The Earl of Clanricarde against Stokes
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 13 June 1806 |
| Date | 13 June 1806 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 103 E.R. 199
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
the earl of clanricaede against stokes. Friday, June 13th, 1806. Assuming it to be necessary in an action for a penalty by a common informer that the count should refer to the statute giving the remedy as well as to that creating the offence and giving the penalty; yet a count for a penalty on the stat. 5 Ann. s. 14, stating that the defendant kept a snare to kill game against the form of the statute in such case made, &e. by reason whereof, and by force of the statute in such case made, &c. an action hath accrued, &c. is sufficient; for the first statute mentioned refers to the 5 Ann. c. 14, creating the offence and giving the penalty; and the statute lastly mentioned refers to the 2 Geo. 3, c. 19, whereby the whole penalty is given to the common informer, the half only of which had been given to him by an intervening statute. In debt to recover the penalty of 51. created by the stat 5 Ann. c. 14, the declaration stated that the defendant within six months next before the exhibiting (a) Cowp. 192. 200 CLANRICARDE V. STOKES 7 EAST, 517. of the plaintiff's bill, to wit, on the 4th of Nov. 1805, at Exton in Hampshire, did keep a snare to kill and destroy game, the said snare being then and there an engine to kill and destroy the game, against the form of the statute in such case made and provided; the said defendant not being in anywise qualified or having any lawful authority so to do: by reason whereof, and by force of the statute in such case made and provided an action hath accrued to the said plaintiff to demand and have of the defendant 51. Plea nil debet. After verdict for the plaintiff, it was moved in last Easter term to arrest the judgment, and the rule was now; supported by [517] Jekyll and Dampier, on the ground that the penalty and the remedy by action were given by several different statutes, viz. the penalty by stat. 5 Ann. c. 14 (a)1, made perpetual by stat. 9 Ann. e. 25, (which so far may be considered for this purpose as one Act;) and the remedy by three statutes, first by the stat. 8 Geo. 1, c. 19, substituting the action (which is to be brought before the end of the next term after the offence,) for the information before justices under the Stat. 5 Ann., and giving half the penalty to the common informer ; next, by the stat. 26 Geo. 2, c. 2, which extends the time for bringing the action to two terms after the offence committed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The King v Dickenson
...by another, it is not sufficient to state that by force of the statute an action had accrued, &c. 2 East, 338, Lee v. Clarke. But see 7 East, 516, Lord Clanricarde v. Stokes, semble contra. [See also hubs. & R. 425, Ilex v. Pirn, where it was held that if one statute subjects an act to a pe......
-
R v Houston
...v. Browne 1 Jebb's C. C. 21. Collins' CaseENR 2 Leach, C. C. 827. Rex v. MackenzieENR Russ. & Ry. 429. Earl of Clanrickarde v. StokesENR 7 East, 516, 520. Rex v. Law Plowd. Com. 206. Jee, clerk, v. ThurlowENR 2 B. & C. 547. Regina v. Houston, 2 C. & 2 C. & Dix., C. C. 26. CASES AT LAW. 445 ......
-
Nunn v Claxton
...there the offence must be charged to be against the statute or statutes, as the case may be. He referred to Earl of Clanricarde v. Stokes (7 East, 516).] The ^ other objection is riot good ; the declaration is in the usual form ; [716] if the defendant really waa not a member of the Company......
-
R v William Henry Pim
...on which the felony created by the 49 Geo. III. was founded. The learned judge mentioned the case of the Earl of Clanrtcarde v Stokes (7 East, 516), in which nearly all the [428] cases on this subject had been under the consideration of the Court of King's Bench. The learned judge however r......