"in case judgment shall be given for the person or persons making such return to such writ, he or they shall recover his or their costs of suit."

But where the prosecutor succeeds on some of his traverses only, so that the defendants are entitled to judgment, the prosecutor shall not have costs upon the issues found for him. R. v. Mayor of Malmesbury, 11 Law J. 318, qb.

The party entitled to judgment, may, in having his costs taxed, include the costs of the writ or return, without making any previous application to the court, under stat. 1 W 4, c. 21, s. 6, for leave to do so. R. v. Fall. et al., 1 Ad. & El. N. C. 636.

Execution.] By stat. 9 Ann. c. 20, s. 2 (ante, p. 275), the costs and damages are to be levied by ca. sa., fi. fa., or elegit. Under a fi. fa., the party is entitled to levy the poundage, costs of execution, &c., under stat. 43 G. 3, c. 46, in the same manner as in civil actions. R. v. Mayor of Glamorgan, 2 Smith, 8. The writs are tested and made returnable, as directed ante, p. 112, and sued out and indorsed as directed, ante, p. 111. The forms must now, I should think, be framed from the forms in civil actions. See 2 Arch. Pr. 327, &c.

Peremptory mandamus.] If the prosecutor have judgment on demurrer to the return, the court by their judgment award a peremptory mandamus. See ante, p. 275.

If after a traverse of the return, the prosecutor have judgment, either by default or upon demurrer, he may sue out a peremptory mandamus, without waiting to execute a writ of inquiry for his damages.

If a verdict be found for the prosecutor, and judgment be signed for him, he may immediately sue out a peremptory mandamus, either before or after he sues out execution. R. v. Trustees of Luton Road, 10 Law J. 263, qb. But he cannot have a peremptory writ, until his proceedings are completed, by judgment. R. v. Baldwin, 8 Ad. & El. 947. Nor, will the court grant the writ for a part merely of what was required by the original mandamus, nor amend or remodel the former writ, to enable the prosecutor to sue out such a peremptory mandamus. R. v. Church Trustees of St. Pancras, 3 Ad. & El. 535. As to the form of the peremptory mandamus, see ante, p. 211.

To the peremptory mandamus, the defendants can make no other return but that they have obeyed the writ. R. v. Mayor of Poole, 9 Law J. 231, qb. If it be personally served, or if a copy be served and the original at the same time shown to the defendant, and he afterwards refuse or neglect to obey the writ, the prosecutor may obtain a rule nisi for an attachment against him, which may afterwards be made absolute in the ordinary way. The court will grant the attachment only against those who actually refuse obedience to the writ, and

the application must be against them alone, and not against the whole corporation, &c. R. v. Mayor of Poole, supra. In showing cause against the attachment, the defendants may take an objection to the mandamus for a defect appearing upon the face of it; and if the court hold the writ bad, they will quash it, and discharge the rule nisi for the attachment. R. v. Ledgard, Mayor of Poole, 1 Ad. & El. N. C. 616.

SECTION 5.

Writ of Error.

Formerly, where the party suing out the mandamus, traversed the return, and judgment was given for either party, either upon demurrer or otherwise, the party aggrieved by the judgment might have brought a writ of error, in the same manner as in civil actions; and as the whole of the record would then be open to the court, the plaintiff might obtain the opinion of the court of error as to the validity of the return. See R. v. Manchester and Leeds Railway Co. in error, 3 Ad. & El. N. C. 528. Dean of Dublin v. R. in error, 1 Bro. P. C. 73.

But as the party who sues out the mandamus may now at once demur to the return, if he or the defendant be dissatisfied with the judgment of the court of Queen's Bench, he may proceed to obtain the opinion of a court of error upon it. And accordingly it is enacted by stat. 6 & 7 Vict. c. 67, s. 2, that "whenever any such judgment as is herein before mentioned (see ante, p. 279) shall be given, or whenever issue in fact or in law shall be joined upon any pleadings in pursuance of stat. 9 Ann. c. 20, and judgment shall be given thereon by any of the courts aforesaid (see ante, p. 277,) it shall be lawful for any party to the record in any of such cases, who shall think himself aggrieved by such judgment, to sue out and prosecute a writ of error for the purpose of reversing the same, in such manner and to such court or courts, as a party to any personal action in the said court may now sue out and prosecute a writ of error upon the judgment in such action; and such and the like proceedings shall thereupon be had and taken, and such costs awarded, as in ordinary cases of writs of error upon judgments of the said courts respectively in personal actions; and if the judgment of such court be reversed by the court of error, the said court of error shall thereupon by their judgment not only reverse the same, but shall also in addition thereto give the same judgment which the court, whose judgment is so reversed, ought to have given in that behalf; and if by their said judgment they shall award that a peremptory writ of mandamus shall issue, the same shall and may accordingly be issued by the proper officer in the office from which such writs issue,

as the case may be, upon production to him of an office copy of the said judgment of the court of error, which shall be his authority and warrant for so doing: Provided always, that bail in error to the amount of 501., or such other sum as may by any rule of practice be appointed as hereinafter provided, shall be duly put in within four days after the allowance of the said writ of error, and the same shall afterwards be duly perfected according to the practice of the court wherein the said original judgment was given; otherwise the plaintiff in error shall be deemed to have abandoned his writ of error, and the same shall not be further prosecuted." See as to proceedings in writs of error, 2 Arch. Pr. 135, &c.

