Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

ter have not any authority in the Islands, which is true as regards ordinary cases. It was not subject to them even before the reign of King John. The Governor held the pleas, and in extraordinary cases, resort was had to Normandy, yet never to England. But in aftertimes, says Mr. Falle, contentious persons, not acquiescing in the determinations here, instituted suits in the English Courts, a practice which was too readily admitted; and persons were summoned from Jersey to attend them. This vexatious proceeding was remedied in the reign of Edward the Third; and accordingly, when towards the end of that reign, an attempt was renewed to bring a matter of trespass from the Island into the King's Bench, the Court would not admit it,—and decreed thus, as appears in the fourth institute of Lord Coke's

"An action of trespass was brought by A. in the King's Bench, for a trespass done by B. in the Isle of Jersey, whereupon in the record this entry is made:- and whereas the aforesaid business cannot be determined in this Court, because the Jurats of the said Isle, cannot come before the justices of this Court, nor by right ought they, nor ought any business originating in that Isle ; wherefore the whole record of this business shall be sent into the Chancery of our Lord the King, that he may forthwith, issue his Commission to whomsoever he may think proper, to hear and determine the said business in the said Isle, according to the custom of the said Isle.' By this it appeareth that although the King's writ runneth not into these Islands, yet His Majesty's Commission under the Great Seal doth; but then only on urgent and uncommon emergencies. The commissioners appointed under the said commission must first exhibit their commission in court, and have it there enrolled; but in no case concerning life, liberty, or estate, have they the power to determine any thing contrary to the advice of the Judges of those Islands, who are to sit, opine, and make conjunctive records of their proceedings with them; and moreover they (the commissioners) must always judge and determine according to the laws and customs of the Isles."

"Hence," says Mr. Falle, "that great lawyer, (Lord Coke) from whom I have transcribed the above record owns that the King's writ runneth not into these Isles, the like exemption belonging to them all. For which another emi

nent man of the same profession, (Lord Hale*) gives these two reasons: 1, because, says he, the Courts there (in the Islands) and those here (at Westminster) go not by the same rule, method, or order of Law: 2, because those Islands, though they are parcel of the dominion of the Crown of England, yet they are not parcel of the realm of En gland, nor indeed ever were; but were anciently parcel of the Duchy of Normandy, and are those remains thereof which all the power of the Crown and Kingdom of France have not been able to wrest from England.” "But though," says Mr. Falle, “ the King's writ runneth not into these Isles, the same great lawyer observes from the foresaid record, that His Majesty's Commission under the great seal, doth, and which we readily acknowledge, there being diverse instances of such commissions issued forth both in former and latter days, yet always upon urgent and uncommon emergencies. And the Commissioners have been generally taken from the Chancery, or have been otherwise men versed and knowing in the Civil Law, the service being thought to require persons so qualified. Their coming suspends the ordinary forms of justice; but first they must exhibit their conmission in Court, and have it there enrolled; and then they can in no case, concerning life, liberty or estate, determine any thing contrary to the advice of the Jurats, who are to sit, opine, and make conjunctive records of their proceedings with them; and lastly they must judge according to the laws and customs of the Isles."

Having quoted Mr. Falle, and his authorities at length, and giving him full credit for his veracity, we shall now direct our attention to the opinion which has been laid down, that the King's writ runs not into the Islands. An adjudicated case in the Court of King's Bench, is referred to, as cited in the forth institute (a posthumus work) of Lord Coke. "An action of trespass was brought by A. in the King's Bench for a trespass done by B. in the Isle of Jersey: whereupon in the record this entry is made :-'And whereas the aforesaid business cannot be determined in this Court, be

History and Analysis of the Common Law of England, written by a learned hand, (supposed Lord Chief Justice Hale, published, an 1713, ch. 9.)

cause the Jurats of the said Isle cannot come before the justices of this Court, nor by right ought they, nor ought any business originating in the said Isle; wherefore the whole record of this business shall be sent into the Chancery of our Lord the King, that he may forthwith issue his commission to whomsoever he may think proper, to hear and determine the said business in the said Isle according to the custom of the said Isle. By this it appeareth that although the King's Writ runneth not into these Islands, yet His Majesty's Commission under the Great Seal doth ; but then only on urgent and uncommon emergencies."

