THE POWER OF THE KINGS OF ENGLAND To Examine the CHARTERS Of PARTICULAR Corporations and Companies. Exemplified by the STATUTES and LAWS of this REALM. THat the Kings of England have Power to Examine the Charters of Corporations, may appearent by the following Discourse, which will manifestly make it apparent, for if the Prince hath Power on the forfeiture of the Charters and Franchises of an Aggregate Corporation to seize on their Franchises and Liberties, how then can it become a Question whether he cannot by the same Authority examine the Charters of Particular Corporations and Companies? That by the Laws of this Realm He can do the former is here illustrated, and therefore His Power cannot be deficient in the later. In Disquisition therefore of this Case, WE shall Consider in the first place what a Corporation is. A Corporation is either Sole, as Bishop, Parson, 39 H. 6.14. 7. E. 4.12. or Aggregate, as Mayor and Commonalty. A Corporation Aggregate is a Lawful Society of a certain Number of Men Constituted by the King, with divers Liberties and Privileges, 11 H. 7.27. Fitz grant 30. Summa Hostiensis. Fol. 60. All Corporations have their Origination and Essence from the King, otherwise it's an Illegal Society, contrary to the Laws and Statutes of the Kingdom 9 H. 6.16. b. Lib. 10. Fol. 26.33. Inst. Part 3. Fol. 202. Lib. 8. Fol. 125. One Corporation cannot make another by Usage or Prescription, 40 E. 3. Fol. 3. ●9. Ass. 8. Brok. Corporation, n. 45. Neither can ●●e King give Licence to any one to make a Corporation, Lib. 10. Fol. 27. b. But one Corporation may be made out of another by the King, 9 E. 3. Fol. 18. The King may, if he pleaseth, make a limited Corporation, or a Corporation to a special purpose, as to take and not to give, o● Conditional to pay Rents, etc. P. 11. Jac. en le Excheq. St. Saviour's Case. 21 E. 4.59. 2 H. 7.13. Dy. Fol. 100 a. If the King grants Hominibus De Dale to be quit of Toll, they are a Corporation to that purpose, 21 E. 4.55, 56. The King grants Civibus de Norwico quod non ponantur in Juratis, etc. the grant is good and makes them a Corporation, 21 E. 4.55, 56. 2 H. 13. 7 H. 4.44. When a Corporation is rightly Created, all Incidents are annexed to it, Lib. 10. Fol. 30. b. St. Saviour's Case. If the King Creates a Corporation, and doth not give any express Power in the Letters Patent to make Laws or Ordinances, yet this Power is incident to the Corporation, and is included in the very Act of Incorporating, as is also the Power to Sue, to Purcase, and the like; but these Laws ought always to be subject to the Laws of the Realm, as Subordinate to it, Heb. Rep. Fol. 285. Therefore every Law made by any Corporation, aught to be, 1. Remedium Congruum, a fit Remedy to redress the Mischief. 2. Bonae fidei & rationi Consonum, Consonant to Justice and Right Reason. 3. Pro Communi utilitate Civium & aliorum fidelium Domini Regis, for the Public Profit of the Citizens and other the good Subjects of the King▪ and therefore Ordinances or Laws by them made pro privato lucro, and not pro bono publico, for private Advantage, and not for the public Good, are void. Lib. 5. M. 32. & 33. Eliz. BR. Chamberline de Lond. Case. Hob. Rep. Fol. 212. P. 14. Jac. Rot. 907. Norris & Stamp. A Franchise or Liberty is a Royal Privilege in the Hands of a Subject, of some Benefit, Power, or Freedom that Persons or Places have above others, Crompt. Juris. Fol. 241. Franchises are real or Personal. Franchises Real are Privileges annexed and given by the King to some Place, as County Palatines, Corporations, Lamb. E●ren. lib. 1. c. 9 Ploughed. Fol. 123. Crompt. Juris. 137. Franchises Personal, which are granted by the King to some Person or Persons, as Exemption from Juries, from Toll, 21 E. 4.55, 56. All Franchises were Originally derived from the Crown, but now by continuance of Time are Claimed and had in some Cases by Prescription, Inst. Part 1. Fol. 114. Lib. 9 Fol. 23. Bolt. Part 1. Fol. 57 Part 2. Fol. 235. Moor's Rep. c. 918. If a Corporation Claims some Privileges by Charter, and others by Prescription, and so conclude, Et eo Warranto utitur, it's good in Law, Mores Rep. c. 443. Amongst Franchises, some are more Royal, as the Franchises of Counties Palatines, etc. Others less Royal, as Markets, Fairs, etc. Of these, some lie in doing, as to make Justices of Peace, to Pardon Felonies, etc. Some lie in having, as the Goods of Felons, of Fugitives, Wayses, Estrays, Dy. Fol. 44. Ploughed. Com. Fol. 169. Others do lie in Discharge, as Exemption from Payment of Subsidies, etc. Henry the Sixth, by his Letters Patent, 20 H. 6. Granted to Corpus Christi College in Oxon that they and their Successors, and their Tenants should be discharged of Payment of Toll for Pontage and Passage in every Place within England, and adjudged to be good, T. 43. Ch. B R. Enter Wood & Hawksel Rolls Abr. Tit. Prerog. l. 2. Fol. 198. The Isle of Guernsey, for Eight Years was discharged of all manner of Tolls, Exactions, and Customs, Rot. Parl. 14. R. 2. n. 30. Tenants in Ancient Demesnes are free and quit of all Tolls in Fairs and Markets for all things concerning Husbandry and Sustenance, Inst. Part 4. Fol. 269. 21 E. 4.59. Some Franchises may be Forfeited, 1. By a Non-User. Some, 2. By a Refuser. And others, 3. By an Abuser, or Mis-user. 1. By Non-User, as those Franchises which are pro bono publico; and therefore if one hath a Leet to keep, and never keep it, or a Clerk of a Market, who never attends his Office; these by Non-user are Forfeited. The Non-user of a Fair or Market is no cause of Forfeiture, 2 H. 7. Fol. 11. But the Non-pursuit or Arresting of Felons by him that hath the Franchise, it may cause a Forfeiture, 3 E. 1. c. 9 39 H. 6.33, 34. 2. Refuser: The Abbot of Crowland had a Gaol, wherein divers Men were Imprisoned, and because he refused to deliver them, but detained some of them who were Acquitted of Felony, after their Fees paid, the King seized the Gaol for ever, 20 E. 4.6. The King granted to the Abbot of St. Alban to have a Gaol-delivery, and divers Persons were Committed to the Gaol for Felony, and because the Abbot would not be at Cost to make Deliverance, he detained them in Prison long time without making Lawful Deliverance, the Abbot had for that cause Forfeited his Franchise, and that the same might be seized into the King's Hands, 8 H. 4.18. 20 E. 4.6. Brok. Tit. Forfeiture. Inst. Part. 2. Fol. 43. 