SECTION 6.

Amendment.

By stat. 9 Ann., c. 20, s. 7, the statutes of jeofails, and stat. 4 & 5 Ann., c. 16, were extended to all writs of mandamus and proceedings thereon, as far as the same are applicable to the proceedings in the former act mentioned. Those statutes, however, state so many instances in which defects in proceedings are aided, that it is inconvenient to enumerate them in this place; but the reader is referred to the statutes themselves.

The court have amended the writ; R. v. Mayor of Newbury, 1 Ad. & El. 759, 751; they have amended the return, even after it was filed, where the error arose from a mere clerical mistake; R. v. Lyme-Regis, 1 Doug. 135; and where the return appeared to be insufficient to raise the question intended to be agitated, the court, at the instance of the prosecutor made a rule, giving liberty to the parties, to whom the writ was directed, to amend in the manner required, if they wished to do so. R. v. Marriott, 1 D. &. R. 166.

PART III.

COLLATERAL PROCEEDINGS.

CHAPTER I.

Articles of the Peace.

In what cases.] Wherever a person has just fear that another will burn his house, or do him a corporal hurt, as by killing or beating him, or that he will procure others to do so, he may demand the surety of the peace against him. 1 Hawk, c. 60, 8. 6. So, if another threaten to imprison him, [without any legal ground for it], he may demand surety of the peace against him; for every unlawful imprisonment is an assault and wrong to the party imprisoned. Id. s. 7. And there must be a threat, either in words, or to be inferred from the conduct of the party, otherwise the court will not grant the surety demanded. R. v. Dunn, 12 Ad. & El. 599.

And it is only in this court, or the court of Chancery, that a peer or peeress can be bound over to keep the peace, or that it is at all usual for peers or peeresses to demand surety of the peace. And there have been several instances in this court, of peeresses exhibiting articles of the peace against their lords;-as in the cases of the Marquis of Carmarthen, Foster, 359, Lord Vane, 2 Str. 1202, 13 East, 1172, n., Earl of Stamford, Hardw. 74, Earl Ferrers, 1 Burr. 631, 634, Lady Strathmore, against her husband Mr. Bowes, 1 T. R. 696, and Lord Howard, 11 Mod. 109. And where any woman intends thus to exhibit articles of the peace against her husband, she may employ an attorney for the purpose at the husband's expense, and he will be liable to the attorney for the amount of his bill of costs on the occasion. Turner v. Roakes, 10 Ad. & El. 47.

Formerly the court were unwilling to allow articles of the peace to be exhibited, where the party complained of resided at a great distance. See R. v. Waite, 2 Burr. 780. But this at present would be no objection, as the court may, if necessary, allow the party to enter into recognizances before a justice of the peace in his neighbourhood.

The articles.] By stat. 21 J. 1, c. 8, s. 1, after reciting that divers turbulent and contentious persons, some out of malice and others in hope of gain, by way of composition, do oftentimes upon their corporal oaths peremptorily and corruptly taken, or otherwise upon false suggestions and surmises, procure process of the peace or good behaviour out of His Majesty's courts of Chancery and King's Bench against divers of His Majesty's quiet subjects, whose dwellings and abodes are (for the most part) in counties far distant and remote from the said courts, to their intolerable trouble and vexation, whereas they might upon good cause showed receive justice at the hands of the justices of the peace in the counties where they dwell :-for remedy whereof it is enacted, by sect. 2, "That all process of the peace or good behaviour to be granted or awarded out of the same courts or either of them, against any person or persons whatsoever, at the suit of or by the prosecution of any person or persons whatsoever, shall be void and of none effect,- unless such process shall be so granted or awarded, upon motion first made before the judge or judges of the same courts respectively, sitting in open court, and upon declaration in writing, upon their corporal oaths, to be then exhibited unto them by the parties which shall desire such process, of the causes for which such process shall be granted or awarded by or out of any of the said courts respectively, and unless that such motion and declaration be mentioned to be made upon the back of the writ; the said writings there to be entered and remain of record: and that if it shall afterwards appear unto the said courts, or either of them respectively, that the causes expressed in such writings or any of them be untrue, that then the judge or judges of the said counts or either of them respectively, shall and may award such costs and damages unto the parties grieved, for their or any of their wrongful vexations in that behalf, as they shall think fit: and that the party or parties so offending shall and may be committed to prison by such judge or judges, until he or they pay the said costs and damages."

Get a draft of the articles drawn by counsel; engross them on parchment, and let them be signed by the party; then lodge them with one of the masters of the crown-office in court. The party being in court, instruct counsel to move that he be sworn to the articles, that the articles be read and filed, and that an attachment issue against the defendant. The exhibitant is then sworn to the articles, and the articles are read aloud by one of the masters of the Crown-office; and if the court think the statement to be such as to amount to a threat of personal injury, &c., as above mentioned, they grant the motion, and the rule may afterwards be drawn up at the crown-office. This rule is not