case the lord marquis OF DORCHESTERS case No special bail in a action of scan  mag Pemberton sergeant in a action of temptation to sin great man move to have  good bail which the court deny and say that in such case bail be not  requirable but notwithstanding the defendant consent to put in fifty pound  bail and then upon the usual affidavit it be move to change the venue the  action be lie in London which be oppose by the sergeant who desire that it may  be try where it be lie but he say in this case that the venue can not be  change first modern because the king be a party to the suit for it be tam wild  ox lord ring how pro he himself second the plaintiff be a Lord of parliament  which be adjourn and will meet and therefore it will be inconvenient to try  the cause in the country since the service of the king and kingdom both  require his attendance here and he say that upon the like motion in the king  bench between the Lord Stamford and Needham the court will not change the  venue modern er p north chief justice say that be always take it as a current  opinion that in a scalndalum great things the venue can not be change for  since it be in the nature of a information it be lamb how it be advisable  whether it be not within the statute of James c which do appoint information  to be try in their proper county Atkins justice incline that the venue may be  change for though by the wisdom of the law a jury of the neighbourhood be to  try the cause yet in point of justice the court may change the venue to this  it be object that then there will be no differellce between local and  transitory action action of debt and account shall be bring in their proper  county by the Richard c and it be agree that a attorney be swear to bring  action nowhere else but the court not agree at last the defendant be Willing  that the cause shall be try in London if the plaintiff will consent not to try  it before the first sit in the next term a Lord chief baron Gilbert say the  court will never change the venue in a action on this statute because a  scandal raise of a peer of the realm reflect on he through the whole kingdom  and he be a person of so great notoriety that there be no necessity of his be  tie down to try his cause among the neighbourhood pale yellow c p it be refuse  to be change in the case of the duke of No folk salk of Lord Stamford lev of  Lord Sandwich in easter term Bac Abr but in the case of the earl of Shaftsbury  vent the venue be change from London on account of the great influence his  lordship have in the city Jones but see Pinkney v Collins term Rep and  Clissold v Clissold term Rep that the venue in a action for a libel can be  change but see freeman v Norris term Rep and Metcalf v Markham term Rep contra  a Atkins justice as to that reason offer why the venue shall not be change  because the plaintiff be a Lord of parliament say that that do not satisfy he  it may be a good ground to move for a trial at the bar to this it be answer  that in the case of the earl of Shaftsbury the court will not grant a trial at  the bar without the consent of the defendant the venue be not change b say  vide side b