3. Abuser, or Mis-user. If a Corporation hath Franchises, and Abuse or Mis-use them, they may be Forfeited, Inst. Part 1. Fol. 183. The same Law, if they take for Murage more than they ought to take by their Grant, West. 1. c. 31. The Duke of Norfolk had the Office of Marischal of the King's Bench; he made a Deputy, who permitted the Prisoners to escape, adjudged that it was a Forfeiture of the Office: But if the Duke had made a Grant for Life to J.S. and he had permitted the Prisoners to escape, this had been no Forfeiture but for the Life of J. S. For in the Case of the Deputy the Duke did remain Marischal, and so Respondeat Superior; but in the other Case J.S. was Marischal for his Life, and so shall Forfeit only his own Interest, 39 H. 6.33, 34. Where an Office is granted to a Man, and he mis-use or do not his Office, this is a cause of Forfeiture of it, Ibid. When the Lord of a Franchise refuse to do a thing according to the Grant of the Franchise, or doth a thing against his Franchise, or mis-use his Franchise by himself or Deputy, or non-use his Franchise, in all these Cases the Franchise shall be seized: For when the King grants a Franchise, there is a Condition in Law, that he should do Right to all Parties concerned, if not, the Franchise shall be seized, 20 E. 4. Fol. 5, 6. When one Franchise is incident to another of Common Right, than the Forfeiture of the one is the Forfeiture of the other, as the Abuser of the Court of Pie Powders may cause the Forfeiture of the Fair. So when the Franchises are one of them Subordinate to another; but otherwise when they are Absolute, or by several Titles or Patents, H. 17. Jac. B R. If one hath a Fair or Market for one day, and he keep it another day; as when a Grant or Prescription be for Wednesday, and he keep it on Thursday, it's a cause of Forfeiture. So when a Fair or Market is Granted to one for one day in the Week, and he keep it two days; but in the last Case, the Forfeiture shall be only of that he hath Usurped, Cok. Lib. 9 Fol. 50.22. Ass. 34. Old n. b. Fol. 157. If a Man keeps a Fair or Market two days, and being Questioned by the King for it, and claims both days by the Kings Grant, and it's afterwards found that he hath Right but to one day by Prescription, and to another by Patent, and the first is found against him, this will be no Forfeiture of the last, Lib. 9 Fol. 50. In some Cases for the Abuser of a Franchise one shall be Fined only, and not Forfelt his Franchise. So for the Usurping of a Franchise, where none is, or of more than is due; but to take less than is due, is no cause of Forfeiture, Broke Tit. Forfeiture, n. 37. 14 H. 3. The Archbishop of Dublin was Fined Three Hundred Marks, for that he did dis-forest a Forest of the Church, 2 H. 4.3. Lib. 11. Lyfords' Case. By an Ancient Record, in the Time of William the Conqueror, it doth appear, that the end of Erecting of Corporations, and making and establishing of Cities and Towns Corporate, was, 1. Ad Consuetudines Regni & jus common & dignitates Coronae Conservand. for the conservation of the Dignities and Preeminencies of the Crown, and the Laws of the Land. 2. Ad tuitionem gentium & Populorum Regni, for Defence of the King's Subjects, and for keeping the King's Peace in time of sudden Uproars. 3. Ad defensionem Regni, for Defence of the Realm against outward and inward Hostility. If a Corporation may be Forfeited. A Corporation may be Forfeited: Corporations are called Liberties, Franchises, as it doth appear by the Writ of Non omittas propter aliquam libertatem, Regist. 82. f. n.b. 74. a. and by that Name have been ousted. By the Surrender of all Franchises and Liberties a Corporation is gone, Coke Entries, Fol. 527. Palm. Rep. Fol. 493. Cives London petunt quod Rex vetit its concedere prestinum statum scilicet Majororem & antiquas libertates, Rex non habet inde Consihum quia sunt in bono statu ut sibi videtur, & hac vice statum non mutabit. Inter les Petitions de Parliament 18 E. 3.1. The Citizens of London Petition the King that he would be pleased to grant to them their former state, that is to say, their Mayor and Ancient Liberties: The King gave them this Answer, That he was not Advised to it, because they were in a good state and condition, as it seemed to him, at pro hac vice, he would not alter or change. The City of Norwich and the Liberties thereof seized into the King's Hands for Burning of the Cathedral Church there, but afterwards upon their Petition, and Paying a great Fine, their Liberties were restored to them, 13 E. 1. Rot. Fin. m. 10. Quia Homines de Southampton verberaverunt & vulneraverunt usque ad morrem Gilb. Canon, qui exequahatur praeceptum Regis in dicta villa, pro transgressione villae Capta fuit villa ista in manum Regis & finem fecerunt, & firmam suam exaltaverunt ad 20 l. per Annum. Rolls Abridgm. Part 2. Tit. Prerog. Fol. 204. Because the Men of Southampton did beat and Wound even to Death, Gilb. Canon, who did Execute the Mandate of the King in that Town; for the Offence and Transgression of the said Town, the said Town was seized into the King's Hands, and they paid a Fine, and their Fee-Farm Rent was advanced to 20 l. per Annum. Mandatum est Guilielmo de Haverhall, The saurario Regis quod Civitas London Capiatur in manum Regis, eo quod Cives ejusdem Civitatis non tenuerunt Hutesium & clamorem Secundum Legem & consuetudinem Regni, Teste Rege apud Wondestock 22 die Angusti. Rot. Claus. 30. H. 3. m. 5. Inst. Part 3. Fol. 118. William de Haverhall, Treasurer of the King, is Commanded that the City of London be seized into the King's Hands, for that the Citizens of the said City did not make Hue and Cry according to the Law and Custom of the Kingdom. 29 E. 3. the Liberties of the City of Oxford seized for a Riot, and part of them granted to the University, which they do enjoy to this day. Rot. Claus. 29 E. 3. m. 9 And in the 32 H. 3. the Liberties of the City of Oxford were seized into the King's Hands, 32 H. 3. m. 18. The Liberties of the Mayor, Bailiffs, and Commonalty of Cambridge were seized into the King's Hands, for that in the late Tumults and Uproars there, they and other misdoers did break up the Treasury of the University of Cambridge, and thereout take and burned sundry the Charters, etc. of the said University; and for that they compelled the Chancellor and Scholars of the said University, under their Common Seal, to release to the said Mayor and Burgesses all manner of Liberties, and also all Actions Real and Personal, and further to be bound to them in great Sums of money. And the King did grant unto the Chancellor and Scholars aforesaid within the said Town of Cambridge and Suburbs of the same, divers of the said Liberties; that is to say, the Assize, Conusance, and Correction of Bread, all Weights, Measures, Regrators, and Fore-staliers, with the Fines and Amercements of the same, Rot. Parl. 8 R. 2. n. 11. Inst. Part 4. Fol. 228. 31 E. 1. The Liberties of the City of Winchester were seized, and after upon their Petition and a Fine paid they were restored, 31 E. 1. Rot. T. C. Jac. Rot. 3. The Liberties of Newmarket in Yorkshire seized, and part of them never regranted. 9 E. 1. The Liberties of the Corporation of Sandwich seized, and Judgement quod amittant libertates. Vide m. 18. E. 3. Rot. 62. B R. en. Talley Office. Vide Rot. Claus. 15 E. 2. m. 2. Pat. Rot. 20 E. 2. m. 5. Claus. Rot. 16 R. 2. m. 30. Cl. Rot. 22 H. 6. m. 21. m. 16. Carol. 