| OCR Text |
Show 258 AT GOC I 0 CS .n;nGt:.:. (A. D. 1C0~. In a few <lays aflerwarLb catne on to be argued the great case of Tlze A-~·ng v . tlze J1Iayor and Gomnwnalty ~f the Ca.~ of London. Fitch, the , olicitor g )neral, nppcared for the crown; and Treby, the r ccon1er of London, for the def'cndnntR. 'The fonner wa. heard Y •ry f[lxornbly; but the latter haYing contended that, even if the by-law and the petition were illegal, they mu~t ue considered only a the acts of tbc individunls who had. concurred in th m, aud could not affect the privil ege~ of the body corporate,- an ens leg£s, without n. soul and without the capacity of . inning,- Lonl Chief Justice Sau nu<., rs exclaim ell, - ·• Accorcling to your notion, never wa one corporate act done by them; certainly, whatsoever the Con1mon Council docs, binds the whole; otherwi ~e it is i1n po iblc for you to do any corporate act; for you never do, and never can, convene all the citi zen~. Then you say your petit ion is no reflection on the king, but it f'ay.~ that by the prorogation public ju"tice was interrupted. If so, uy w h01n was public ju tice intcrrupteu? \Yhy, by the king! And i, it no reflection on the king that, in. tend of ui~tributing ju.-,ti<·e to bi.· people, he prevents them from obtaining ju tice? You nlllst allow that the accusation is _,ithcr true or false. But, suppo~ ing it true that the king did ami~. in proro~atiug tho Pnrlian1ent, the Common Council of Loudon, neither by charter nor pre.~cri ption, had any right to control him. If the 1nattcr were not true, ( as 1. t I.S llOI') the petition is a. 1nere calumny. But if you coulJ ju::3ti(y the presenting of the petition, how can you justify the printing of it, whereby the n1ayor, aldern1en, and citizen::; of London do let all tl1e nation know that the king, by the prorogation .of Parliament, hath given the public justice of the nation an 1 ~t erruption? Pray, by '\Vhat ]a,v, or custom, or charter, is tlus A. D. 1683.] ED:\1UND SACNDERS. privilege of censure exercised? You stand forth as ' clwrtered libertine ~ .' As for the impeccabilit,y or tliC corporation, and your uoctl·ine thn.t nothin <r whic;h it doe' can affect j( ' being. strange would be the result if that w l1ich th , corporation doe· i not the act of the corporation, an(l it; ilw act Leing unlawful and wicked, the corporation hall be c1i;::;punishable. I tell yo u, I deliver no opinion now; I ouly mention -ome points worthy of con 'idera.tion. L et the cn~c be argued again next term." In the en uing term the ca c \Vas again argued by Sawyer, the attorney general, for the crown, aiHl Pollexfen for the city, ·when Lord Chief J u ~ tice Saunders ._aid, "\tV e . hall tak time to be advised of our opinion, but I cann ot help now "ay· ing what a grievous thing it would ue if a corporation cannot be forfeited or cli ..~ ,-oh·c(l for any crime whatsoever. Then it is plain that you oust the kino- of his quo U.-'(/JT(Wto, and that, as many eorporations a ih<'re nrc, ._ o nhtny independent commonwealths are e tabli ·hct1 in Enaland. ,y e shall look into b the precedent·, and giYe judgn1ent next term." When next tern1 arrived the Lon1 Chief Justice Saunders ' was on his death-Leu. II is course of life wa, o difl'ercnt frorn what it had been, an<l his diet and exer rise ._ o changeu, that the constitution of hi~ body could not . u.s tain it, anu he fe ll into an apoplexy and pn.l:-;y fr01n which he ne,·cr r ecovered. But before his il1nc ' S he had ..:ecurecl the votes of his brethren. The judgment of the court \vas pronounced by l\Ir. Justice Jones,* the senior pui::;ne judge, who said,- • This is not the \Villiam Jones mentioned in the life of Lord North, but a person of n different character, one Ed ward Jones.- Ed. |
