case the king against Berchet and other a information for a not in break fence  and enclosure in Hertfordshire lie in the crown office SC Mod SC ante  information for a not in break the fence and enclosure of Mr guys at Tring in  Hertfordshire sir Francis winnington argue last term for the defendant that no  information do lie in the crown office and order to be argue again this term  for which I be prepare to argue it but none be ready to justify their demurrer  we have judgement pro ring per tout Le court and gist my intend argument be as  follow the question be if this information do lie if the defendant be bind to  answer to it that it do I shall prove by these follow step first by show that  a inquest be not necessary in all case to enforce a defendant to answer the  king suit and the reason why and apply that reason to this case and then show  that even in some capital case it be not requisite and that in all case not  capital there be no necessity of it and so evince that this method of  prosecution be no way contrariant to any fundamental rule of law but agreeable  to it and then show the constant usage of this method and the approbation it  both have from the judge and lawyer of all age and in all reign even before  octavo caroli as well as since even before and after Empsons law as well as  under it and that that law do no way affect this case and then answer that and  the other objection start on the other side the shower KB rule which I agree  to and lie down as my foundation be this that no man be to answer the king  suit without some record import his charge but that if there be any matter of  record or suggestion or surmise upon record or information file as of record  for the king import the charge of a offence that this may if the king please  serve instead of a inquest or verdict either by indictment or presentment and  that the party thereupon shall be compel to plead to it as a presentment I do  not mean this of treason or felony though there be two case even in that too  nor do I mean to prove it by new offence create by statute or information  enact to be for they but offence at commonlaw or such as be make de to make  new and no particular mode of prosecution appoint the king suit be of three  nature either first in matter of mere right and property where freehold or  inheritance be concern it be true there must be a inquisition or office to  entitle the king to either suit or service and so be Kelway dyer but in other  case a suggestion or information file of record for the king will serve  instead of they where a office be no otherwise requisite which be the same as  a inquest in our case I will not cite particular case the book be full of they  as bro title surmise pl that a suggestion or information which he use  promiscuous and therefore with he as synonimous term of a die seize under a  term in chivalry or a devise by will of good to the king that in those case  such information upon record will serve instead of a inquisition I urge this  only to show that in matter of great shower KB er p concernment as inheritance  two jury be necessary to give the king a unavoidable right as in case of crime  where life be concern by grand and petit jury otherwise in lesser matter  second in matter that be part crime and part interest it must be agree that a  inquest be not necessary to entitle the king to a suit or to compel the  criminal to answer and for that there be a notable case in Henry fol a  information for unlawful take and detain certain jewel of the crown which be a  rank trespass and a plea be to it of the city custom for that shop be market  overt c upon argue the demurrer it be urge that this matter ought to have be  prosecute by way of presentment which will be matter of substance to enforce  the party to answer and not by bare information the which be deny by the  attorney general and it be accord judge shower KB pro ring the reason why I  urge this be because their argument tend to overthrow all information as I  shall show present it must be further agree even that a information lie for  intrusion into the king land and usurpation of his royal franchise and yet  these be crime and be way et arms and incur fine and imprisonment export good  out of England not pay the custom due by commonlaw be a offence at the  commonlaw as be dyer these be suable here or in the exchequer and punish by  fine upon information and it will be difficult to assign a difference between  these and other offence for they be against the crown and all tend though not  in equal step to the diminution of the king honour and revenue and he have as  much right to a fine after a offence commit as he have to a custom duty which  he have by the commonlaw dyer and by they he be suppose in the eye of the law  to support and maintain his court of justice as by the other to keep the sea  open and safe for trade nor can I see any reason why a indictment shall not be  as necessary in these case as in we but to come close three in matter direct  and simple criminal a presentment be not requisite that there must be a record  I will agree to be necessary and so be the law declare in Edward cap that no  man shall be put to answer without presentment before justice or matter of  record or due process of law accord to the old law of the land a record be  necessary because prosecution be use by the attorney over as far as both  before the king in his privycouncil and before the king Council in camera set  with stars now this very Act they have be please to urge as on their side but  how proper your lordship must judge for it be so far from maintain their  assertion that none be compellable to answer but upon indictment and  presentment which be all one only the former be draw by a clerk the other be  make by themselves