1. where the Liberties of divers Towns were seized. Judgement given that the Liberties of the Town of Barkenstead in Hartfordshire should be seized. The Liberties of London seized for giving of false Judgement in the Hustings, 28 E. 3. c. 20. Punishments of the defaults of the City of London, and their Franchises to be Forfeited upon their default. Rex amovit custodem Hospital: de suo Patronatu quia male dispendit proficua domus, 9 E. 3. Lib. 11. Magdalen College Case. If a Bishop cut down all the Timber and Trees of his Bishopric, he is to be Deposed as a Delapedator, 2 H. 4. Fol. 3. Lib. 11. Liffords' Case. The Colleges of the Templars, in the Reign of Philip the Fair of France, for their Insolency, Oppression, and Misdemeanours were all Forfeited and seized into the King's Hands; the like was used against the Corporations and Societies of the Jews, as well in France under Dagobert, Philip Augustus, and Philip the Long, as afterwards in Spain under Ferdinando King of Arragon and Castille, Bodin. Repub. Lib. 3. Fol. 383. Kelway. 6 H. 8. Fol. 169, 170. Regist. 20. Inst. Part 2. Fol. 432. The Corporation or Community of the City of Corbeil in France was Forfeited and seized into the King's Hands. Bodin. Repub. Lib. 3. Fol. 373. And therefore Offences done by a Corporation Collegiately Assembled, the whole Corporation is Punished by loss of their Privileges, or of the Right of their Community. Bodid. Lib. 3. Fol. 373. A Prohibition went to the Bishop of Norwich, and he Excommunicated the Party that brought this Writ, thereupon an Action of the Case was brought against the Bishop, and so set forth the whole Matter and it being found against the Bishop, it was adjudged that his Temporalities should be seized until he Absolved the Party, and satisfied the King for the Contempt, 21 E. 3. Rot. 46. The Bishop of Duresm pretending that he had a Privilege that the King's Writ was not to come there, and because one brought it thither, he Imprisoned him, and this being Proved by Information against him, it was adjudged that the Bishop should pay a Fine to the King, and lose his Liberties. 31 E. 1. Rot. 18. Crok. P. 8. Car. Fol. 253. By the Stat. 13 Eliz. c. 12 Subscription is required of the Clergy, if they refuse to Subscribe, the Parties are disabled, and ipso facto deprived, Inst. Part 4. Fol. 324. Disapidations is a fault for which the Incumbent may be deprived, 29 E. 3.16.20 H. 6.46.9 E. 4.34. By the same Reason, if a Corporation doth Abuse or Mis-use their Franchises, they do lose them, for there is a Condition in Law annexed to them, that they shall rightly use them, otherwise they shall be Forfeited. If a Corporation may be Dissolved, than it may be Forfeited; but a Corporation may be Dissolved, ergo, Forfeited; for the Liberties being seized into the King's Hands, they are Extinct. Anno 34 H. 8. the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem, and divers Monasteries were Suppressed and Dissolved, and their Possessions vested in the Real and Actual Possession of the King. When the Religious Persons of Abbeys or Monasteries are detained, and they have lost their Habit, Rule, and Order, than the Corporation is absolutely dissolved. Davyes Rep. 11. Case de Rroxies. Fol. 1. b. If Lands be given to a Dean and Chapter, or to a Mayor and Commonalty, and to their Successors, and after such Body Politic or Incorporate is Dissolved, the Donor and his Heirs shall have again the Land, and shall not Escheat; and the Reason is, because the Fee is vested in their Politic Capacity; and therefore the Law doth annex a Condition to every such Gift and Grant, that if such Body Politic be Dissolved, the Donor shall re-enter, for that the cause of the Gift faileth, Inst. Part 1. Fol. 13. b. Brok. Corp. n. 78. Object. But it may be Objected, that a Corporation aggregate is immortal, invisible, and never dies, 39 H. 6.14. a. 21 E. 4.27. Answ. It's Answered, that a Corporation is Immortal not in Thesi, for we see they have their ortus and occasus, but in Hypothesi, in respect of their perpetual Succession, and because it's presumed they will do no Act to Dissolve them, or commit any Offence by which they may Forfeit their Right of Community. If a Corporation consists of Brothers and Sisters, and afterwards all the Sisters are dead, all the Grants and Acts made by the Brothers are void, for when the Holy Sisters are dead, it's no perfect Corporation, m. 37 Eliz. B R. the Case inter Sergeant Lovelace and Manwood, Rolls Abridg. Fol. 514. But suppose all the Brothers should likewise die, where is the Immortality of the Corporation? Though a Corporation cannot be granted over or assigned to any Person or Persons, yet it may be surrendered to the King; for a Corporation hath its Origination and Essence by the Charter of the King, by the surrender of their Charter the Corporation is gone: For after surrender of their Charter, if they use their Franchises, they are Usurpers upon the King; and if a Quo Warranto be brought against them, what can they Plead, their Charter being surrendered? Must they not submit to such a Fine as shall be imposed upon them? If a Corporation may surrendered its Charter, it may by mis-user or abuser Forfeit its Charter; and if the Charter by which they are Incorporated be Forfeited, where is the Corporation? Is it not translated into Aristophanes' City in the Clouds, for now it is Invisible? Object. But it may be Objected, that if a Corporation doth surrender all its Lands and Franchises unto the King, yet the Corporation doth remain; for the Dean and Chapter of Norwich, 2 E. 6. did surrender to the King their Church and Possessions, and he Incorporated them by the Name of Dean and Chapter, etc. Sanctae & individuae Trinitatis Norw. ex fundatione, E. 6. and regranted to them their Church and Possessions, by the Name of Dean, etc. omitting ex fundatione Regis, E. 6. And it was adjudged the Ancient Corporation remained. Answ. It's Answered, That by their Incorporation of Henry the Eight, they were to be Dean and Chapter of the Bishop of Norwich, and therefore to be of his Council, to Advise with them about the determination of difficult Points and Controversies of Religion; and also to give their consent to every Grant which the Bishop should make to bind his Successor: For it was thought by Henry the Eight not to be Reasonable to impose so great Confidence in any sole Person, as to give him Power to bind his Successor, and therefore without the consent of the Bishop, he having an Interest in them as a Corporation, to be his Counsel, the Dean and Chapter, without the consent of the Bishop, could not surrender their Corporation, but shall remain as long as the Bishopric continue, Lib. 3. m. 40, 41. Eliz. Dean & Chapter de Norw. Case. Object. Civitas London habeat omnes libertates suas antiquas & consuetudines, Mag. Ch. c. 9 The Liberties of the City of London for any Cause shall not be taken into the King's Hands, Rot. Parl. 1 E. 3. Authoritate Parliament, Inst. Part 4. Fol. 253. Answ. That the City of London shall have its Ancient Franchises and Frank Customs, it's Excellently Interpreted by our Ancient Authors, that the Citizens of London shall have their Franchises of which they are seized by a Rightful and Loyal Title of the Gifts, Grants, and Confirmations of the Kings, and which they have not Forfeited by their Abuser or Mis-user, and that they have those Franchises and Customs which are sufferable by Right, and not Repugnant to Law, Inst. Part 2. Fol. 20. Mirror, Ch. 5. §. 