Thus corruption, breach of trust and malfeasance in public affairs,
attempts to commit felony, seem to have been reckoned not indictable at
common law, and came, in consequence, under the cognizance of the
Star-chamber. In other cases its jurisdiction was merely concurrent; but
the greater certainty of conviction and the greater severity of
punishment rendered it incomparably more formidable than the ordinary
benches of justice. The law of libel grew up in this unwholesome
atmosphere, and was moulded by the plastic hands of successive judges
and attorneys-general. Prosecutions of this kind, according to Hudson,
began to be more frequent from the last years of Elizabeth, when Coke
was attorney-general; and it is easy to conjecture what kind of
interpretation they received. To hear a libel sung or read, says that
writer, and to laugh at it and make merriment with it, have ever been
held a publication in law. The gross error that it is not a libel if it
be true, has long since, he adds, been exploded out of this court.
Among the exertions of authority practised in the Star-chamber which no
positive law could be brought to warrant he enumerates "punishments of
breach of proclamations before they have the strength of an act of
Parliament; which this court hath stretched as far as ever any act of
Parliament did. As in the 41st of Elizabeth, builders of houses in
London were sentenced, and their houses ordered to be pulled down, and
the materials to be distributed to the benefit of the parish where the
building was; which disposition of the goods soundeth as a great
extremity, and beyond the warrant of our laws; and yet, surely, very
necessary, if anything would deter men from that horrible mischief of
increasing that head which is swollen to a great hugeness already."
The mode of process was sometimes of a summary nature; the accused
person being privately examined, and his examination read in court, if
he was thought to have confessed sufficient to deserve sentence, it was
immediately awarded without any formal trial or written process. But the
more regular course was by information filed at the suit of the
attorney-general or, in certain cases, of a private relator. The party
was brought before the court by writ of subpoena, and, having given
bond, with sureties not to depart without leave, was to put in his
answer upon oath, as well to the matters contained in the information as
to special interrogatories. Witnesses were examined upon
interrogatories, and their depositions read in court. The course of
proceeding, on the whole, seems to have nearly resembled that of the
chancery.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account