The King against Amery
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 04 July 1786 |
| Date | 04 July 1786 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 99 E.R. 1141
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
IT. R. 384. THE KING V. AMERY 1141 the king against amery. Tuesday, July 4th, 1786. Upon an application for a trial at Bar, the Court will in every case exercise its own discretion upon the peculiar circumstances thereof. Where a fair trial cannot be had in the county where the matter arises, the trial will be awarded in the next English county where the King's writ of venire runs. A rule was made absolute, no cause being shewn, on a motion by Erskine, for leave to enter a suggestion on the record in this action, " That the corporation and citizens of Chester were interested in the event of this suit, and therefore that a fair and impartial trial could not be had in the county of the City of Chester." Erakine then moved for a trial at the Bar of this Court; and relied upon the importance of the question to be agitated. Lord Holt says that a trial at Bar is of common right; and in cases of intricacy it is peculiarly requisite. It will be sufficient therefore to induce the Court to grant it in this instance, to state to them the magnitude of the subject in dispute, and the variety of issues which are to be tried. The principal question is, whether the right of electing aldermen in the City of Chester is vested in the citizens at large or in a select body? There are twelve issues on this record. 1st. That this is not a body corporate by prescription. 2d. Non concessit to the charter of the 37 of Car. 2. 3d. That the charter of Car. 2 was not accepted, as to the election of aldermen. 4th. That certain persons appointed aldermen under that charter did not act as such. 5th. That the mayor, aldermen, and common council, have not used to elect under the charter. 6th, 7th, & 8th. Relate to the qualification and election of the defendant to the office of alderman. 9th. That the charter of Car. 2 was accepted asto all matters contained both in the plea and replication. 10th. That the order of removal in the time of Jac. 2 was not signified. [364] llth. That the charter of restoration of Jac. 2 was accepted. 12th. That the charters of Hen. 7 and Elizabeth are still in force. These issues must necessarily give rise to many intricate questions of evidence, and in fact go to the very existence of the corporation. In the Maidstone cases (a), (a) The Maidstone cases came before the Court in Hil. 13 G. 2 under the names of Rex v. Weldish, Rex v. Rand, Rex v. Curties. These were informations in the nature of quo warranto against the defendants, to shew cause by what title they exercised the office of jurats of the King's town and parish of Maidstone in Kent: and the question was, whether there ought to be trials at Bar 1 It was objected against the trials at Bar, by Mr. Solicitor General, that there was no reason for it^ either upon account of the length or difficulty of the trials, because there was but one single issue that was material, and that was upon a bye-law, which was a fact, the proof of which could not take up any great length of time. As to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The same Jevens against Harridge and Wife, Administratrix of Levemere
...oyer of adeed of which profert is made in a declaration cannot be demanded after the term in which the profert is made. 1 Mod. 69, Anon. 1 T. R 149, The King v. Amery. See the reason in 5 Rep. 75 a., WymarWs case. [But since the new rules, this seems inapplic able; and the rule, it is conce......
-
The Queen v The Rev. Peter Conway
...W. Blackstone 1 W. B. 378. BurrowesENR 3 Burr. 1330. Regina v. Kennedy Supra. Rex v. Inhabitants of WiltsENR 6 Mod. 307. Rex v. AmeryENR 1 T. R. 363, 367. Rex v. St. Mary on Hill ChesterENR 7 T. R. 735. AnonymousENR 12 Mod. 503. Rex v. Fawle 2 Ld. Ray. 1452. Rex v. HarrisENR 3 Burr. 1330. D......
-
Rogers v Rearsby
...slip, the defendant should have taken advantage of it upon oyer (a). * 1 And. 240. Fide 1 T. R. 116. (a) Fide Barnes 340. Dougl. 215, 459. 1 T. R. 149. English Reports Citation: 91 E.R. 658 COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, CHANCERY, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER. Blackhall and Evans Mich. 3 Georgii 1 ......
-
The King agaist The Trustees of The Norwich and Watton Road
...of form, set out the notice. The affidavits shew that in fact the notice has been given ; a fact which did riot appear in Hex v. Bagshaw (1 T. R. 363). [672] Thirdly, the application is premature. The inquisition effects nothing till the order be made : then, if at all, the proceedings are ......