2. Fleta Lib. 2. c. 48. Ploughed. Com. Fol. 40. And it doth appear by the Authorities abovesaid, that for Abusion the Franchises of the City of London may be seized: And whereas the Act 1 E. 3. saith, that the Liberties shall not for any cause be seized, etc. it must be understood, that for any cause that is not reasonable, or at the King's Pleasure, they shall not be seized. The Citizens of London were before and after the Conquest Governed by Portgraves or Portgreeves until the Reign of King Richard the First, by whose Charter they were Governed by two Bailiffs: But King Richard, the first Year of his Reign, appointed them a Mayor, who continued therein until the Eight Year of King John, and then King John appointed a Mayor, and because sometime the Mayor appointed by the King was no Citizen of London, King John, the Tenth Year of his Reign, Granted to the Citizen's Liberty and Authority to choose a Mayor De seipsis, Inst. Part 4. Fol. 255. 7 R. 2. it was Enacted that the Aldermen of London shall not from henceforth be Yearly chosen, but shall remain till they be put out for Reasonable cause, notwithstanding the Ordinance of Edward the Second and Edward the Third. So that by this Act it doth appear, that for Reasonable cause an Alderman might be put out, Rot. Parl. 7 R. 2. n. 25. So that by the Authorities abovesaid it doth appear, that a Corporation is a Franchise, and that a Franchise may be Forfeited, and by consequence a Corporation. 3. If the Mayor and Commonalty, and Citizens have done any Act in their Common Council, whereby to Forfeit their Corporation and Franchises. wherein we shall Inquire, 1. Whether the Quo Warranto be well brought against the Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens, etc. or ought not the same to have been against particular Persons. 2. How far the Acts of the Common Council shall bind the Corporation. 3. What those Acts were. 4. If they amount unto a Forfeiture of the Franchises and Liberties. 1. It's conceived that the Quo Warranto is well brought against the Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens of the City of London, without naming any Persons in particular, for by that Name they ought to Plead and be Impleaded, etc. An Action was brought against the Masters and Scholars of New College in C. and well brought, 15 E. 4. Fol. 33. a. Quo Warranto versus de Corporation de Maidenhead in Berkshire, quod Gardianis, Pontenarii Burgenses & Communitas de villa de Maidenhead, for three Years have used a Market with divers Liberties. H. 17. Jac. B R. Rot. 106. in Coron. Office. Palmer's Rep. Fol. 80. An Action upon the Stat. of Winchester was brought against the Men Inhabitant in Hundredo de Elthorn and Spelthorn, without naming any particular, and well brought. T. 12. Jac. Foster's Case. Hutton Rep. Croke Part 2.187. Noys Rep. Fol. 21. An Action versus Inhabitantes in domidio Hundredi d' Waltham, and adjudged good, T. 15. Jac. Rot. 2244. Constable's Case. Brownl. Part 1. Fol. 156. An Action was brought against Dean and Chapter, without Naming them by their Names of Baptism; so if Dean and Chapter bring an Action, 21 E. 4.15. An Action upon the Stat. of Winchester, and 27 Eliz. Versus homines Inhabitantes de D. Rastal. Entries, Fol. 406. If the King grants Land in Fee Probis hominibus villae d' D. it's a good Corporation; and so, if he grants Lands Burgensibus Civibus & Communitati, to the Burgesses, Citizens, and Commonalty, they may sue and be sued by those Names, and they may have an Action ad respondendum Probis hominibus, Burgensibus Civibus, etc. 7 E. 4.14. Where Mayor and Commonalty is sued, and all the Commoners appear in their proper Persons, it's not good, for this is another Body; therefore the Corporation ought to appear by Attorney by the Name of the Corporation, and not in their proper Persons, 19 H. 6.8. Brok. Tit. Corporation, n. 28. A Quo Warranto was brought against the Mayor and Bailiffs of Maydstone, T. 2. Car. in B R. The Mayor and Bailiffs of Maydstone's Case. Poph. Rep. Fol. 180. An Information against the Inhabitants of the Town and Burrough of Denhigh in the County of Denbigh, for Usurping divers Franchises, etc. Coke Entries, Tit. Quo Warranto. Fol. 537. b. 2. So that if a Quo Warranto is well brought against Burgenses, Cives, Inhabitants & Communitatem de villa, etc. be good a fortiori, this Quo Warranto being brought against the Mayor and Commonalty, and Citizens of London. 2. The Burgesses of the Town of Tewksbury in the County of Gloucester, brought an Action of Debt upon the Statute of 8 H. 6. c. 27. which hath reference to the Statute of Winchester, if Satisfaction be not made for the Robbery therein mentioned, within fifteen days after Proclamation: The Action was given against the Commonalties of the Forest of Dean, which are adjacent to the River of Severn, and of the Hundreds of Bledstow and Westbury, and the Writ was, Praecipe Communitati Ferestae de Deane & Hundredis de B. & W. Exception was taken to the Writ, for the Writ ought to have been Praecipe Communitati Forestae d' Deane & Hundredorum de B. W. according to the words of the Statute of 8 H. 6. as one entire Commonalty, and yet the Writ was adjudged good, for that it was to the same effect, 8 H. 6. c. 27.11 H. 6. Fol. 47. a. Inst. Part 2. Fol. 570. The next thing which falls into Consideration, is, How far the Acts of the Common Council shall bind the Corporation. 1. The Acts of the Common Council shall bind the Corporation, for that Court hath some Resemblance of the High Court of Parliament, for it consisteth of two Houses, the one of the Mayor and Aldermen, the other of such as be of the Commons Assembly, Representing the Commonalty of London. In this Court they may make Constitutions and Laws for Government of Trade and Traffic, for the better Execution of the Laws and Statutes of the Nation, or pro bono Publico, and for the good Government of the City, so those Constitutions and Laws be not contrary to the Laws and Statutes of the Nation: And being made by the Mayor, aldermans, and Commonalty, do bind within the City of London and the Liberties thereof. Inst. Part 4. Fol. 249. Lib. 5.62, 63. the Chamberlain's Case. Lib. 8.173. the Case of the City of London. 