Page 84
As to the Case Proposed.
1. IAm clearly of opinion, that the taking of Bonds in the Kings Name, to the meer behoof, and for the advantage of pri∣vate persons, when there was such Debt real∣ly due to the King, was a fraudulent and un∣just act from the beginning; for though it were not actually forbidden, and so might per∣haps be valid enough in foro externo, till the issuing out of the Kings Proclamation in that behalf; yet was it in point of Conscience un∣lawful before, as being a crafty course: so refused by the King himself, and guilty of a double injustice, the one to the King, as an abuse to his Prerogative; the other to the subject, as tending to their oppression, as by the Proclamation is recited, and that there∣fore,
2. Neither might the Merchant, whiles he lived, nor ought his Executors, now he is dead, to make advantage of the Kings Name used in that Bond; nor might he then, nor may they now, by virtue of the Kings Prero∣gative, or under the colour thereof, for the recovery of the said Debt, use any way to the prejudice or damage of the Obligee, or