informal that this law do plain declare that there be some  other legal way to charge a man with a crime beside those two for what else  mean those word or matter of record or due process of law and it be in the  disjunctive now it be a know rule in the interpretation of statute that such a  sense be to be make upon the whole as that no clause sentence or word shall  prove superfluous void or insignificant if by any other construction they may  all be make useful and pertinent if their construction be right that nothing  but presentment be mean then all the shower KB rest be nonsense because it  have no meaning but my Lord none of these old law be so weak pen they have a  meaning and a strong one too there be a due process to charge a man with a  crime beside that of indictment there be a thing of record beside that of  presentment and that be a information which I shall present prove agreeable to  the old law this Act make it plain to I either there be somewhat else or not  if not this statute be mistake if there be it be a information or somewhat  else but there be no other ergo c it can be appeal for that be the party not  the king suit therefore this Act be so far from prohibit the case of  information that it strong imply and establish they that a record be  equivalent to a indictment or inquest there be two instance one in case of  capital crime where a record import the charge thereof be sufficient to compel  the party to answer to it as if a inquest be against a and he confess it and  by bill approve b as guilty and afterward waive his approver by confess his  bill to be false the king may notwithstanding proceed to arraign and charge b  upon that bill as at his suit and b be and shall be compellable to answer to  it and so be the book Henry pl and agree so in Edward pl and many other so in  a appeal of murder if the shower KB er p appellant become nonsuit the king may  proceed to charge the appellee and he must plead and may be try condemned and  execute upon it though no inquest against he and so be all the book Henry pl  Henry pl Edward pl the same in Yelv the case of crisp v virol this I urge to  show that a inquest by a jury be not always and indefinite necessary and that  to charge a man upon record be not contrary to the fundamental rule of the law  as be pretend but to come close in matter mere criminal but not capital the  find of a jury be not requisite Henry pl as abridge by brook title surmise pl  there be this resolution that where a suggestion be make to the court that a  rescous be commit upon the sheriff coroner or the like it be affirm by  Nottingham then attorney general and arderne chief baron and Laicon do not  deny it that the court shall award process against the offender and it be  agree clear by the reporter say brook that upon a suggestion thereof they will  award process it be not upon the return of a rescous for that be resolve ill  on a exception take to it it be true brook make a question si so much in  Scaccario well in other shower KB senate but if there then sure here to who  jurisdiction all such matter be most proper the abridgment speak it indefinite  on a suggestion beside in all case of contempt to a court no presentment be  necessary no not so much as to convict for if do in fancy curiae a record may  be make of it and a punishment judicial inflict and that execute immediate as  be do in Mr reading case but to come home to the point before you in case of  crime of which the court can take no notice but ab extra a information be  sufficient to find process and have always be think so even in all case and  for that I will go backward even to the reign of Edward the four and further I  will not name the last reign because perhaps they will cavil at the authority  though in this they only follow their predecessor in the reign of Charles the  second be abundance I remember two not print and those be by sir William Jones  against Harrington for word a and against Johnson for nothing b and argue by  sir Francis winnington there pro ring in Michaelmas term car there be a  information here against parish and other for cheat a young lady c and  unlawful procure a warrant of attorney to confess a judgement in a very great  sum and a verdict and judgement and the party fine and commit after debate in  arrest of judgement in Trinity term car inter indict Num a information by sir  Thomas fanshaw as coroner and attorney against Opie dodge and other Cornish  man for unlawful get one of themselves swear of a tale in order to give a  verdict for a defendant in trespass and sander offer to move in arrest of  judgement but be bid by hale to bring his writ of error and there be judgement  quod to take in hand ad faciend that which divides cum lord ring it be report  with the information at large in sander report d in Hilary term and car  information against alderman sterling and other for conspiracy to take away  the gallon trade and judgement on debate e and no doubt in all these case but  a information lie and yet they be all controversial and adversary suit in  Trinity term car it be deliver as law by Keeling and agree per curian that if  any information be exhibit by the attorney general or the master of the crown  office the court may quash it upon motion because it be ex duty f in easter  term car one against the inhabitant of Yaxton in Oxfordshire for not repair a  highway and much debate upon motion and no question of this point g here be  plain the opinion of hale Keeling shower KB Wyndham c nor do my Lord chief  justice Vaughan much differ from they for he affirm they to lie here as well  as in the star Chamber in bushel case h speak of juror be fine c he say No man  can ever show that juryman have be punish upon information either in law or in  the star Chamber for bare