14 H. 8. It's said, that the Dean and major part of the Chapter make the Corporation, and their Act is the Act of the Corporation, although the others do not agree to it, 14 H. 8. Fol. 9 So in the 21 E. 4.27.70. b. it's said, ubi major pars ibi tota, 9 H. 6.32. If the Major part of the Corporation doth Imprison the Minor part until they consent to do an Act, although they do not consent, yet the Act done by the Major part shall bind all, and its the Act of the Corporation, 15 E. 4. Fol. 2. And with this agrees Panormitan C. cum in cunctis; where it's said, Quod authoritas & protestas Capituli consislit in majori parte ejus, & sic totum Capitulum facere dicitur quod major pars facit, Davyes Rep. Fol. 48. Therefore I agree, that if the Minor part of a Corporation accept of a New Charter, it shall not bind the Corporation, T. 13. Jac. Baggs Case Rolls, Rep. Part 1. Fol. 224. Yet in some Cases the Act of one, or of some few of the Corporation will bind the rest: Did not the Corporation of Sandwich, for the Misdemeanour of John Dennis, the then Mayor thereof, in a high Measure suffer, and being thereof Convicted, was not the Judgement thereupon Quod Communitas amittat libertatem? The Command of the Mayor only, to the Bailiff of the Corporation, to enter into certain Lands for the Corporation, though it be without Deed, shall be good, and bind the Corporation, 16 H. 7.2. A Sum of 100 l. per Annum was due to the Mayor and Commonalty of Southampton out of the Customs of the King, an Acquittance by the Mayor alone, because he was the Head of the Corporation, was allowed by the Justices, and for that there were shown many Prsidents of Acquittances by the Mayor made in times past, 2 R. 3. Fol. 7. An Action of Debt was brought against the Provost and Scholars of a College in C. for that T. M. their late Provost and Predecessor of the Def. and the Scholars by F. their Servant bought certain Goods to the value of 10 l. which came to the use of the College: By the Justices it was agreed, that the Contract was good, and shall be intended the Contract of the Provost only, and the Name of Scholars is but surplusage, for the Contract of the Provost, and for that it came to the Use of the College is sufficient, 5 E. 4.7. Brok. Corporation, n. 53. A Writ of Covenant was brought by the Mayor and Commonalty d' H. against the Mayor and Commonalty of D. and declared that the Defendants by their Deed Covenanted that the Plaintiffs should be Free of Murage, Pontage, Customs, and Toll in D. of all those of H. and that they have unjustly taken Toll by certain of their Burgesses of certain of the Burgesses of H. etc. adjudged that the Prisal and taking by their common Minister, is a taking of the whole Corporation, for it cannot reasonably be intended that the whole Community could meet together to take Toll, and therefore it was adjudged a breach of the Covenant; there is no mention made that he was their Minister by Specialty, Sub communi sigillo Corporationis. 48 E. 3. Ful. 17. I do agree, that where there are Garden and Chaplin, Mayor and Commonalty, Dean and Chapter, or the like, the Garden, Mayor, or Dean, solely cannot make a Lease, nor discontinue, for it ought to be by the whole Corporation, and by Deed, 21 E. 4.70. But if the King makes a Corporation consisting of Twelve Men, to continue for ever in Succession, when any of them die, that the rest may choose others in their place, if three or four of them die, yet all Acts done by them shall be valid in Law, Rolls Abridgement Part 2. Fol. 514. By which it doth appear by what Acts a Corporation is bound, but when those things are acted and done in the Common Council of the said City, being a Court of Record, and which is Representative of all the Free Men and Citizens of the City of London, they must in a more eminent degree bind the Corporation. We shall Observe, 4. What those Acts were. 1. The said Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens of the said City of London have assumed an unlawful and unjust Power and Authority to Levy Money of the Subjects of our Lord the King, to the proper Use of the said Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens assumed by colour of the Laws or Ordinances by them in Fact Ordained without any other Right, Title, or Authority; and in particular in their Common Council Assembled, they did make and publish a certain Law by them in Fact Enacted, for Levying several Sums of Money of all His Majesty's Subjects and Liege People, as well Free as not Free men of the said City, and of other Foreigners, at the Public Markets held within the City aforesaid, coming thither to Sell their Victuals and Provisions. 2. That the said Mayor and Commonalty, and Citizens of the said City, in their Common Council Assembled, without any Legal Authority, did assume upon themselves to Censure and Judge our said Lord the King and the Prorogation of the Parliament, and then and there being so Assembled in their Common Council, did Vote and Ordain, that a certain Petition, under the Name of the Mayor, aldermans, and Commons of the City of London in the Common Council Assembled, should be exhibited to our said Lord the King, in which Petition there was contained, that by the said Prorogation of the Parliament, the Prosecution of the Public Justice of this Kingdom, and the making necessary Provision for His Majesty's Protestant Subjects was obstructed: And they did Order the Imprinting of the same, and caused the same to be Published and dispersed. We shall inquire whether these Laws and Ordinances made by the Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens of London be Warrantable by Law or not. I do agree that they have Power to make Laws and Constitutions for the well Government of the City, 22 Ass. Part 34. But Ordinances which are contrary to the Public Good, which is the scope and great End of all Laws (for Salus Populi est Suprema Lex) are injurious or prejudicial to a multitude, and beneficial only to some particular Persons, such Ordinances are repugnant to the Law of Reason (to which they ought to be subordinate) and by consequence void: And most of the Ordinances and Constitutions which by the Common Law have been adjudged void, as being unreasonable, against common Right, or purely against Law, if their Nature and Quality be considered, they have been found injurious to a multitude, and prejudicial to the Commonwealth, and to have had their commencement and continuance by Oppression and Extortion. 1. They have made a Constitution and Ordinance to Levy several great Sums of Money, as well upon the said Citizens of London as Strangers which come to the Markets of the said City with Victuals, etc. These Sums of Money Levied by them could not be Levied for Toll, Pickage, or Stallage, incident to their Markets, or due by Prescription (they do not pretend it to be) but by an Arbitrary Power, without any Right and against Law they have Levied the said Sums: Every Oppression against Law by colour of any Usurped Authority is a destruction within Magna Chart. c. 29. and it's the worst of Oppressions that is done by colour of Justice: If the King de novo doth grant a Fair or Market, Toll doth not pass as incident to it without special words. Kelloway, Fol. 138.145. 