[* 232] promulgated at our suit for certain felonies (or " trespasses")* whereof he is indicted, and have you there then there this writ. Witness, &c. Judge's war. England, to wit. Whereas it is certified to me, by one of rant for ap the clerks in the crown office, that J. A. late of the parish of prehension of defendant, Saint D. in the west, in the ward of F. without, in London, outlawed printer, stands charged, by information filed against him in after convic the court of king's bench, by his majesty's attorney-general, tion. (e) for certain trespasses, contempts, and misdemeanours, on which information the said J. A. hath been, by a jury of his country, convicted, and thereupon he was pronounced outlawed in the city of London. And it being further certified to me, that the said J. A. has not received the judgment of the court for the said offences, nor is he under any recognizance so to do. Rule for com fendant to These are therefore to will and require, and in his majesty's name strictly to charge you and every of you, on sight hereof, to apprehend and take the body of the said J. A. and if he shall be apprehended in term time, to bring him into his majesty's court of king's bench at Westminister, to receive the judgment of the said court for his said offence; or if he shall be apprehended in vacation, forthwith to convey him to the common jail of the county, city, or place where he shall be apprehended, there to remain without bail or mainprize until he shall be discharged by due course of law. Hereof fail not at your peril. Given under my hand and seal, the fifth day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety-one. W. H. Ashurst. (L. S.) To J. P. and J. H. and also to all constables, headboroughs, tything-men, and others, whom it may concern. The defendant being brought here into court, in custody mitting de of the sheriff of the county of Middlesex, by virtue of a writ Marshalsea, of capias ut lagatum, it is ordered upon the motion of Mr. and allowing Attorney-General, that the said defendant be now committed writ of error to the custody of the marshal of the marshalsea of this court, in outlawry. to be by him kept in safe custody until he shall be from (f) Rule for the marshal to bring up de. fendant to assign errors. (8) thence discharged by due course of law. And the said defendant, now here in court, producing a writ of error, and praying oyer of the record. It is ordered by this court that the said writ of error be allowed. On the motion of Mr. Attorney General. That the marshal or his deputy bring the defendant up tomorrow to assign errors. (e) Ante 1 vol. 367. See form, Hand. Prac. 460. Upon a certificate of the clerk in court, this warrant may be issued in aid of the outlawry process for the ap prehension of the defendant. ror on a Of* Easter term, 1768-8 Geo. III. Our lord the king Writ of er. hath sent to his justices appointed to hold pleas before him, judgment of his writ closed in these words (that is to say) George the outlawry. (h) third, by the grace of God of Great Britain, France, and [* 233] Ireland, king, defender of the faith, &c. to our justices appointed to hold pleas before us, greeting: forasmuch as in the record and process, as also in the publication of an outlawry against John Wilkes, late of Westminster, in the county of Middlesex, esquire, on a certain information against the said John Wilkes for printing and publishing a certain libel or composition, entitled, an Essay on Women, whereof the said John Wilkes is impeached, and thereupon by a jury of the county is convicted, as it is said manifest error hath intervened, to the great damage of the said John Wilkes, as by his complaint we are informed. We willing that the said error (if any be) be duly amended, and full and speedy justice done to the said John Wilkes, in this behalf do command you that if the said outlawry be returned before us, as hath been said, then, inspecting the said record and process, you cause further to be done therein for annulling the said outlawry as of right, and according to the law and custom of England shall be meet to be done, witness ourself at Westminster, the twenty-seventh day of April, in the. eighth year of our reign. Assignment And hereupon the said John Wilkes comes in his proper of error (4) person and says, that in the record and process, and also in the publication of the aforesaid outlawry, there is manifest error in this, that there is no sufficient information filed or exhibited against the said John Wilkes, whereon to ground the process of the outlawry aforesaid, by reason whereof the said outlawry is void, and of no effect or force whatsoever; there is also error in this, that no public proclamation whatsoever is mentioned to have been made at any open county court, or at any general quarter sessions of the peace whatsoever, or at the door of any parish church where the said John Wilkes was an inhabitant, according to the exigency of the said writ of capias cum proclamatione, therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, that it is not shewn, nor does it appear by the return of the sheriff of Middlesex, that the sheriff of Middlesex did cause to be exacted, the said John Wilkes in the said county of Middlesex, from county court to county court, until he was outlawed according to the law and custom of England, as the said* sheriff [* 234] by the said writ of exigent is commanded, and that it is not (h) Ante 1 vol. 369. 4 Burr. 2535. This form is after conviction. See form of writ of error Co. Ent. 358. a. b. See form of precipe and fiat in errer, Hand's Crim. Law. Prac. 462. Ante 1 vol. 369. and (i) See 1 vol. 368,9. 4 Burr. Joinder in error. shewn, nor does it appear by the return of the sheriff of Middlesex, that the said John Wilkes was a first, second, third, fourth, and fifth time exacted, at the county court, of the county of Middlesex, as by the law of the land he ought to have been before he was outlawed, therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, that in the record process and aforesaid, and in the publication of the outlawry aforesaid, it is no where expressly shewn, that the place called Brook-street, if any such there be, where the several county courts are supposed to have been held, at which the said John Wilkes is said to have been exacted, is in the county of Middlesex, or in any, or what other county, therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, that it does not appear that any judgment of outlawry was given or pronounced against the said John Wilkes, or if any such judgment was given or pronounced, in what form the same was so given or pronounced, as it ought to have done, in order that the legality and propriety of the said judgment might be seen and examined; but in the record and process aforesaid, and in the publication of the outlawry aforesaid, reference and relation only are had to some judgment not shewn or expressed, but supposed to have been before given against the said John Wilkes, therefore, in that there is manifest error. Wherefore, the said John Wilkes prays that the outlawry aforesaid, for the errors aforesaid, and other errors appearing in the record and process aforesaid, may be reversed and