said inn, for travellers and other persons, and then and there required the said T. I. to suffer and permit him the said S. P. W. to enter, and to stay, and to lodge at the said inn for and during the night of the same day, and to suffer and permit a certain horse, upon which the said S. P. W. then and there rode, to enter and stay, and lodge in the said stables for and during the time aforesaid,† and that the said S. P. W. was then and there ready and willing, and then and there offered the said T. I. to pay him a reasonable sum of money for such lodging for himself the said S. P. W. and his said horse.t* And that neither was the said inn, nor were the said stables, at the time of such application by the said S. P. W. as aforesaid, fully occupied, but there was then and there sufficient room in the said inn for the accommodation and entertainment of the said S. P. W. therein, and there was then and there sufficient room in the said stable for the accommodation and entertainment of the said horse for and during the time aforesaid ;* but that the said T. I. not regarding his duty as such innkeeper, did not, nor would, at the said time when he was so requested as aforesaid, suffer or permit the said S. P. W. to enter to stay or lodge at the said inn as aforesaid, during the time aforesaid, nor did nor would the said T. I. at the said time when he was so requested as aforesaid, suffer or permit the said horse of the said S. P. W. upon which the said S. P. W. rode as aforesaid, to enter or lodge in the said stables for or during the time aforesaid, but so to do the said T. I. then and there, without any sufficient cause, wholly neglected and refused; to the great damage of the said S. P. W., to the evil example of all persons in the like case offending, and against the peace of our lady the Queen, her crown and dignity.

Second count.-That whilst the said T. I. was such innkeeper, and so kept the said inn and stables as aforesaid, to wit, on, &c. at, &c. the said S. P. W. then being a traveller, came to a certain outer door, &c. (as in the first count, omitting the words between the † and †*).

[Third Count.-Similar to the second, except that it also omitted the allegation between +* and * and all mention of the horse.]

Fourth Count.-That whilst the said T. I. was such innkeeper, and so kept the said inn as aforesaid, to wit, on, &c. at, &c. the said S. P. W. then and there, being a traveller, came to the said inn, and then and there required the said T. I, to suffer and permit him the said S. P. W. to enter, and to stay, and to lodge at the said inn for and during a reasonable time for the rest and refreshment of him the said S. P. W. in the said inn, and that the said T. I. not regarding his duty as such innkeeper, did not, nor would, at the said time when he was so requested as last aforesaid, suffer or permit the said S. P. W. to enter, or stay, or lodge at the said inn, as last aforesaid, but so to do the said T. I. then and there, without any sufficient cause, wholly neglected and refused; to the great damage, &c. &c. (j).

(j) This precedent may be classed under neglects of duties imposed by common law.

SECTION XXI.

ORDERS OF JUSTICES-DISOBEYING.

Offence indictable.]-Disobedience to an order of sessions (k), or to an order made by justices out of sessions, in a matter over which they have jurisdiction (1), is a misdemeanour at common law, as a contempt of public justice, whether another and more summary remedy is or is not available. And this rule applies to all persons mentioned in the order, and on whom it has been duly served; and though particular officers of a society may have ceased to hold the offices in respect of which it was addressed to them in particular, they are still bound, as members, to use their best endeavours to cause it to be obeyed (m). But before any indictment for disobedience of such an order can be sustained, it must be personally served on the parties who are bound to obey it; and, therefore, an indictment charging a contempt, by six persons, of an order which was only stated to be served on four of them, was holden bad on demurrer (n). On the trial of such indictment, the court will not enter into any of the merits of the original case, nor into formal objections to the indictment which do not appear on the order itself (o); for it would be absurd that a party should, by a contempt, procure a revision of the judgment of a competent tribunal; but if it appear on the face of the conviction that the justices had no jurisdiction to make the order, which was disobeyed, it is utterly void, and the defendant should be acquitted at the trial, without being left to bring a writ of error, though the want of jurisdiction may appear on the record (p). Though such previous orders as are the foundation of the magistrates' power must be recited, or at least referred to in the indictment (q), the bare recital in such orders of the facts necessary to give the magistrates jurisdiction to make them, will not prove those facts to exist, nor will reciting the orders in hæc verba dispense with the necessity of establishing the truth of the facts there

(k) R. v. Robinson, 2 Burr. R. 799, 800; R. v. Bartlett, 2 Ses. Cas. 176.

(1) R. v. Balme, Cowp. 650; R. v. Fearnley, 1 T. R. 316.

(m) R. v. Gash, 1 Stark. N. P. C. 441. See R. v. Wade and another, 1 B. & Adol. 861.

(n) R. v. Kingston and others, 8 East, R. 41.

