Queen v Leighton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1748 |
| Date | 01 January 1748 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 92 E.R. 806
IN THE KINGS BENCH.
[173] de tekm. sanct. mich. 7 ann.-e regius. in the king's bench. queen versus leighton. (Resolution of the Court.) This case was heard Pasch. 4 Anna, Salk. Rep. 106, 353, 450. Powis J. Conviction for a forcible detainer. Justice Powis: This is a good conviction; it was a conviction for a forcible detainer upon view; made by Sir Owen Buckingham, Lord Mayor of London. The 1st point is, whether the entry was peaceable or not 1 and it does not appear what the entry was, whether peaceable or by force? this rests on the Statute 8 H. 6, now it shall be intended an entry that is peaceable, for the law will never intend a tort or wrong. 2 R. 80. 2 Cro. 151. Yelv. 32, 99. 3 Cro. 915. The great case that rules this point, is, Palmer 194, 195, and whether the entry be peaceable or forcible, yet the detainer by force is punishable. The 2d point is, if 'the justice of peace may fine; I think he may; they sometimes do otherwise, that is, they commit quousque he make fine; the justice sees the offence himself and the manner of it, and therefore he is the best judge of the punishment himself, and he makes it a record. He is intrusted to convict in a summary way, and he that can convict, in the nature of the thing, may set a fine. [174] The 3d point is, here is a judgment, and it is not said, ideo considerat' est, JOBTE80UE, ITS. IN THE KING'S BENCH 807 which is the legal judgment; I think it is good notwithstanding that, being a proceeding in a summary way; it is not a formal judgment, and for that reason it has been made a question, if a writ of error lay, or not, of such a judgment? but I think a certiorari is the moat proper way to have this conviction examined. 1 E. 743. Eaym. 433. 1 Vent. 33. Justice Powell: The 1st objection is, it does not appear what the entry was, either peaceable or by force; this might be a good exception in an indictment, but it cannot appear in a conviction on view ; the entry may be peaceable and yet the detainer may be by force; so it must be set out in an indictment, but it cannot be done in a conviction on view, because it cannot be known by view, nor can any thing be returned but what is in view. Where a jurisdiction is founded on an Act of Parliament, you must be particular in it and follow the words of the Act of Parliament. The entry tho1 it do not appear in the conviction, yet it appears in the complaint; the complaint is a necessary part in a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Colonel Layton's Case
...is good ; for by the statute 8 Hen. 6, c. 26, all mayors are made justices of peace.-S. C. post, 59, 236. S. C. Salk. 106, 353, 450. S. C. Fort. 173. Colonel Lay ton was brought into Court by habeas corpus, having been committed by the Lord Mayor of London, on his own view, for a forcible e......
-
The Queen against Layton
...imponatur, or idea consideratum: if the former, it is removeable by certiorari; if the latter, by writ of error.-S. C. ante, 46, 59. S. C. Fort. 173. S. C. Salk. 106, 353, 450. A conviction of forcible entry removed by certiorari, and the judgment given upon the conviction was, "yuod finis ......