  charge but the whole court be of a contrary opinion for at most it can go but  to that indictment and can be plead to a new indictment for the same offence  for a nolle attendance at that rate will amount to a pardon Powell justice in  all case of conspiracy the ind acquietat go to the fact charge and not to the  indictment for if it go to the indictment and the indictment be vicious  conspiracy will lie but that be not so and colourable proof will destroy this  action and the plaintiff by procure this nolle attendance bar the defendant  from give such proof and this action can be maintain but upon a acquittal of  the fact charge by verdict confession c but he doubt of the effect of a nolle  attendance upon a indictment whether it discharge the indictment or only put  the defendant without day and that notwithstanding the attorneygeneral may  issue new process upon it holt chief justice say that he have know it think  very hard that the attorneygeneral shall enter nolle attendance upon  indictment and that it begin first to be practice in the Iatter end of king  Charles the second reign but that on information it have be frequent do and be  order precedent to be search if any be in Mr attorney palmer or nottingham  time Harcourt master of the office there never have be any proceed after a  nolle attendance and per all men in case of barratry the defendant upon motion  may have a rule to have article deliver to he of the instance and the  prosecutor shall not give evidence of any particular but what he have give  article of and if the prosecutor give no article be shall give no evidence  holt chief justice at another day declare that in all king Charles the first  be time there be no precedent of a nolle attendance on a indictment gold  justice quote a case in Hardres hard a where it be enter on record on all  information and hold to be a discharge of it the court seem all clear that the  action do not lie but give no rule modern er p