find against evidence except where embracery or  subornation be join which show it be a supposition that formless a harrington  case Hilary term car vent b king v Johnson easter term car show c mich term  car side d sand e side f side g side h Vaugh shower KB er p cion do lie for  such offence and yet they be such as be not within any particular statute that  direct this method of suit they be so common in Charles the second time that  they be get into our precedent book of plead in Vidians entry I be one exhibit  by sir Thomas fanshaw v Justinian Paggit senior for neglect and abuse in his  office of custos narrow places as for a offence at commonlaw and fol be two  more of the like nature one of which be against Wilkinson the six clerk for  cheat sir John marsh longvil and Bluck of a deed of article and cancel it all  which show the opinion of the lawyer in this point for the last be at the  instance of lawyer and vidian be well know to be a good clerk and a curious  observer of what pass here then for the late time in easter term in superior  banc one for forgery against Charles Dudley the titular duke of Northumberland  for forge the entry of a marriage between sir Robert Dudley and Frances  vavasor lady of honour to queen Elizabeth in the register book of east  Greenwich in ken and a trial on it and much debate in arrest of judgement and  the party fine two hundred pound by Glynn and Newdigate which be say the book  more than he be worth king in Hilary term banc superiori a information against  main and two justice of peace for not inquire of a riot accord to the statute  of Henry c which be commit near their residence and verdict and judgement  after debate nisi causan pro jailer c l and it be observable that the statute  which command the inquiry and upon which the information be ground do not give  a information so that it be the same with a offence at the commonlaw in style  practical register which be print and be a bundle of observation say to be  take from the mouth of Mr sergeant roll there he have a whole chapter upon  this head of information distinct from a long one of indictment and twenty  rule make in those time concern they which sufficient show the approbation of  their use even in those day I will name one verbatim in Michaelmas term b S a  information may be prefer in this court against the shower KB inhabitant of  any town or village in England for not repair the highway which they be bind  to repair then he give this reason for it for this court may punish offence do  against the weal public all the nation over and many other rule et dictam  judge be there observe which show the sense of the lawyer of that age c in the  reign of Charles the first there be abundance of precedent and resolution in  easter term car one freeman m be bring by habeas corpus be commit for a riot  and rescous of one take by a messenger and a day be give to file a information  or prefer a indictment against he and then say that there be frequent such  information for such and other like misdemeanour in Hilary term car in Stevens  case n a ill practice appear in one spicer a undersheriff the clerk of the  crown be appoint to draw a information for the misdemeanour in mich term car  one against ware and Lynne for stop a common way oh and a special plea and  demurrer to it and after argument and much debate a rule for judgement in  easter term car against the mayor and commonalty of London for permit a riot  and tumult wherein dr lamb be slay and none of the offender take p and hold to  lie and the same term against sir James Wingfield and other for a riot Q and  on the trial urge strong by Noy that the default of one shall bind the rest  but resolve to be as several as in a indictment in Hilary term car two several  information against strew and Hobart for their several escape out of the  gatehouse r but no doubt of this thing though they have good counsel and much  debate upon the trial in Michaelmas term car motion be make for a attachment  against a officer of the marsh of Wales for arrest a courtleet juror while  upon duty whereby the king court be disturb S the court deny the motion  because not a officer or process of they but direct a information against he  here in this court for that misdemeanour in Michaelmas term car one in this  court against Elliot Hollis c I Vid Ent king side l style m cro car n cro car  oh cro car p cro car Q cro car r cro car S latch shower KB er p for a  misdemeanour t a plea to the jurisdiction and overrule a cause much debate and  this point start but by one of their counsel videlicet Mr Calthrope and answer  as slight by the attorney that there be many precedent this judgement be  impeach in parliament u but this never object as I can find by any of the  history of that time which be a strong argument that the parliament think a  information to lie if the matter have be within their jurisdiction and if  shower KB they have think otherwise we shall unquestionable have hear of it as  Rushworth have it in his appendix ten it be plain by the very note that this  point be never start or question the grievance complain of be restraint of  liberty of speech in parliament and breach of that privilege the word be that  the information for matter do in parliament and the same appear in the  information be a breach of privilege nothing can be a strong argument that it  be illegal and why not because it be a information but because the crime  charge if any be commit in parliament and upon the debate in parliament in  when reverse as appear by cro car this be the matter insist on and Strowds act  urge as the ground of the reversal I beg your lordship pardon for urge one  instance more in that reign for information by the attorney even in a high  court than this in the second year of