Now his lordship's conclusion must be taken in connection with the premises : this was an action for a trespass, between party and party; the process for which was necessarily the Common Writ, the right of issuing which, was the only question mooted; whereupon the above record was entered. It is admitted upon all hands that this writ "runneth not into the Islands." But there are cases of public wrongs in which the power of the Crown is called in to remedy: then, the King becomes a party to the suit, and the process is by extraordinary means, called Prerogative Writs, which do run into the Islands of Jersey and Guernsey. Blackstone says, "and though certain of the King's Writs or processes from the Courts of Westminster, do not usually run into privileged places, yet it hath been solemnly adjudged (Cro. J. 543, 2, Roll. abr. 292, Stat. II. Geo. 1. c. 4, 4, Burr. 834) that ALL Prerogative writs may be issued to EVERY DOMINION OF THE CROWN OF ENGLAND!!!" And in another place speaking of exempt jurisdictions, he says ALL Prerogative writs (as those of Habeas Corpus, Prohibition, Certiorari and Mandamus, may issue to all exempt jurisdictions, because the privilege that the King's writ runs not, must be intended between party and party, FOR THERE CAN BE NO SUCH PRIVILEGE AGAINST THE KING!!!" Mr. Clark, in his Colonial Law, p. 102, observes, "though the ordinary writs of process from the English Courts do not of course run in the Colonies, yet Prerogative Writs, such as mandamus, prohibition, habeas corpus and certiorari, may issue, on a proper case, to every dominion of the crown; but as to a colony, it being in the discretion of the Courts whether they will issue those writs or not, they would not chuse

66

[ocr errors]

to exercise that power when the cause is one which they cannot properly judge or give the necessary relief. Therefore, on imprisonments in the plantations, it has been more usual to complain to the King in Council, and petition for an order to bail or discharge, than to apply to the King's Bench for an Habeas Corpus. [Rex. v. Cowle, 2 Burr. 856; Cro. Jac. 484.] However, it is clear that the King's Bench has that jurisdiction, and it is expressly noticed and reserved by the Act of Assembly respectively establishing the Courts of King's Bench and Common Pleas in St. Christopher and Nevis." [See Stokes's Law of Colonies, 6, and the authorities there cited.]

The following account of the jurisdiction of the English Courts in these islands is taken from Hale's History of the Common Law.

Mich. 42, Edw. 2, Rot. 45, coram rege.-A great complaint was made by petition against the Deputy Governor of these Islands for divers oppressions and wrongs done there. This petition was by the Chancellor delivered into the Court of B. R. to proceed upon it, whereupon there were pleadings on both sides; but because it appeared to be for things done and transacted in the said Islands, judgment was thus given:

"Et quia negotiam prædict' in curia hic terminari non potest, eo quod juratores insulæ prædict' coram' justiciariis hic venire non possunt' nec de jure debent, nec aliqua negotia infra insula prædicta emergentia terminari non debent, nisi secundum consuet' insulæ prædictæ. Ideo recordum retrotraditur Cancellario ut inde fiat commissio Domino Regis ad negotia prædicta in insula, prædicta audienda et terminanda secundum consuet' insulæ prædictæ." And accordingly, 14th June 1565, upon a report from the Attorney General, and advice with the two Chief Justices, a general direction was given by the Queen and her Council, (which we shall presently give at length,) that all suits between the Islanders, or wherein one party was an Islander, for matters arising within the Islands, should be there heard and determined. 66 But," says Mr. Clark, in his Colonial Law, p. 702, "still this is to be taken with this distinction and limitation, viz: that where the suit is immediately for the King, then the King may make his suit in any of the Courts here, especially in the Court of King's Bench. For instance in a quare im

pedit brought by the King in B. R. here for a church in those Islands, so in a quo warranto for liberties there; so a demand of redemption of lands sold by the King's tenant within a year and a day, according to the custom of Normandy; so in an information for riot, or grand contempt against a governor deputed by the King. These and the like suits have been maintained by the King in this Court of King's Bench here, though for matters arising within those Islands. This appears Pascha, 16 Edw. 2, Coram Rege, Rot. 82; Mich. 18, Edw. 2, Rot. 123, 124, 125; and Pasc. 1, Edw. 3. Rot. 59. And for the same reason it is, that a writ of habeas corpus lies into these islands for one imprisoned there, for the King may demand, and must have an account of any of his subjects loss of liberty, and therefore a return must be made to this writ, to give the Court an account of the cause of imprisonment; for no liberty, whether of a county palatine or other, holds place against those brevia mandatoria, as that great instance of punishing the Bishop of Durham for refusing to execute a writ of habeas corpus out of the King's Bench, 33 Edw. 1., makes evident." To this, we may add, the deprivation of Office of the High Bailiff of the Isle of Man, for not attending to a writ of habeas corpus ad subjiciendum, and the opinion of Mr. Plummer, counsel for the States of Guernsey, who in his address to the House of Lords in 1805, against the smuggling act, admitted the general right, independent of the Habeas Corpus Aet, by which the Crown might, by virtue of the general power that belongs to the Crown, have addressed a mandatory writ to all its dominions, even to its foreign dominions: and Mr. Allen, counsel for the electors of Jersey, in his address to the royal commissioners in 1811, "maintained as an English lawyer, that the inhabitants of Jersey and Guernsey had now as much legal right to the benefit of the Statute 31 Ch. 2nd, as their fellow-subjects in England." (See his argument p. 60.)

But to return to the "general direction" before mentioned. In the reign of Queen Elizabeth a complaint of the inhabitants of Jersey and Guernsey was made to her Majesty, that contrary to their charters they were called to answer in England by process awarded against them out of the Courts of Westminster, when the following order was issued :—

« AnteriorContinuar »