11 H. 6.19. 9 H. 6.45. T. 38. Eliz. Rot. 936. Heedy & Weldhouse. And the Reason is, because it's but a private Profit against common Right. If the King doth grant a Market with Toll, if he doth not appoint how much shall be taken for Toll, the Grant is void: For when the King doth create a Market, and grant such things which may be chargeable to the Subject, the Law presumes that the King granted it Pro bono publico, and the Subject had Quid pro Quo, and greater benefit by it; But it's against all reason to give power to any Subject to impose so much as he pleases upon another by Toll or other Duty; and the rule is given, Lib. 11. f. 8. in the Case de Monopolies, that every Grant and Grievance to the prejudice of the Subject is void, 13 H. 4.14, 15. Kelloway temps, E. 3.134. 30 E. 3.15.1. and expressly 9 H. 6.45. it is, That in a Prescription for Toll, it ought to be set out how much had been used to be taken for Toll, 11 H. 6.19. Book tit. Patent 11.12. When the King erects a Court, he ought to appoint Officers, and not the Patentee; so that there be no oppression or extortion, 14 E. 3.13, 14. In the 13 H. 4. the Commons complained in Parliament, that an Office was erected for Measurage of Clothes and Canvas, with a new Fee for the same by colour of the King's Letters Patents; and prayed, that the said Letters-Patents might be revoked: For the King could erect no Office with new Fees to be taken of the people, who may not be so charged but by Parliament. The Royal Answer of the King in Parliament was, That the Statutes therefore provided should be observed: Rot. Parl. 13 H. 4. n. 43.13 H. 4. fol. 16, 17. King Edward the Third had granted to Robert Polcy a new Office of Measuring Worsteads, with a new Fee: at the petition of the Commons it was resolved in Parliament to be void, and afterwards revoked as void by Authority of Parliament: Rot. Parl. 22. E. 3. n. 31. Rot. Parl. 25. E. 3. And by the Stat. 34 E. 1. all Burdens or Charges put upon the Subject by the King, either to or for the King, or to or for any Subject, by the King's Letters-Patents, or other Commandment or Order, is prohibited, unless it be by common consent in Parliament: 1 Inst. Part. 2. fol. 534. If the King cannot put or impose any Burden or Charge upon the Subject but by their assent in Parliament; From whence do the Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens of London derive their Power and Authority to set and impose such Sums of Money? If from the King, that Power and Authority is against the 29 ch. of. Madge and the Statute of 34 E. 1. If by Prescription, that Prescription is against the said Statutes, and so void in Law: therefore it's an usurpation of an unlimited Power, and contrary to Law and Justice, and a just cause of forfeiture of their Corporation. And that which adds to the Superinjustice of their actings, as they have imposed these sums of Money upon the King's Subjects, so they may at their wills and pleasure impose what greater sums of Money they shall think fit. Richard D'Wakyes did distrain William de Hay, for that he did hold of him certain Lands apud Lin de fold by the service of 10 s. Et per tallagium ei faciendum ad voluntatem ipsius Richardi, & quia ipsum Willielmum talliavit, Anno Regis 9 una f● vice ad 2 s & atia vice Anno 10 & 18 d. quod tallagium ei a retro fuit pro praedictis 2 s. per Annum ipsum Willielmum distrinxit super feodem suum pro praedictis arreragiis; Adjudged that the Tallage of 2 s. and 18 d. or any other sum uncertain: And because it was to be at the will and pleasure of the said Richard D'Wakyes, 'twas against the Statute of 34 E. 1. and so void: M. 11. E. 1. in Banco. Rot. 49. Sussex. A Custom that the Lord of a Manor shall detain the Distress taken upon his Demesnes until a Fine be paid unto him for the damage, at his will, is void. Davys Rep. foe 33. a. 2. H. 4.24. and because he is Judge in his own case, 5 H. 7. fo. 9.44 E. 3. fo. 19 An Action of Trespass was brought for carrying away of certain Trees. The Def. pleaded a Custom; that he, of the Tenants of the Manor, which first came to the place when, etc. should have all the Windfalls there: Adjudged that this Custom was void for the incertainty; and the reason given was, that that lieth not in Prescription, which lieth in the will and pleasure of man; for the will of man is uncertain: 14 E. 3. Fitz. Batt. 277. And this Ordinance of the Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens doth not only extend to his Majesty's Subjects within the City of London, but unto Forainers and Strangers which shall come to their Markets within the said City; which is not only against Law, but a very high breach of their trust which his Majesty hath reposed in them, and a misuser and abuser of their Franchises. The Lord of a Manor prescribes to have of every man which breaks the Pound of the Lord there 3 l. the Prescription is not good, because Strangers cannot be bound by it, 21 H. 7.40. 11 H. 7. fo. 14. a. 21 H. 7. fo. 20. And any Town may make a By-law amongst themselves, that no man there shall put their within the Commons before Michaelmas upon pain of 20 s. adjudged that that binds them, but no Strangers shall be bound by it, 20 H. 7.40. 11 H. 7. fo. 14. 21 H. 7. fo. 29. And therefore that Ordinance or By-law made by the Guardians and the Fellowship of Weavers of Newbury, That no person should use the Art of Weaving within the said Town of Newbury except he had been an Apprentice to the Art within the said Town, and had used it there by the space of five years before the said Ordinance, or were admitted by the Guardian and Fellowship, upon the pain of 20 s. a month, is void, because it excludes Strangers, though they have served as an Apprentice for 7 years to the said Art: and because it did restrain the Liberty of the Subject: Hol. rep. fo. 211, 212. This Ordinance made by the Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens of London in their Common-council assembled, is against Law; it restrains the King's Subjects in their Liberties (which are their rightful Inheritance). Every one that comes to their Markets with Victuals, etc. (without which they could not subsist) must pay, etc. if not, they must be turned out, etc. Solve, aut abi: this is pro privato lucro. But that Ordinance for carrying their Broad Cloth before sale thereof to Blackwel-hall to be searched, was pro hono publico; and for that reason did oblige Strangers that did not bring their Cloth to be searched, lib. 5. Chamberlain of London's Case. Money cannot be raised or charged upon the Subject but by Act of Parliament. If the King himself cannot do it, I am sure no Corporation can, having no power, Authority or Jurisdiction, but what is originally derived from him. It's not the quantity of Money levied by them, but the manner of the raising of it by a Legislative Power unjustly usurped