Charles the first there be one exhibit  by way of article and subscribe by the then attorney in the house of lord  against the then earl of Bristol for diverse high crime and misdemeanour both  here and abroad the same be receive by the lord as a charge and enter in their  journal upon record the party force to plead to it and he do so and the same  enter in like manner both be to be see at large in dr franklin annal of James  the first and Charles the first c that the same be do in car information by  attorney against the Lord Kimbolton and the five member of the Commons house  it be true my Lord this last be but a melancholy precedent because of its  consequence for it be note a breach of privilege as it be in nalson collection  z but I do not find it note illegal because it be not by presentment or  impeachment but the reason of their censure be because the attorney have break  their privilege in meddle with member and such against who they say he have no  proof to make good his charge I urge this only to show that in all these  debate we no where find a information censure as illegal how et because ankle  and if a inquest have be think universal requisite and necessary it will  certain have be touch upon these occasion in the next precede reign videlicet  James the first our book do not take so much as notice of information in this  court for Hobert and coke who be then attorney general prefer most of they in  the starchamber which I shall prove present to be a strong authority for we as  even by the commonlaw of England yet even in this reign there shower KB be  many information upon the file which I shall not trouble your lordship with  because ancient one will be of more authority in Michaelmas term James b r  information that where by the custom of the realm to avoid annoyance of the  highway a public carrier shall not carry in any wagon above two wheel and  above two thousand weight that he have carry with eight horse four wheel and  above that rate of weight from Oxford to London by the which the highway be  become unpassable a and the party fine and imprison in Michaelmas term James  here be a trial at bar on a information on Henry c against fasten net or trunk  cross over any great river c and much debate on the trial and yet this Act  give no information b by James c notice be take of information by the  parliament as usual prefer by the king swear officer that statute prescribe  the manner how information shall be by the attorney for the time be and by  other officer or officer for the time be this be a full authority for their  allowance in easter term Elizabeth among the t cro car u cro car ten appendix  to the first volume of rushworth collection page that page c z Vol a Edgerlins  case jenk cent can page b it be report   shower KB er p bundle of indictment  of that term be several information by the clerk of the crown they be in  disorder and no number or figure to make search by c I read some myself one in  the name of mile sand coroner and attorney of the queen for a riotous assault  and rescue against Richard Bynsdale a livre Lord mark upon it the parliament  in her reign allow they by Elizabeth c that penal prosecution shall be within  a year c there be a express proviso that it shall not extend to any officer of  record as have in respect of their office lawful use to exhibit information  now here be the judgement of parliament that there be officer to exhibit they  and those that be mean must be the attorney and his deputy the coroner for I  know no other and be it otherwise that long proviso have be needless but to go  high in easter term in the first of Philip and mary Num in it indictament a  information against Plowden and other for depart from the parliament without  licence c be exhibit by griffin the then attorney with a that curiae hic to  come to know et to shape as now be usual and six of they submit to fine and  Plowden plead with a idle traverse like that of a lawyer in his own case but  no scruple if a information lie nor do coke make any question of that c but  only about the court be jurisdiction of the matter because parliamentary it be  report Inst in Michaelmas shower KB term the six of Edward the six be a  information by the then attorney pur Le roy solement against Michael Harcourt  on the statute of maintenance d I know they will say the statute of Henry c  give a information but non constat this information be upon that law beside  with submission I think the objection find on a plain mistake for none of  those law do give ail information to the king the common word be such a part  to the king and such a part to he that shall sue for the same in any court of  record by bill plaint information action of debt c in which no essoin wager of  law or protection shall be allow now it be plain this only give it to the  party for wager of law never lie to the king suit now if the king please he  may sue for the whole penalty as well as pardon the whole and therefore  information can no more be say to be give to the king by those law than a  indictment be which be not name now they must agree that information have be  frequent for the king for the whole penalty on those statute offence and  therefore they be of as strong authority as those of commonlaw offence but I  will mention no more of these because of this exception I must confess I know  of no statute that give a information to the king but Empsons law which I  shall show present not to concern this case in this reign of Henry the eight  there be abundance and the reason why there be so few after it be as sir  Thomas smith say in his commonwealth of England the starchamber be not so much  frequent till after this reign and the good effect it have in prosecute and  humble this great cardinal in Trinity term Henry