case cooper against the hundred OF Basingstoke easter term will roll if a  person be assault by thief in the hundred of a and carry into the hundred of b  and there rob a action lie on the statute of hue and cry against the  inhabitant of the hundred of b SC salk SC Mod SC holt SC ld ray a action  against the hundred upon the statute of Winchester Edward saint c and and  Edward c a of hue and cry a special verdict be find at the assize to this  effect modern er p the plaintiff be travel in the highway within the hundred  of Michael in the county of Devon and be there assault and set upon by several  malefactor to he unknown who take possession of he and carry he into a coppice  hard by the say highway in the hundred of Basingstoke and there rob he the  question be whether the hundred of Basingstoke be Chargeable with this robbery  this case be argue several time at the bar holt chief justice now this term  declare the unanimous opinion of the court that the hundred of Basingstoke be  Chargeable it have be endeavour to be maintain that this robbery be commit in  the hundred of Michael but it be most plain upon the word of the verdict that  it be whole commit in the hundred of Basingstoke for without all question if  these have be two county as they be two hundred and he have be take in one  county and carry into the other and there rob the robber must have be try  where the robbery be commit now then if the robbery be commit in the hundred  of Basingstoke by the express word of the statute it be Chargeable so that the  hundred where the robbery be commit shall be liable to make satisfaction for  the robbery now it be impossible in this case to make the robbery commit in  the hundred of Basingstoke to be a robbery from the time of the assault which  be in the hundred of Michael in Devon for there be no manner of reason to make  a relation in this case for it be no way like the modern case of murder where  the stroke be on one day and the death on the other there to some purpose  there be relation to the first day but not to all purpose it have relation to  make all the land the party have at the time of the stroke give escheat and to  forfeit his estate for life to the king but to other collateral purpose it  have not any such relation for if a man be indict for that he give a mortal  stroke to a on such a day whereof he languish until such a day and so the jury  do say that the party indict do murder the party slay on the day of the stroke  give it will be bad but they may conclude that he kill he on the day of his  death   a in this case there be no robbery commit until the plaintiff be in  the hundred of Basingstoke for there the take away be which be the fact that  make the hundred Chargeable beside in the case before put of the relation if a  give a mortal will to b on the three of march suppose whereof the party die  the last of march between these two day c have receive and comfort a or if a  constable have he in his custody and suffer he to escape between the two day c  shall not be accessary to the felony nor the constable guilty of the escape of  a felon yearbook Henry pl Plowden b the pardon of all offence and misdemeanour  after the stroke and before the death pardon the murder that follow that be  suppose a pardon be of all offence commit by he before the ten of march that  pardon the stroke and by consequence the murder that ensue by the death of the  party but in our case there be not any colour for a relation for the assault  be not the immediate and efficient cause of the robbery but be only the  occasion or cause without how non of it therefore there be no necessity of a  relation to it and if there be no relation then of necessity that hundred must  be liable where the fact be commit and that be the hundred of Basingstoke this  be not a new case but have be determine already in dean case Hutton c a be  assault in one hundred and fly into another hundred and be still pursue by the  robber in pursuance of the assault he be there take and rob there be as much  reason to make this robbery relate to the first assault as there be in our  case and there it be hold that the hundred in which he be rob shall be only  charge that be the hundred in which the actual take away be modern the case in  Goldsborough allow this to be law thief come upon a carrier and seize on he  and his horse and drive his horse into another hundred and there they rifle  his wagon and the hundred where the rifle be not Chargeable because it be a  complete robbery by take the carrier and the horse into their possession and  the rifle after do not make it a great robbery than it be before but if the  carrier have be leave in possession of his wagon modern er p and horse and  only oblige to lead into that place and there the good have be take from he  there the place where the good be actual take from he have be Chargeable but  the true reason why the hundred of Basingstoke stand charge be this it be to  be know that the hundred be not charge because they do not prevent the robbery  but because they have not take the malefactor after for let the mischief be  ever so great if they apprehend the malefactor within forty day as the law  stand now by statute Edward c and Edward c see also lev sand hawk p c that  edit ch S c and the statute Elizabeth c and Geo c a heretofore within  halfayear they shall not be charge then here be no obligation on the hundred  of Michael in Devon for there be no robbery commit there and the robbery and  charge do not come upon the hundred until it be complete and consummate and  they fail of take the robber within the time limit and for that default they  be charge and not because of any robbery commit the hundred be not bind to  pursue a man for a assault nor for a battery even to death nor shall they  incur any forfeiture for not apprehend such offender and in this cause there  be nothing do in the hundred of Michael but the assault and if there be no  obligation on the hundred of Michael to take the robber then of necessity the  hundred of Basingstoke must do it because the one or the other must it be say  that suppose a assault be make in one hundred by day and the party be carry  into another hundred and keep till night and then be there rob in the  nighttime it be not reasonable in that case that the hundred where the robbery  be commit shall be charge because the robber be by night but I answer that the  remedy fail there because there be no reason to charge the hundred where the  robbery be commit because it be by night so if he be take in the highway by  modern day and carry into a dwellinghouse within the hundred and there rob the  action fail because the hundred be not answerable for robbery commit in a  dwellinghouse but if he have be carry from the highway into a empty waste  house and there rob I will not deliver any opinion how that will have be and  be say they be all of opinion that the hundred shall be liable for a robbery  commit in a private way and by the whole court judgement be give for the  plaintiff a collection OF case argue and determine in the court OF king bench  common plead and chancery from easter term the six year OF george the second  TO easter term the twenty year OF george the second modern easter term the six  of George the second in the king bench chief JusticeLord Raymond chief justice  die in the vacation there be at this time no chief justice and all writ be  direct to Mr justice page and test in his name a sir Francis page Knt sir  Edmund probin Knt William lee Esq justice sir Philip York Knt attorneygeneral  Charles Talbot Esq solicitor general