case the king against tailor in a information quo warranto if a usurpation be  confess by the defendant for only part of the time lie in the declaration a  general judgement of ouster be erroneous SC stram SC Kely SC bar king b and  the note a information in the nature of a quo warranto be grant against the  defendant in Hilary term last to show by what authority he act as capital  burgess of the borough of Evesham and in the information the usurpation be lie  to be from the twenty day of August last to the fill of the information the  defendant by his plea admit a usurpation from the twenty of August to the  twentyninth of September last and after have set out the constitution of the  corporation he plead that upon the twentyninth of September he be regular  elect into that office and have ever since enjoy the office under that  election modern to this there be a replication and upon that four issue be  take the first issue be that the defendant at the time of his election be not  a burgess and the charter require the capital burgess to be choose out of the  burgess the second issue be that the meeting at which this election be make be  not duly summon the three issue be that the defendant be not duly elect the  four issue be that he be not duly swear the first and last issue be find for  the defendant and special verdict on the two other a general judgement of  ouster be enter against the defendant for as the defendant by his plea bad  confess a usurpation that be take to be the proper judgement Mr will move to  set aside this judgement and insist that if this general judgement of ouster  shall be permit to stand though the court shall be of opinion for the  defendant upon the special verdict or indeed if all the issue upon the trial  have be for he be can not have have any benefit thereof for there can be two  inconsistent judgement enter one that the defendant shall be oust the other  and that he be acquit of the usurpation the office of capital burgess in this  case which the defendant original hold by usurpation be determine by a regular  election on the twentyninth of September and there can be no ouster of a thing  modern er p not in be and he cite the case of the king v Hicks Hilary term Geo  a which be a information of this sort and the office there be determine at the  time the party be convict of the information no judgement be enter but only a  to take in hand pro fine he compare it to the case of a ejectment where if the  term be declare on expire before the judgement be reverse there be no  judgement enter for the recovery of the term but for damage only and it be for  that reason application be usual make to the court for enlarge the term chapel  sergeant on the other side it appear by the defendant confession that there  have be a usurpation therefore the crown be entitle to a judgement and a  general one only can be enter the case of the king v Hicks be not parallel the  person there not be in the possession of the office at the time of the  conviction these information be in the nature of mix action in which the  possessor of the office be evict as well as a fine set upon he for the  usurpation I admit that where such a information be grant for claim several  franchise the party may disclaim as to one and be oust thereof and acquit  himself of any usurpation as to the other but no instance of any such  disclaimer be allow for part of the time lie in the information can be give  modern where it be one office only the defendant be in possession of this  office by usurpation be incapable of be regular elect into it the statute Ann  c S require that upon a conviction on this kind of information there shall be  a judgement of ouster as well as a fine set on the party convict Mr Hussey  cite the case of the king v PindarIn the king bench Geo ld ray a where a  information be grant against the defendant to show by what authority he claim  to act as mayor of the borough of Penryn in Cornwall he justify by his plea  and set out that he be regular elect into that office and that he be duly  swear upon both these matter issue be take and upon the trial it be find that  he be regular elect but that he have never be swear upon which a general  judgement of ouster be enter against he afterward the party suppose himself  not disqualify by this judgement to execute his office for the future provide  he be duly swear apply for a mandamus to be swear into it to which this  general judgement of ouster be return and upon argument the court hold the  return sufficient for while this judgement subsist be can have no benefit from  any such mandamus a writ of error be bring in the house of lord upon the  judgement on the information and likewise on the judgement of the court upon  the return to the mandamus and the house of lord affirm the judgement give  below on the information and quash that on the mandamus because no such writ  lie Mr Parker on the same side to show that in enter up judgement the usual  term must strict be comply with he cite walcot caseSalk b and to show that the  judgement of ouster be a essential part of the judgement in a information be  mention Lord holt opinion in the case of the king v knoll salk skin c Mr will  in reply say the case of pindar be very different from the present there the  defendant justify his exercise of the office for the whole time the  information charge he to lave usurp and it appear that he never have be swear  but during the whole time bad that alley exercise it no other judgement can be  give but that of a general judgement of ouster but here the justification not  be a entire one for the whole time but a admission of a usurpation until the  twentyninth of September and then a claim of it under a regular election the  party indeed be liable to be fine for have act as a capital burgess until the  twentyninth of September but must be acquit of any usurpation for the residue  of the time the notion that a illegal exercise of office for a time will lie  the party under a perpetual disability of be choose in a regular manner he say  be repugnant to common sense and reason and not warrant by any legal  resolution he insist that the case in ejectment before put be in point because  though the party be at the modern time of trial in possession of the office  yet it be under a regular election and the interest which the party have in  the office as a usurp one and which he be liable to be oust of by a  information of this sort be absolute expire and determine by the election on  the twentyninth of September modern er p Mr fazakerly on the same side by writ  of quo warranto at commonlaw person illegal in possession of office which  concern the public be liable to be oust but then they be not punishable by  fine this introduce information of this nature in which the person convict be  to be fine but in these information it not be a settle point whether upon a  conviction thereon the party be liable to be oust to satisfy this doubt the  Ann c be make the Act of parliament only say that upon such conviction it  shall and may be lawful for the court to award a judgement of ouster and  likewise to set a fine and though the word it shall and may be lawful shall be  construe compulsorily and not to leave a discretion in the court as be contend  for on the other side yet the Act must have a reasonable construction put upon  it and the provision for judgement of ouster c must be intend only where there  be a continue illegal possession of the office which be the common case and  not where the party be legal in possession thereof though possible he may have  usurp original Mr draper on the same side as to the manner of plead cite Alton  wood case Henry roll Abr the court be clear of opinion for the defendant on  the reason before mention and set aside the judgement