roll oh information by sir  Christopher hale then attorney general against several for a nuisance in a  highway in the county of Oxford contra peace et in malum exemplum and  imparlances and other formal entry make as now hoc vide Trinity term Henry  roll the like by the same attorney general in the same form against the mayor  and bailiff of Oxford for stop a ditch and fill it with filth ad nocumentum  and imparlance hoc etian law Trinity term Henry roll inter indict et placita  coronae the like by the same attorney against dr Ligham a chancellor for  maintain the authority of Rome on a statute of praemunire on non cul a jury  ready to give their verdict at the bar he express fateba quod non to be able  to dedicate information hoc etian law ibidem in roll against dr Robert cliff  on the statute of Richard c and after a trial a judgement of praemunire enter  for seizure of shower KB land good c in the same term roll there be the like  against John baker the same term roll against Thomas skin in roll the same  against Adam traverse in roll the same against Roland Phillips all these I see  and read in the treasury at Westminster in Trinity term Henry roll information  against though martin and a clergyman et officiar what curiae for a cheat in  Warwickshire and a fine on he in mich term Henry roll c Inst d cite in the  case of discontinuance of process c   Rep b and there be the same point dyer  shower KB er p information against Richard bishop of Norwich and judgement of  praemunire against he thereon now it be observable that these information do  recite the statute Richard c and by that the party be to be attach to answer  before the king and his Council which be there the court of starchamber or by  writ of praemunire which say Crompton Jur be to be sue out of chancery and  they may be implead in the king bench by bill as in the custody of the marshal  and by information in the crown office as appear by these precedent and by  both it appear there be no need of indictment though the offence be mere  criminal in Michaelmas term Henry roll information against the dean and  chapter of well pro erection cujusdam molendini wellwatered places ad nocument  and lie in Somerset and a cognovit nocument enter in Trinity term Henry roll  against Thomas wile and other for not repair of grove lane in Oxford in  Trinity Henry roll the like against Katharinam prioress of Littlemore for not  repair a way call Stoneford lane in Michaelmas term Henry roll the like per  attorn king against will Gregory of Sydingborn in ken pro non watch vigiliar  in night et other watch in Trinity term Henry roll Devon the like against  though Juliet and other pro maletractione will wolf super deliberate short  catalog palace eiden Thom et other direct pro restitution will do you much  good will Shelton these be all offence at the commonlaw in Michaelmas term  Henry roll the like per attorn king against John William pro obstupatione  regius way in tutton in Southampton in Trinity term Henry roll Worcester the  like against sir John savage sheriff there for a trespass contempt and  misbehaviour in his office in easter term Henry roll oxon the like per attorn  king against John traverse and other pro non reparation a royal palace vice  nuncupate Le causeway two hundred a part vocal Osney bridge usque passagium  vocal Hincksey ferry in Trinity term Henry roll information by sir c hale  against Robert cliff and other quare enclosed space at villan westmonaster  fregeru et alian irregular in easter term Henry roll against the mayor and  bailiff of Oxford pro nocument in Michaelmas term Henry roll information by  will Fenner coroner against Abraham price pro insultu super a certain c all  the last there be docquets of they on their roll in the shower KB crown office  keep for that purpose though the information be not there but remove in this  reign of Henry the seven there be several precedent of information in the  crown office in Michaelmas term Henry roll one for a trespass and contempt  against Henry Gerves clerk and in easter term Henry be a information by the  then attorney general James hobard against mill and other for a cheat in levy  of a fine in another man name in contempt king ad malum exemplum and in form  as be now it be print as a precedent in moil entry under the title commitment  but because Empsons law may be think to affect this time though in truth it do  not as I shall show present I will therefore go beyond it in Trinity term  Henry roll information against Robert Brandon and other pro transgression et  contempt in Hilary term Henry roll consimile in Michaelmas term Henry roll  information against Peter Edgecombe and other to the number of sixtynine pro  transgress et riot et all men to make that which divides cum ring these be all  commonlaw offence and there be docquets of they in the crown office to this  very day in Trinity term Henry there be among the bundle of indictment of that  term a information by James Hobart against John Sygrave for present one  Richard in court Christian for call the defendant thief to the prejudice of  the king court this record I have see and read at Westminster in the Upper  treasury over the parliament house in easter term Henry roll information  against though Piccard for a trespass in the same term roll the like against  John Gaston for deceit in Trinity term Henry roll the like against Richard  Dodd pro transgr in Michaelmas term Henry roll the like against Martin black  pro transgr in Hilary term roll pro manutentione and this be before the  statute which give information to the party that will sue for the penalty in  easter term Henry roll a information pro manutentione against John Gawtree in  the same term roll be seven several information beside I find upon search of  the roll inter