in their Common-council. It was not the quantity of the Ship-money, but the raising of it without a Parliament, which was the Crime. Quos una culpa nectet, eos una poena plectet; and that must be the Seizing of their Liberties. A Man takes two pence for every Barrel of Beer which shall be Landed at a certain place near to the Sea; this is not lawful, although it be upon his own Land, for this is to Levy a new Custom, which he could not do Rolls Abridg. tit. Praerogat. fol. 571. An Information was against Morgan, for raising of two pence for every parcel of Beer landed at Crockernepit in the County of Somerset, near Bristol; he was found guilty, was Fined one hundred Marks, and imprisoned by Judgement of Court upon one of the Articles in Eire, That it shall not be lawful for any person to raise a Tax, Rate, or Custom upon the Subjects of the King, though on their own Land, P. 11. Car. 1. Rolls Abridg. Tit. Praerogat. fol. 571 2. The Contriving, Imprinting, and Publishing of the Petition to be presented to his Majesty, containing much scandalous Matter in it, and Reflections upon his Government. I agree, it's lawful for any Subject to Petition to the King for redress in an humble manner, when he finds himself grieved; for access to the Sovereign must not be shut up in case of the Subject's distresses: but on the other side, it's not permitted under colour of a Petition and Refuge to the King, to make ill Reflections on his Majesty and his Government. If a Scandalous Letter be sent and delivered to a person who received it, though the party which sent it did never publish it, yet it's punishable, for the King and Commonwealth are interessed in it: for such Letters do tend to the breach of the Peace, and to the stirring up Challenges and Quarrels; and therefore the Means of such Evils, as well as the End, are to be prevented. Hob. Rep. fol. 62. Barrow's Case. If a Man Imports Books writ beyond Seas against the King's Supremacy, knowing the effect of them, and offer them to any Subjects, he is within the danger of the Statute 5 Eliz. So of those that teach the Contents, and affirm it to be good; the same of him that conveys the Books secretly to his Friends, to persuade them to be of that opinion; the same of them that Print, and offer such Books within the Nation. Dy. foe 282. T. 6. Car. 1. An Information was Exhibited against Bonham Norton, his Son John Norton, Lee May, Tho. Smith, etc. for contriving a Slanderous Petition to the King, and for charging of the Lord Keeper with a Bribe for making of a Decree, and they were Sentenced. T. 6. Car. 1. Doctor Leighton was Sentenced for Making, Imprinting, and Publishing of a detestable Book, containing in it Treasonable Matter against the King, and inviting the Subjects to Rebellion. Perkins was Sentenced to pay One thousand pounds, and Imprisonment during his life, because he dispersed a Seditious Letter against the Loane of King Charles the First; for the King sent to the Freeholders' to lend to him Money. Huttons rep. fo. Veritas convitii non excusat convitiantem a poena. Penry for publishing Scandalous Libels against the Church-Government, was Indicted, Arraigned, Attainted, and Executed, P. 35. Eliz. inter Placita Coronae in Banco Regis. New Book of Entries, fo. 252. William's a Papist, and Barrister at Law, Indicted of High-Treason, for writing two Books, the one called Balaams Ass, and the other called Speculum Regale; because he affirmed the King should die before 1621. and for saying that England was the Habitation of Devils; and that it is the abomination of desolation: By all the Judges, it was High-Treason at Common-Law; for these words import the End and the Destruction of the King and his Nations; and that false Religion is there maintained; which is a motive to the people to Rebellion. And although the Book was enclosed in a Box, sealed up, and conveyed secretly to the King, and never published, yet he was Attained for High-Treason, and Executed at Charing-Cross, P. 17. Williams of Essex Case. Rolls rep. part. 2. f. 89. In the time of Henry the Eighth, upon the Dissolution of the Monasteries, there was a great Rebellion in the North of England; the Dean of Windsor being told of it, said, The King had brought his Hogs to a fair Market; and a parson hearing of it, said, Principibus obsta serò medicina paratur: because the words of the Dean had an ill Reflection upon the Government, and of his Majesty's Management of the Affairs of State, they were both Indicted of High-Treason for speaking the words, and were found guilty; and the Dean was attainted of High-Treason; but the Parson, because he was so ignorant (as many times Ignorance is the best Sanctuary) that he did not know the difference between Principiis and Principibus, he was Reprieved, and obtained his pardon of the King. Every Libel against a private person deserves severe punishment, for it incites all of the Family, Kindred, and Society to revenge, and tends to Quarrels: Verba movent litem, lis vulnera, vulnera Mortem; against a Subordinate Magistrate, it's a greater offence, because it scandalises the Government; for Injuria crescit & decrescit secundum dignitatem personae. But against the King, who is the Supreme Head of the Commonwealth, Pater Patriae, it's a Crime of the first Magnitude. And how fatal and pernicious the publishing of Scandals and Libels have been to the Kings of England, and to their good Subjects, this Nation is very sensible: 7 E. 1. the King sent Commissions to all the Counties of England, to inquire de Spersoribus Rumorum: and 25 E. 1. Declaratio Regis missa fuit ad omnes Comitatus Angliae, de Rege purgando de certis rumoribus iniquis contra ipsum ortis, etc. Rot. Parl. 7 E. 1. M. 13. Rot. Patent. 25 E. 1. pars 2. M. 7. A Declaration of the King was sent to all the Counties of England, to purge him of certain false and unjust Rumours and Scandals raised against him. Rex mandavit Majori & Vicecomit. London, Quod facta inquisitione de sparsoribus rumorum & Seditionem in Civitate, ipsas caperent, & in Prisona de Newgate detinerent: 20 E. 3. pars 1. M. 18. & 26. The King Commands the Major and Sheriffs of London, that they make diligent inquisition of the spreaders of False Reports and Sedition in the City, and that they should seize upon them, and keep them in the prison of Newgate. As for the Petition imprinted and published by the Major, Aldermen, and Citizens, I hope it was acted by many of them out of a principle of Piety and Loyalty, but must needs be looked upon as an action of no great discretion in them, (to say no worse) for to make such ill reflections upon his Majesty, when the King by his Oath is bound to do Justice, and Nulli Negavimus, is one of his Royal Attributes. Ob. But it hath been said, That no acts bind beyond the Corporation, but such as are done under their common Seal; therefore they cannot present a Clerk to a Living, but by Deed sub Communi Sigillo, 13 H. 8 12. nor make a Surrender, 33 H. 6.17. 