(9) R. v. Mitton, 3 Esp. R. 200, note; 4 Doug.; Caldecot. 536, S. C.

(p) R. v. Hollis, 2 Stark. C. N. P.

stated (r). The punishment, on conviction, may be fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court (s).

Indictment against a High Constable for not obeying an Order of Sessions.

That at the general quarter sessions of the peace holden for the county of Berks, at the Guildhall, Reading, in and for the county aforesaid, on, &c. before A. B., C. D., E. F., and G. H. esquires, and others their fellows, justices of our said lady the Queen, assigned, &c. it was ordered by the said court there [here set out the order of sessions in the past tense], as by the said order, reference thereto being had, will more fully and at large appear, which said order was afterwards, to wit, on, &c. at, &c. personally served (f) on the said C. D. one of the high constables in the said order named, and the said C. D. then and there had notice of the said order, and was then and there requested to obey the same as therein mentioned; nevertheless, the said C. D. late of, &c. then being one of the high constables in the said order mentioned, unlawfully and contemptuously, upon being so served with the said order as aforesaid, did neglect and refuse to [here state what the order required the defendant to do], as by the said order he the said C. D. was required to do, nor hath he the said C. D. at any time since complied with or obeyed the said order, although often requested so to do ; in contempt of the said justices, and against the peace, &c.

Indictment against an Overseer for not paying a Weekly Sum for the support of a Bastard, according to Order of Justices made before 4 & 5 W. IV. 76.

C.

That B. B. of, &c. before the making of the order of the justices hereinafter mentioned, to wit, on, &c. at, &c. aforesaid, was delivered of a female bastard child, which said bastard child, at the time of the making of the order, and also at the time of the contempt and disobedience hereinafter mentioned, was, and yet is living, to

(r) R.v. Gilkes, 8 B. & C. 439. (8) In many local acts of modern date, particularly those obtained by railway, canal, and water-work compa. nies, clauses are found, which point out a course for recovering compensation for the damages sustained from their works, to be assessed by a jury at the quarter sessions, and go on to provide that that court is to give judgment on the verdict, which judgment is to constitute one of its records for all intents and purposes. But it appears, that without special provision to that effect, there is no effectual method of enforcing such a judgment, except by mandamus to the company to pay the damages so ascertained. For the sessions have neither process by which they could levy them, nor any officer to direct it to, if they had it.

It

is also doubtful whether an action of debt would lie on such a judgment; and if the remedy by indictment for disobedience to the judgment of the sessions was adopted, that party in whose favour the judgment was recorded would have no clear legal right to receive any fine which might be imposed on a conviction. See R. v. Nottingham Old Water-works Company, 6 Ad. & E. 355; 1 N. & P. 480. S. C., not S. P. 5 N. & M. 498; R. v. Gardner, 1 Nev. & P. 308; R. v. York City (Justices of), 1 Ad. & E. 828.

(t) This is necessary; and the want of this allegation will not be supplied by the allegation that the defendant was requested to comply with the terms of the order; R. v. Kingstone, 6 East, R. 52; R. v. Moorhouse, Cald. 554.

wit, at, &c. And the jurors, &c. that the said B. B. having such bastard child as aforesaid, she the said B. B. on, &c. aforesaid, at, &c. aforesaid, became and was very poor and impotent, and not able to provide for herself and her said bastard child; and the said B. B. so being very poor and impotent, and not able to provide for herself and her said bastard child as aforesaid, she the said B. B. afterwards, to wit, on, &c. at, &c. applied to the then overseers of the poor of and for the township of O. aforesaid, for relief in the premises, and that the then overseers of the said poor, and each and every of them, then and afterwards did wholly neglect and refuse to relieve the said B. B. so being very poor and impotent as aforesaid, to wit, at, &c. aforesaid. And the jurors, &c. do further present that the said B. B. so being very poor and impotent, and unable to provide herself and her said bastard child, after such neglect and refusal as aforesaid, to wit, on, &c. aforesaid, at, &c. aforesaid, appeared before M. M. and W. W. esquires, then being two of the justices of our said lady the Queen, assigned, &c. and then and there, before the said M. M. and W. W. being such justices as aforesaid, took her corporal oath upon the holy gospel of God, and did depose, that she the said B. B. was very poor and impotent, and unable to maintain herself and her said child; and that she the said B. B. had then lately applied for relief to the then overseers of the poor of the said township, and was by them the said overseers refused to be relieved on that occasion. And the jurors, &c. that the said M. M. and W. W. being such justices as aforesaid, did thereupon, afterwards, to wit, on, &c. aforesaid, at, &c. aforesaid, duly summon the said overseers to appear before them the said M. M. and W. W. being such justices as aforesaid, in order to show cause, if any there should be, why relief should not be given to the said B. B. in the premises, and that the said then overseers, having been so summoned as aforesaid, did, before the said M. M. and W. W. being such justices as aforesaid, refuse to relieve the said B. B. on that occasion, and did not show to the said justices any sufficient cause why relief should not be granted to the said B. B. and that the said M. M. and W. W. being such justices aforesaid, did thereupon, afterwards, to wit, on, &c. aforesaid, make their certain order in writing (u), signed with the proper hands and sealed with the respective seals of them the said M. M. and W. W. so being such justices as aforesaid, whereby, after reciting, &c. [here set out the order in the past tense]. And the jurors, &c. that one J. R. late of, &c. on, &c. and long before and afterwards, was one of the overseers of the poor of and for the township of O. aforesaid, having duly accepted the said office, to wit, at the township of O. aforesaid, and that it was then and there the proper office and duty of the said J. R. as such overseer as aforesaid, well and faithfully to execute and obey the said order of the said M. M. and W. W. so made as aforesaid, according to the exigency thereof. And the jurors, &c. do further present, that the said order of the said M. M. and W. W. so made as aforesaid, afterwards, to wit, on, &c. aforesaid, at, &c. aforesaid, was duly exhibited and personally delivered to the said J. R. so being such overseer as aforesaid, to be by him well and faithfully executed and obeyed in all things, according to the exigency thereof,