placita coronae in Trinity term Henry roll several entry where  the information be not enter a process award on the suggestion of though  Greswold who sequitur pro lord ring c de plea transgr and a attachment and  roll throughout shower KB er p the whole roll abundance of such entry though  Greswold who pro lord ring sequitur versus Robert Arnold et all de plea  transgr et contempt contra form set up de hunter and upon that there be a  award of process hoc see and in all other it be enter indict c in easter  shower KB term in the five year of Edward the four roll walterus travel attack  pro intratione Proserpine chasae domini king et fugatione damar in Michaelmas  term Edward roll David John attack pro insultu et verberatione John green  ibidem roll ludovicus John attack pro fraction enclosed space domini king  ibidem roll Thomas may et all attack pro insultu et verberatione Robert  Howster ibidem roll rogerus Wyche et all attack pro insultu et verberatione  will spicer in Michaelmas term Edward roll Robert Russel attack pro insultu et  verberatione in Hilary term Edward roll jacobus reeve et all imperil for  forestal in Hilary term roll Johannes west attack above stat de  Manutentionibus of these there be memorandum in the crown office in this reign  upon the roll I find in Hilary term Edward roll Johannes west who pro ring  sequitur versus Johan Lysons et Johan reeve for forestal de plea transgr et  contempt et non go for sale and a attachment award in Michaelmas term Edward  roll find John Doyle outlaw for maintenance unde attack c in Trinity term in  the first year of Richard the second roll information by though Shardlow  coroner et attornatus king against Johan Wotton pro insult in easter term in  the three of Edward the three in person ring roll endors Southampton the  bishop of Winchester be attach ad respondend lord king de eastern quod cam  restrain to be to go apart without freedom he depart from parliament c and  Adam de Fincham the then attorney who pro lord ring sequitur pray process and  the bishop plead to the jurisdiction of the court et idem who pro c demurrer I  urge this to show that indictment or presentment be not always necessary even  in those day the record be recite at large Inst it be true my Lord coke say  this be by original writ but it be not upon a inquest among the Lord hale  manuscript in Lincoln inn library there be a book figure libre I the title be  placita a primo eduvardi primi usque it seem to be a alphabetical table to the  record of those eighteen year and there I find under title information which  be a distinct head from that of indictment these follow note information trial  pasch Edward rot information for a nuisance pasch Edward rot information  against the justice of Ireland To bring together into Ireland Trinity term  Edward roll contempt and slanderous word punish by information Trinity term  Edward for break the assize of bread Trinity term Edward majus nuisance for  stop a common river punish by information and the jurisdiction of the court  well vouch Trinity shower KB term Edward mich Edward majus all these I find  there in distinct line I confess I have not search for the record themselves  for want of time beside all this there be the continual usage of the star  Chamber which as appear by the car c which abolish that court have no redress  or remedy to punish offender but what may proper he have in other court  meaning this which in truth be the supreme for plead of the crown all be here  in person ring sans addition therefore the party there declare the law of the  land not to be as they will have it videlicet universal to require a  presentment there be always information for riot assault menace libel slander  false due forgery perjury extortion and other misfeazances c which in the  reign of queen Elizabeth and king James the first be very common I will not  cite particular it will be endless the report be full of they but I will go  high because of the statute which they say erect that court if we may believe  the Lord coke he say e that the Henry c do not erect that court but confirm  and establish it add the two chief justice as judge and empower they to  examine the defendant upon interrogatory he quote many authority of offence  punish there but because Mr prynn in his epilogue to and on the four institute  cavil at three of they I will not name they but other which will sufficient  declare the antiquity of the use of information f one bigot be fine forty mark  for a riot and in the yearbooks be several case in person ring in camera set  with stars as ass pl and register be a writ to appear e Inst f n Henry shower  KB er p in person ring et council his and in Edward information before the  king Council for go arm within his palace g in cotton abridgment h Cavendish  be fine one thousand mark for a slander on the then chancellor I and there be  abundance which I will not mention in rushworth collection king and the four  institute l and in truth so many that it be the terror of the people and upon  that occasion be the complaint by the commons because they be convict without  a jury not because it be by information some will have the starchamber no  court of record because their proceed be in English but if that be a objection  then all the ancient parliament roll and act of parliament before Henry the  six which be most enrol in French not in Latin and many charter shower KB writ  and commission enrol in French and the statute since the first of Henry the  six must be no record it be high time now to answer their objection but here  my lord I will first observe the reason and use of a presentment or indictment  it be to apprise the king of such a offence commit as it be of a office to  inform he of a title in civil matter the jury only present