held for nothing, and that he may be restored to the common law, and to all which he hath lost by occasion of the outlawry aforesaid, &c. And Wm. De Grey, esquire, now attorney general of our present sovereign lord the king, present here in court, in his proper person, having heard the matters aforesaid, above assigned for error, for our said lord the king, saith, that neither in the record and process aforesaid nor in the publication of the aforesaid outlawry is there any error, and he prays that the court of our said lord the king, now here, may proceed to the examination as well of the record and process aforesaid, as of the matters aforesaid above assigned for error, and that the outlawry aforesaid, may in all things be affirmed. Assignments And hereupon the said J. A. comes in his proper person of errors in and says, that in the record of process, and also in the puban outlawry on an infor. lication of the outlawry aforesaid, there is manifest error in mation for a this, to wit, that there is no sufficient information filed or misdemean exhibited against the said J. A. whereupon to ground the our. (k) process of the outlawry aforesaid, by reason whereof the [235] said outlawry is void and of no effect or force whatever; there is also error in this, to wit, that the process of outlawry (k) Ante 1 vol. 368,9. Hand's Prac. 477. above set forth, is not sufficient in law to warrant or support the outlawry aforesaid; therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, to wit, that it does not appear that the sheriffs of the city of London returned to or upon the said writ of capias ad satisfaciendum, first above-mentioned, that the said J. A. was not found in their bailiwick, or that they made any return thereto; therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, to wit, that it is not stated, that the said J. A. did not appear, or that he made default at the return of the said several writs of capias ad satisfaciendum above-mentioned, or any or either of them; therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, to wit, that it is stated and appears that the said sheriffs of London were commanded as before, that they should take the said J. A. if he should be found in their bailiwick, and him safely keep, so that they might have his body before our said lord the king, at Westminster, on Saturday, next after the octave of the Holy Trinity, to satisfy our said lord the king, in manner and form aforesaid; but it is not stated, nor does it appear by whom, or by whose authority, or in what manner the said sheriffs of London were so commanded as aforesaid, or that they were so commanded by a writ of our said lord the king to them in that behalf directed; therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, to wit, that after stating that the said sheriffs of London were so commanded as aforesaid, it is stated and appears, that the sheriffs of the city of London aforesaid, returned the said last-mentioned writ, although no writ is previously stated to have issued, to which the said return can possibly apply: therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, to wit, that it is stated and appears by another writ of our said lord the king, the said sheriffs of London were commanded that they should take the said J. A. if he should be found in their bailiwick, and him safely keep, so that they might have his body before our said lord the king at Westminster, next after the morrow of All Souls, to satisfy our said lord the king in manner and form aforesaid, without stating that the said sheriffs of London were so commanded, as they had been oftentimes before commanded, or in any other manner whatsoever; therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, to wit, that no writ of capias cum proclamatione, is stated to have issued against the said J. A. nor any public proclamation to have been made thereupon, at any open county court, or at any general quarter sessions of the peace whatsoever, or at the door of any parish church where the said J. A. was an inha- [* 236] bitant, according to the exigency of such writ; therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, to wit, that there is an intervening term between the teste and return of the said writ of exigent, which appears to have issued on an outlawry, Friday next after the morrow of All Souls, in Michaelmas term, in the thirtieth year of the reign of our said lord the now king, returnable on Monday next after the morrow of the Ascension of our Lord, in Easter term then next following, passing over Hilary term, in the thirtieth year aforesaid; therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, to wit, that by the return to the said writ of exigent, it appears that the said J. A. was exacted at the husting of pleas of land, holden at the city of London, at the Guildhall within the said city, on Monday next before the feast of Saint Edward the king, but it does not appear thereby in what year of the reign of our said lord the king, or in what other year he was so exacted; therefore in that there is manifest error; wherefore, the said J. A. prays that the outlawry aforesaid, for the errors aforesaid, and other errors appearing in the record and process aforesaid, may be reversed and held for nothing, and that he may be restored to the common law, and to all which he hath lost by occasion of the outlawry aforesaid, &c. Assignment And hereupon the said Jn. Y. Ja. Y. and Js. Y. come in of errors in their proper person, and severally say in the record and proon an indict. cess, and also in the publication of the aforesaid outlawry, ment for fe- there is manifest error in this, that the said Jn. Y. Ja. Y. and lony against Js. Y. are alledged to be a fifth time demanded and outlawed the principals and the on the nineteenth day of May, in the the thirtieth of year accessary af. the reign of our lord, the now king, when it appears by the ter the fact. writ of proclamation, which is alledged to have issued on (1) Thursday, the 25th day of March, in the thirtieth year aforesaid, and the proclamation returned thereon, that they, the said Jn. Y. Ja. Y. and Js. Y. had a day given to render themselves to the sheriff, so that he might have their bodies before the justices therein named, until the assizes and general session of oyer and terminer and gaol delivery, holden for the county of S. next after the eighteenth day of April, in the thirtieth year aforesaid, being the ninth day of August, in the thirtieth year aforesaid, therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, that the writ of exigent appears to have issued, contrary to the statute in that case made and provided against the said Js. Y. who is only charged as accessary after the fact to a felony alledged to have been committed by the said Jn. Y. and Ja. [* 237] Y.* and appears to be outlawed by the same judgment as that whereby the principals are outlawed, whereas by the law of the land, none shall be outlawed as accessors until the principal be attainted, but their exigent shall remain until such principal be attainted by outlawry or otherwise; therefore in that there is manifest error; there is also error in this, that (1) Ante 1 vol. 368,9. Hand's Prac. 480. |