34 H. 6.21. nor assign Auditors, 4 H. 7.17. 7 H. 7.9. Et hujusmodi, so their Laws and Constitutions made in their Common Council do not bind, because they are not under their Common Seal. Answ. Excellent Logic; he must be a rare Chemist that can Extract such a Consequence from the Premises. The Common Council of the City is a Parliament of the City; the Mayor is the King, the aldermans the Peers, the Commonalty the Commons; and what they there Enact and Ordain is upon Record; Jones Rep. Fol. 540. Therefore those Constitutions and Ordinances by them there made, being Enacted in a Court of Record, if not Warrantable, make the more against them; and what is then by them Enacted is of greater Force and Puissance than if it had been under their Common Seal. If they appoint an Attorney at Law or Bailiff in their Common Council, they may justify any Act which doth belong to their Office, Sans monstrans de fait, etc. for it's to the Use of the Corporation, 12 H. 7.25, 26. They certify their New Mayor Yearly in the Exchequer, because it's entered on Record, 13 H. 8.22. vide lib. 10. l' Guardians 8. S. Saviour's Case. 14 H. 8.29. 12 E. 4.9, 10. iv If the Mayor, Commonalty, and Citizens have done any Act in their Common Council, whereby to Forfeit their Corporation and Franchises. Where a Franchise is absolute and entire, and hath no dependence on another Franchise, then if any incident to it be Forfeited, the whole Franchise is Forfeited, 22 Ass. 34. Palmer's Rep. Fol. 82. en l' Case d' Corporation d' Maidenhead. But the Corporation of London is a Franchise, Court d' Entries, Fol. 527. Palmer's Rep. Fol. 82. absolute and entire, and hath no dependence on another Franchise, therefore the Forfeiture of any incident to the Corporation of London, is a Forfeiture of the Corporation. To make Laws and Ordinances for the well Government of the Corporation is incident to every Corporation, Hob. Rep. Fol. 211. But the Corporation of London hath abused and misused this Power, therefore they have Forfeited their Power to make Laws and Ordinances, which is incident to their Corporation, therefore they have Forfeited their Corporation; the abuse of the Court of Pyepowders, being incident to a Fair, is a Forfeiture of the Fair, 7 H. 4.44. otherwise of Toll, because it's not incident to the Fair or Market, Palmer, Ibid. Object. There is a Stat. 7 R. 2. That the Citizens of London shall enjoy all their whole Liberties whatsoever, with this clause, Licet usi non fuerint, vel abusi fuerint, and notwithstanding any Statute to the contrary, 7 R. 2. n. 37. Answ. This is no Act of Parliament, but an Act of Grace of the King in Parliament. For no assent of the Lords, etc. do appear, but only per dominum Regen● & Consilium suum, which must be intended his Privy Council, if it had been otherwise, then Consilio Comitum Baronum, etc. as 35 E. 1. apud Carlioten Stat. de Asportatis Religiosorum, etc. ●ut admitting it to be an Act of Parliament, it doth only extend to 〈◊〉 Offences and Crimes which they had committed or omitted, and not 〈◊〉 ●●ose that shall be committed or omitted by them de futuro: If otherwise, it would have been against all Reason and Justice, and by consequence void; and that it must be so, read the Kings Answer to the Petition of the Commons at large, Jones Rep. Fol. 241. And if we look into all the Statutes which confirm the Liberties of London, viz. 14 E. 3. c. 1. which confirms all Reasonable Liberties. 2 H. 4. c. 1. the Liberties which have been duly used. 3 H. 5. c. 1. all, except such as are Repealed by the Common Law. 2 H. 6. c. 1. All Liberties well used, and not Repealed by the Common Law: There is no Statute or Prescription Warrant any of their Actions but only such as are consonant to Right, Reason, and Justice. Qui Muragium ad villam clandendam gravius ceperint quam concessum fuerit per Cha●tam Regis, perdant ex tunc gratiam suae concessionis & graviter amerciantur. Fleta, lib. 2. c. 43. They which shall take more Murage than is granted to them, shall lose the Benefit of their Grant, and shall be grievously Amerced. Le ley voet quo chescan perdera son Franchise que eo misuera, Mirror. c. 5. §. 4. The Law wills, that every one shall lose his Franchise which mis-use it. And Bracton saith, that Libertates possunt amitti per abusum vel non usum, Bract. lib. 2. Fol. 56. lib. 3. Fol. 117. And it's to be Observed, that where the Law saith, that they shall lose their Liberties or their Grant, it's to be understood of a Forfeiture of them for ever, Inst. Part 2. Fol. 222. How the Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens of London have misused and abused their Franchise by Levying of such Sums of Money, to the Oppression of His Majesty's good Subjects, is submitted to the grave consideration of all Sober and disinteressed Persons. A Leet was seized into the King's Hands because they did take of the Offenders against the Assize of Bread and Beer 2 s. when they had no Pillory nor Tumbril, Rastals Entries, Fol. 540. In the Eires of the County of Cornwall, 30 E. 1. inter Placita Coronae & infra Hundredum de Keryer, there was prescribed that in Holston Burgh they did take, de novo, of every great Beast, viz. Ox, etc. as well of the Buyers as of the Sellers, one penny, whereas they ought to take but one penny of the Buyer: And that they take of Merchandises exceeding 12 d. of the Buyer, ob. and of the Seller, ob. whereas they ought to take but ob. of the Buyer. Rolls Abridg. Part 2. Fol. 523. The Justices in Eire did inquire of those which did take superfluous or undue Tolls in Cities, Burroughs, or elsewhere against the common Usage of the Kingdom, Cap. Itineris vet. Magna Charta. It's to be Observed, that if the Defendants in a Quo Warranto made default, their Franchises were seized into the Hands of the King, and the King was to be Answered all the Profits, and if they did not Replieve within the Eire, they lost their Franchises for ever. Iten. Canc. 6 E. 2.7. Ob. If the Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens of London have committed any Offence, the particular Persons which have transgressed aught to be punished, but the Corporation cannot, for no Trespass lie against a Corporation, 22 Ass. 67. Brok. Tit. Corp. n. 43. 15 E. 4.1. b. No Capias, no exigent against it, neither can it be Imprisoned, 21 E. 4.69, 70. 45 E. 3.2, 3. Neither can a Corporation be bound in a Statute or Recognizance, Moores Rep. 68 Answ. His Majesty may proceed against them in their Politic capacity, and so to a Forfeiture of their Corporation and Franchises; or in their Natural capacities against any particular Persons of the Corporation which are Offenders, and they shall be punished Secundum quantitatem & qualitatem delucti; according to the quantity and quality of their Offence. Non oppressus liberant, Qui liberos opprimunt. They will not free those which are Oppressed, who Oppress those which are Freevill FINIS.