they do not accuse  or pray process so that it be plain for the sake of the king as well as the  subject or rather more upon his account that there shall be such inquiry but  if the king court be otherwise inform by a record it be sufficient for he but  say they first objection it be inconvenient for the subject and many needless  information may be exhibit without cause to the vexation of the subject and no  remedy against the officer answer here be no inconvenience to the people here  be a trial per pais fair notice liberty of plead dilatories as well as bar  here be subpoena and attachment as much time for defence charge c for the  prosecutor make up the record c then in case of malicious prosecution the  person who prosecute be know by the note to the coroner accord to the practice  of the court it be true no action lie against the attorney or coroner no more  do it against a grand juror or prosecutor as be rule in the Lord macclesfield  case in the exchequer and long before that in the case of agard v wile m and  the reason give for it be because they be upon their oath and so they be here  as officer upon record second objection great Charta cap that nullus libre a  human being to take in hand well imprisonetur c nisi per of judgment Parium of  oneself well per law terrae answer that this method of prosecution no way  contradict that law for we say this be per law terrae et per common feature  law terrae for otherwise there never have be so universal a practice of it in  all age beside per judgment Parium in that law be intend only of trial per  pares not of a accusation and it have always be construe so and use as a  argument for it and such a trial the defendant may have have in this case if  they have so please and no man be to be punish upon a information but after  such a judgment Parium of oneself unless he confess the fact either express by  a cognovit or imply by default of plead his cause on such a trial shower KB  three objection that Glanville and Fleta say that crime be to be prosecute by  presentment answer I may with submission to your lordship deny their authority  and for do so the book will warrant I as in Fitzherbert grand Abr title guard  it be hold by all the court that Bracton Glanville and Fleta be never take for  author in our law and in stowell case n sander chief baron when he quote  Bracton and Glanville say he cite they not for authority for they be not  author in our law but he use they only as ornament to his discourse and Catlin  say the same thing oh when he quote they but however to give they a more  particular answer Glanville cap be cite the last term but I suppose it be only  to make a good sound with Fleta for I can find nothing in he about it and sir  Francis winnington must have good eye to read one word to the purpose in all  the book for the first chapter be nothing but placita civilian et criminal  divide and distinguish and lib a cap be nothing but a discourse of a assize  and the jury to try it nothing to this effect as to Fleta lib cap fol it be a  discourse of the king court in the sheriff turn et alibi all that he g bro Abr  title contempt pl h page I roll king Vol page l page m bridge Rep n Plowd oh  Plowd shower KB er p say be of the article of enquiry then sect de vic et  bailiff in turnis et look de franco pleg de malefactor to seek after set up be  that if they take and imprison any man in any other manner than they be indict  by twelve juror who set their seal to such indictment trespass shall lie for a  false imprisonment now to answer this first it be plain no law nor the author  a lawyer for by our law there be no need of a seal to any indictment but only  to a inquisition of office second if there be need it relate only to sheriff  turn and those inferior court and not to the king bench three if it be law it  must certain extend to all the particular there mention as article of inquiry  and consequent no information will lie for intrusion or deceive the king of  wreck or usurpation of royal franchise without authority for these be all  particularize there four objection in Edward pl that the king bring a writ  against the sheriff upon the statute against make of undue return of juror and  it be there hold that the king be not to be answer unless he be apprise by  indictment or presentment c answer shower KB the reason there be because there  be process use there be a writ award for a tort a wrong to the crown before  the king court be apprise that there be such offence commit by some matter of  record the word of hill be sir we apprehend that the king will not be answer  to this writ before that he be apprise of it per indictment well auter manner  whereupon he pray judgement of the writ the mistake be the writ issue before  any judgement find or any information file and the word you auter manner imply  it in all the case sans estre apprise be with a c wheresoever it be name now  in our case here be the court apprise here be devoted to curiae hic to come to  know et to shape before any process this be do by a swear officer file of  record beside in Kelway it be hold otherwise and in Edward pl the same  exception be overrule in case of a writ of champarty and the party rule to  answer and do so five objection Edward fol a writ of rescous for the king hold  nought for the same reason as in the other case aforenamed I give it the same  answer because the writ issue before the king be apprise by any information c  six objection that coke in his comment upon great Charta p say No man shall be  take I e restrain of liberty by petition or suggestion to the king or his  Council unless it be by indictment or presentment answer by petition or  suggestion can never be mean of the king bench for be himself have prefer  several here that be mean only of the