Page:Prerogatives of the Crown.djvu/357

 Ch. XII. Sec. v.]. Quo Warranto. S37 still be ousted («). It also lies in the case of a forfeiture of an office by abuser, &c. {b). In case of judgment for the defendant, he shall (c) have an allowance of his franchise ; but in case of judgment for the King, for that the party is entitled to no such franchise, or hath disused or abused it, the franchise is either seized into the King's hands, to be granted out again to whomsoever he shall please; or if it be not such a franchise as may subsist in the hands of the Crown, there is merely judgment of ouster, to turn out the party who usurped it {d). There is also judgment o(capiaturj)rdJine, though the fine is nominal. This writ which must be brought before the King's Justices at Westminster U), has now fallen into disuse, principally on account of the length and complicated nature of the process (/"), and the circumstance of the judgment on the writ being final and conclusive, even against the Crown (g). In its place has been substituted the infor-mation in the nature of a writ of quo warranto, which is filed in the King's Bench by the attorney- general {h); and lies also in the Exchequer {i) ; and wherein the proceedings are more speedy and less conclusive {k). The Court, however, will not extend this remedy beyond the limits prescribed to the old writ ; and as that could only be prose- cuted for an usurpation on the rights or prerogatives of the Crown, so an information in the nature of quo warranto, can only be granted in such cases (/) ; and upon this principle, the Court refused to grant an information to try the validity of an election to the office of church-warden. The quo warranto (a) Ante, 335, note (/). {b) 2 Inst. 486. 3 Bla. Com. 262. Ibid. 263. (c) 3 Bla. Com. 263. (rf) Cro. Jac. 259. 1 Show. 280. Co. Entr. 530, 539, a. Rast. Entr. 540, b. 3 Bla. Com. 263. (e) 3 Bla. Com. 263. Com. Dig. Quo Warranto, A. (/) See Com. Dig. tit. 2uo Warranto^ C. 2. The proper course in the Exche- quer seems to be, to issue a writ to the sheriff, directing him generally to in- quire into usurpations of franchises j upon which the sheriff takes an inqui- sition, finding the particular usurpation intended to be drawn in question. The defendant traverses or demurs to the in- quisition, and proceeds as in other cases. 2 Mannini?, Pr. 510. Defen- dant cannot plead hot guilty, or non usurpavit, but must justify or disclaim, 12 Mod. R. 225. 10 Ibid. 296. {g) 1 Sid. 86. 2 Show. 47. 12 Mod. 225. {h) See 3 Burr. 1812. 1 Bla. Rep. 579. (i) 2-Manning's P. Exch. 509, 10. {k) 3 Bla. Com. 263. (/) 4T. 11.381. Stra. 1196. information