The Queen on The Prosecution of Armstring and Francis, Inbabitants and parishioners of St. Mary, Lambeth, against Fajj and Others, late Churchwardens, Doultion and Others late Overseers, and Ball and Others, Collecrors of the Poor Rate, in the said parish
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 10 May 1841 |
| Date | 10 May 1841 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 113 E.R. 1275
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
S. C. 2 G. & D. 117; 10 L. J. Q. B. 145. Affirmed in Exchequer Chamber, 1 Q. B. 653; 2G. & D. 803; 13 L. J. Q. B. 187. Referred to, Fotherby v. Metropolitan Railway, 1866, L. R. 2 C. P. 194.
[636] the queen on the prosecution of armstronc; and francis, Inhabitants and Parishioners of St. Mary, Lambeth, against fall and others, late Churchwardens, doulton and others, late Overseers, and ball and others, Collectors of the Poor Rate, in the said Parish. Monday, May 10th, 1841. Mandamus to parish officers to produce the parish rates and books at the scrutiny of a poll which had been taken for the election of churchwardens, overseers, and surveyor. The writ stated the refusal of the defendants to be to the damage of the parishioners; and the complaint to be by them. The inducement recited certain facts respecting the polls. Return was made denying these. Two parishioners, for themselves and the other parishioners, entered traverses on these denials, upon which issues were joined, and, on trial, found for the Crown. The Judge certified for a special jury. Held, by the Court of Exchequer Chamber on error, that, as against the defendants on this record, it must be held that the two parishioners were the prosecutors. By the same Court on error, and by the Court of Q. B. on motion, that stat. 1 W. 4, c. 21, ss. 3, 6, applies to all writs of mandamus, and entitles prosecutors recovering on a traverse to damages and costs, whether or not they are so interested as to have been entitled to sue in case for a false return. And that the two parishioners, as prosecutors, were entitled to damages and costs. The jury having omitted to find damages, Held, by the Court of Q. B., that, under the circumstances above stated, the Judge who tried the cause might order, from his recollection, the verdict to be entered on the postea for nominal damages, though the associate's indorsement on the Nisi Prius record was only "Verdict for the Crown." In taxing the coats, the costs of obtaining the writ were included, without applying to the Court under atat. 1 W. 4, c. 21, s. 6. Held to be right, by the Court of Q. B. [S. C. 2 G, & D. 117 ; 10 L. J. Q. B. 145. Affirmed in Exchequer Chamber, 1 Q. B. 1276 THE QUEEN V. FALL I Q. B. 37. 653; 2 G. & D. 803; 13 L. J. Q. B. 187. Referred to, Fatherly v. Metropolitan Eailway, 1866, L. R. 2 C. P. 194.] A mandamus issued in Michaelmas term, 1839, commanding the defendants, or such of them in whose power or custody the same might be, to attend at the Boys' Parochial School House, Lambeth Green, in the parish of St. Mary, Lambeth, with, and produce, the rate made on the 26th of September 1837, and all subsequent rates, and the collecting books for the said rates, for the said parish, at the scrutiny of the votes given at the polls for the choice of churchwardens and nomination of householders to be returned to the justices for their appointment of overseers, and for the election of persons to serve the office of surveyors of the highways, within the parish, in Easter week then last; and also to attend from day to day until such scrutiny was [637] concluded, and to allow an inspection from time to time of such rates and books for the purposes of the scrutiny; or shew cause, &c. The refusal of the defendants to produce the books, &c., was stated to be " to the great damage and grievance of the inhabitants and parishioners of the said parish," "as we have been informed by their complaint;" "whereupon they have humbly besought us," &c. The inducement to the mandamus suggested that a vestry meeting was held in Easter week, 1839 (a)1, before the rector of the parish as chairman, for the purpose of choosing, &c. as above; and alleged the demand and granting of certain polls at that meeting, and that they were duly opened, proceeded with, and continued; and that the scrutiny of the votes was duly demanded and granted. These allegations were severally denied in the return. The prosecutors took sixteen several traverses on these denials; on all of which issues were joined. The traverses wore entered as follows. " And thereupon, on the same 2d day," &c., "come as well Robert Armstrong and Charles Larkin Francis, two of the inhabitants and parishioners of the said parish of St. Mary, Lambeth, on behalf of themselves and the rest of the inhabitants and parishioners of the said parish in the said writ named, by," &c., " their clerk in Court, as the said George Fall," &c., by " their clerk in Court. And the said Kobert Armstrong and Charles Larkin Francis, having heard the said writ and return read (protesting that the said return and the matters therein contained are insufficient in law to bar or preclude them from having a per-[638]-emptory writ of mandamus in this behalf), for plea to the said return, the said Robert Armstrong and Charles Larkin Francis, by force of the statute in such case made and provided, say," &c. Then followed the traverses, with prayer of inquiry by the country. " And the said George Fall," &c., "as to the said several matters to which the said Robert Armstrong and Charles Larkin Francis have prayed may be inquired of by the country, do the like. Therefore for the trying the said several issues above joined between the parties, in manner and form aforesaid, let a jury in that behalf come," &c., " who are not of the kindred either of the said Robert Armstrong and Charles Larkin Francis, or of the said George Fall," &c. : " because as well the said Robert Armstrong and Charles Larkin Francis, as the said George Fall," &c., " have put themselves in that behalf upon the said jury. The same day is given as well to the aaid Robert Armstrong and Charles Larkin Francis, as to the said George Fall," &c. "At which time, to wit on," &c., "come as well the said Robert Armstrong and Charles Larkin Francis, by their clerk in Court aforesaid, as the said George Fall," &c., "by their clerk in Court aforesaid. And the sheriff," &c. The postea also set forth the appearance before the Justices of Assize of " the within named Robert Armstrong and Charles Larkin Francis, on behalf of themselves and the rest of the inhabitants and parishioners of the parish," &c., " by their clerk in Court," not naming the Crown or any one as appearing for the Crown. The cause was tried at the Surrey Spring Assizes, 1840, before Lord Abinger C.B., when a verdict was found for the Crown on all the issues. No damages were [639] found...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The Queen, on The Prosecution of Armstrong and Francis, against Fall and Others
... ... individuals, but as inhabitants and parishioners, on behalf of themselves and the other ... 374). In Sex v. The Overseers of Spotland (Ca. K. B. temp. Hardw. 184), Lord ... 13 Ed. 1, c. 46), Lord Hardwicke said the rule was, " that statutes which give costs ... And that he had been put to expense.] At any rate, Lord Hardwicko's language is merely an obiter ... a mandamus to admit them as churchwardens, and afterwards joined in an action for a false ... ...