This text has been selected for inclusion in the EEBO-TCP: Navigations collection, funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities. To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
The Citizens of London are by a Charter of King Ed. 3. excepted from paying of prisage.* 1.1
Touching this Franchise or Liberty of Prisage I shall present to the Reader these resolutions, shewing who shall be a reputed Citizen, and who not, as to the being exempted of paying Prisage.
A Question was in the Court of
Exchequer 44. Eliz. If a Citizen of London, that had not a family, and did not pay Scot, and Lot, but sojourne in another house, shall have the benefit of the Kings Charter? In the argument of the case, Coke, then Atturney Gene∣ral, put this difference of Citizens, viz. That there was
A Citizen
It was said, that a Citizen Re, & no∣mine. He, that is a Freeman of London, and an Inhabitant, and one that paid Scot, and Lot there, shall be discharged of prisage by the said Charter, &c. Davys Reports le Case de Customs f. 10. b.
He that is to have benefit, and advan∣tage of this Charter, ought to be integre Civis, and an intire Citizen, as it was adjudged in 4. H. 6. in one Knowls case, a Citizen, and Free-Grocer of London, removed his house-hold cum pannis, and did dwell at Bristol, but yet kept his shop at London, and he, having a ship laden with wines, which was unladen in the port of London, would have had the benefit of this Charter of discharge of prisage; But it was ruled
against him; for that he was not such a Citizen as was capable of this discharge; for that he ought to be Civis, Incola, Commorans. 4. H. 6. Knowls Case.
14. H. 6. &c. A private Act of Par∣liament: Complaint was made, that the Lord Mayor would make strangers Citizens; it was there declared, that this benefit to be discharged from payment of prisage, did not extend unto such Citizens as were Dotati, made free, but unto those Citizens only, which are Commorant, Incolant, and Resiant within the City.
A person disfranchised before the arrival of his ship, shall lose the be∣nefit of prisage, he was intitled to at the lading, and a person made free after the lading shall have the benefit of discharge.
Bulstrodes Reports 3. part. The King, and Sir Thomas Waller vers. Francis Han∣ger.
A Woman cannot be capable of this Immunity, though a Citizen; to what end say I; She cannot bear Civilia, or publicae onera of the City; she cannot doe any thing for the benefit of the City; she cannot perform Watch, and
Ward; she can bear no office in the City; neither can she be of any of the Companies; she cannot be an Attor∣ney; she may be a Free-Woman, but this is only to have her will (as many so have) but to no other purpose.
Thus much of the Franchises grant∣ed to the Londoners by Charters Royal, and such as are allowed to be good, & agreable to the Laws of England; I shall now put a Case, or two of such sin∣gularities, or Priviledges as have been adjudged to be contrary to the freedom, of the subject, and consequentially the Kings grants are deemed void in Law.
King H. 6. granted to the Corpo∣ration of Dyers within London, power to search, &c. and if they found any Cloth died with Logge wood, that the Cloth should be forfeit: and it was adjudged this Charter concerning the forfeiture, was against the Law of the Land.
For no forfeiture can grow by Let∣ters Patent. Co. lib. 8. Trin. 41. Eliz. f. 125. le Case de Londres.
So the Company of Merchant Tay∣lots of England, having power by their Charter to make Ordinances,
made an Ordinance,* 1.2 that every Brother of the same Society should put the one half of his Clothes to be dressed by some Cloth-worker free of the same Company; upon pain to forfeit 10 s. &c. and it was adjudged that this Or∣dinance was against Law, because it was against the Liberty of the Subject, for every subject hath freedom to put his Clothes to be dressed by whom he will, & sic de similibus: And so it is, if such, or the like grant had been made by his Letters Patents.
So if a grant should be made to a Londoner, to have the sole making of Cards,* 1.3 or the sole dealing with any other Trade, that grant is against the Liberty, and freedom of the Subject, that before did, or lawfully might have used that trade and consequently is against the Great Charter of England.
Hitherto of franchises granted by the Charters of the Kings of England, we proceed to those that have been given to the Citizens of London by our Kings in their several Parliaments.
Prisage.
Co. 2. Inst. 47. Tr. 41. Eliz. coram Rege ••ot. 92. in Tr. inter Da∣vent & Hur∣des.
Trin. 44. Eliz. Coram Rege Co. lib. 11 fol. 84. & 85 &c. Edward Dar∣ries Case.