Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/1499

and au-[536]-thority to administer the said oath to the said Edward Aylett in that behalf as aforesaid), falsely, maliciously, knowingly, wickedly, wilfully, and corruptly, in manner and form aforesaid, did commit wilful and corrupt perjury, to the great displeasure of almighty God, in contempt of our said lord the king and his laws, to the great damage of the said Joseph Hayling, to the evil example of all other persons, and against the peace of our said lord the king, his crown and dignity.

To this indictment the said Edward Aylett pleaded not guilty; and issue being joined thereon, on the trial thereof at the sittings after Easter term, he was found guilty, and thereupon committed to the custody of the keeper of Newgate; and in Michaelmas term following, the court pronounced their judgment against him as follows:

That the said Edward Aylett, for his offence aforesaid, be imprisoned in the custody of the aforesaid keeper for the space of twelve months now next ensuing; and that within that time, he the said Edward Aylett be set in and upon the pillory in Palaceyard, Westminster, for the space of one hour, between the hours of twelve at noon and two of the clock in the afternoon: and that he the said Edward Aylett do pay a fine to our sovereign lord the king of five hundred pounds; and the said Edward Aylett, present here in court, is now remanded to the custody of the said keeper, to be by him kept in safe custody, in execution of the judgment aforesaid, and until he shall have paid the said fine.

The plaintiff Edward Aylett brought a writ of error upon the above indictment; and assigned for error thereon, that it appeared in and by the said record, that the indictment therein stated, and wherein the said Edward Aylett was convicted as aforesaid, was insufficient in law to ground or support any conviction of him the said Edward Aylett upon; but the said indictment was defective and insufficient in this, (amongst other things,) to wit (1st Assignment), that the names of the jurors, by whose oath the said indictment is stated to have been presented, and was found, are not, nor is the name of any one of them stated; nor do they, or any one of them, appear upon the said record, so as to enable the said Edward Aylett to inquire into, discover, and object to, the competence or incompetence of them, or any or either of them, to present and find such indictment against him the said Edward Aylett. There is also error in this (2d Assignment), that the matter in and by the said indictment alledged to have been falsely sworn by the said Edward Aylett is not, nor does it contain or amount unto, any breach or violation of the oath by the said indictment stated to have been taken and sworn by the said Edward Aylett: and also (3d Assignment) for that the oath in the said indictment, stated to have been taken and sworn by the said Edward Aylett is, only to speak the truth, and nothing but the truth, of and concerning the complaint therein before stated to have been made on the behalf of the said Edward; and yet it does not in any part of the said indictment appear that the said Edward said, deposed, or swore any matter whatsoever of and concerning the said complaint, the matter therein stated to have been [537] said, deposed, and sworn by the said Edward, being only matter of and concerning the ground and subject of the said complaint, and not of and concerning the complaint itself; so that it does not in and by the said indictment appear that the said oath therein stated to have been taken and sworn by the said Edward, was ever violated or broken by him the said Edward, in any manner whatsoever and also (4th Assignment) for that it is not in or by the said indictment expressly and positively averred or stated, nor does it thereby appear with sufficient legal certainty, that the said complaint therein mentioned, and alledged to have been made for or on behalf of the said Edward Aylett, to the said Edward Lord Thurlow, Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, and upon the supposed hearing whereof the said Edward Aylett is by the said indictment stated and alledged to have committed the perjury therein and thereby laid to his charge, was ever actually heard by the said Edward Lord Thurlow, or any other person whatsoever having sufficient or competent authority to hear and determine the same; and also (5th Assignment) for that it does not in or by the said indictment appear that the said matter, so by the said indictment stated to have been falsely sworn by the said Edward Aylett, was sworn or deposed by the said Edward Aylett, in the course of any judicial proceeding whatsoever; and (6th Assignment) for that the purpose, for which the complaint in the said indictment mentioned was made, is not in any wise alledged or shewn, as by the law of the land it ought to have been, so that it might have appeared that the said complaint was a judicial