king alone or in Council or in the  starchamber in the king bench the information be not a suggestion to the king  but to the court upon record beside his text warrant no such comment for page  where he explain per of judgment Parium of oneself he say it extend only to  the king suit for treason or felony or misprision for in lesser or other  offence a nobleman may be cite by other than his peer videlicet by commons all  which do show that the law do not require a presentment by a jury of peer for  if it do it must extend to peer as well as other and then I be sure it be  never observe since it be make beside per law terrae include any due process  of law shower KB seven objection that information be bring by Empson and  Dudley that Henry c be the first that introduce they into our law I answer  first information be give to the party informer in many case before by  particular statute as by the statute of livery in the time of Edward the four  and several in Henry the six time second that of information for commonlaw  offence I have show your lordship many precedent of before this time three I  have show you several just after it be repeal which be I Henry c beside  fourthly this law never introduce they into the king bench at all nor do it  any way concern this court for it be only thus that justice of assize and  justice of peace shall have power upon information before they make for the  king to hear and determine at their discretion now what be this to the king  bench beside there be a express proviso that the say information shall not  reach any person dwell in any other shire than there where such information be  give so that it not only give no power to the king bench but express exclude  they now how this can introduce information into this court I know not beside  the p Inst shower KB er p prosecution by information be not the thing complain  of by that law but the determine by discretion and not secundum law et  experience England and my Lord coke complain there be no trial by a jury  Empson and dudley crime be the inflict penalty which the particular statute  never intend and procure false information and undue office and refuse to  admit traverse where by law they ought this be their crime as appear by the  indictment against they Inst eight objection that coke Q say that the king can  put any man to answer but by presentment or indictment I wonder true why that  be urge for it plain prove my position lie down at first the word be the king  can put any to answer but his court must be apprise of the crime by indictment  presentment or other matter of record which be what I at first affirm and here  it be a information file of record nine objection that the Edward c say that  no man shall be attach by any accusation nor forejudged of life or limb nor  his land or good seize into the king hand against the form of the magnacarta  and the law of the land shower KB we say this be not contrariant to the  magnacarta as be show afore but be agreeable to the law of the land and a  practice find upon it and always approve by the professor of it till now ten  objection the statute of Edward cap answer that be plain mean against the  proceed before the king and his Council and not here in this court and the  same be no more than the require the due course of the law to be observe which  we say be here and this be secundum law for that the precedent custom and  common judicial proceed of a court be the law and so be cro car the Lord  Mounsons case and   and abundance more as to all the petition and complaint in  parliament against call people to answer unjust to their great vexation they  be occasion by the exorbitant proceed of the Council and not of this court nor  do any of they mention it nor be they aim at in it as be apparent throughout  all sir Robert cotton abridgment r in answer to cavendish case which be  Anderson and be urge not as pertinent to the point but as hortatory to your  lordship to follow the example of those judge who notwithstanding the queen  letter do keep to the law I think that may have be spare at this time of day  when there be no occasion for it but in answer to sir Francis winnington who  cite it I will give he two for his one the first be the Henry fol that a  counsellor ought not to be hear to speak against common precedent and the  other be the say of sir I Prisot who be a learned judge in Henry the six time  it be Henry fol if we shall adjudge contrary to receive precedent it will be  of evil example to the young apprentice and student of the law insomuch that  they will not know what to give credence to whether old book or new judgement  upon the whole matter after so long a usage so much approbation from the judge  and ParIiaments so many public direction in court for they and no complaint of  their illegality till now and so plain a consistency as they have with every  fundamental and other rule of law for to destroy this without Act of  parliament will be as much against great Charta as the contrary be agreeable  with it which be as plain as the word of it and therefore I pray judgement for  the king shower KB Jenkins say S that buy of debt be maintenance at the  commonlaw and punishable by indictment or information judgement be give per  tout Le court pro ring though winnington say he think the lord have determine  no information to lie when they reverse sir Samuel Barnadistons judgement but  Mr justice eyres affirm the contrary and that it be for other error and not  that though baron Lechmere argue there to that purpose much to the same effect  as winnington have and that he tell he that Q Inst r see cotton Abr S jenk  century cent case ch shower KB er p it be his opinion and he have furnish sir  Francis with the material of that his argument judgement for the king