(u) This indictment must positively state that the order was made, and not set it forth by way of recital, after a "that whereas," R. v. Crowhurst, 2 Ld. Raym, 1363; though an indictment

against a constable for not levying under a warrant of distress to him directed, need not set forth the conviction at length on which it was founded, Regina v. Wyatt, id. 1196.

and according to the said office and duty of the said J. R. as such overseer as aforesaid. And the jurors, &c. do further present, that the said J. R. so being such overseer as aforesaid, and so having seen and received the said order as aforesaid, afterwards, to wit, on the said, &c. and continually from thenceforth, for and during all such time as the said J. R. continued in his said office of overseer of the poor of the township of O. aforesaid, unlawfully, wilfully, obstinately, and contemptuously did neglect and refuse, and hath hitherto wholly neglected and refused, to pay unto her the said B. B. the sum of two shillings and sixpence weekly, and every week, for and towards the support and maintenance of her the said B. B. and her said bastard child, as by the said order he the said J. R. as such overseer as aforesaid was required to do; and the same and every part thereof is still wholly due and unpaid to the said B. B. although she the said B. B. whilst the said J. R. remained and continued as such overseer as aforesaid, to wit, on, &c. aforesaid, and on divers other days and times, as well before as after, &c. at, &c. aforesaid, requested him the said J. R. to pay her the same (v), and although he the said J. R. hath not, at any time whatsoever, hitherto been otherwise ordered, according to law, to forbear the said allowance; contrary to the said office and duty of him the said J. R. in that behalf, and against the peace, &c. (w).

Indictment against a Father of a Bastard Child, for disobeying an Order of Justices for Maintenance made before 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76.

That H. T. of the parish of M. in the county of D. single woman, before the making of the order of justices hereafter mentioned, to wit, on, &c. at the said, &c. was delivered of a living female bastard child. And the jurors, &c. that the said H. T. having been so delivered of such bastard child within the parish aforesaid, afterwards, to wit, on, &c. at the parish aforesaid, complaint thereof, and also that the said child was then christened by the name of Jane, and was then chargeable to the said township, and likely so to continue, was, by the overseers of the poor of the said parish of M. made to J. R. esquire, and T. B. esquire, two of her majesty's justices of the peace and quorum in and for the said county of D. and residing next unto the limits of the parish church of M. in the said parish of M. in the said county, and she the said H. T. was by them the said overseers of the poor then and there brought, and personally appeared, before the said justices so residing, to be, and was thereupon, then and there examined upon oath by and before the said justices of and concerning the cause and circumstance of the begetting and birth of such bastard child. And the jurors, &c. that the said H. T. upon her said examination upon oath, then and there taken in writing by and before the said justices, deposed and declared, that she was delivered of such bastard child, as aforesaid, and that R. M. I. of, &c. was the father of the said bastard child. And the jurors, &c. do further present, that the said J. R. esquire, and T. B. esquire, so being such justices, residing as aforesaid, did thereupon, afterwards, to wit, on, &c. last aforesaid, at the parish of M. aforesaid, duly summon the said R. M. I. to be and appear

() As to averment of request, see 1

T. R. 316.

(w) Officers of a parish in which a bastard is born, must provide necessaries

for it if they are not provided by the parents, and that without order of justices, Hays v. Bryant, 1 H. Bla. 253.