ftrued- Per Brown J. PLC. 291. Willion v. Berkley. Ibid. 464. Eyfton v. Studde. • Piowden
compares the Words of the Law to the Shell of a Walnut and the Senfe to the Kernel in which is the
the Profit 465 ibid The Intent ought to be found partly from the Words, and partly from the
Mifchief they intend to remedy. Arg. Litt. R. 212. Mich. 4Car m the College of Phyficum's Caie.-—
S P Litt R 247 Pafch. 5 Car in S. C. Conttructions are to be made ot the whole Acts according
to the Intent of the Makers, and fo fometimes are to be expounded againft the Letter to peferue the In-
tent. Per Eyre Ch. J- Show. 491- cites 9 Rep. 59. and Jo. 105.
The Intent of the'Makers mav be collected from the Caufe or Neceflity of M.kuig the Act or by the
WWr in other Parts of the Act. or by Foreign Circum fiances, and the Conftruction mould be confonant
ZithReafinand Dijcretic*. PI. C 205. Per Saunders Ch. B. intheCafeof Stradlrng v. Morgan.
The Reafm that induced the Lav-makers to make fuch Arts to take away the Common Law may be,
and is ufual'ly urged in making Conftruction ot them ; therefore in doubttu Cafes we may enlarge the
Conftruction of ;, fts of Parliament according to the Reafon and Senfe o the Law-makers exp,r
7thcr Parts of the 4B, or guefs'd by confidering the Frame and Defign of the V\ Hole ; Per Trevor Ch. J.
11 Mod. 161. Hill. 1-07. in the Cafe of Archer v. Bokenham.
82 In Aa^ that are to be conftrued according to the Intent and
Meaning of the Makers of them the original Intent and Meaning is to be
obferved. n Rep. 7 3- b. Pafch. 13 jac. Magdalen-College Cafe
8« Even in Pcncl Laws the Intention ot the Legillators is the belt Me-
thod to conftrue the Law ; Per Cur. 8 Mod. 65. Hill. 8 Geo. 1722. m
the Cafe of the King v. Gage.
/'^f- §4- Where there are two Statutes made together, and the one contrary to
^T^y tl t oti a; reafonable Conftrufition fliall be made. Br. Parliament, pi. 9.
Statute ct It'tftm. 2. cap. ;. That where the Baronmakes Default in Redd-tion, the Feme hall he received
&C. And the fame Statute cap. 25 wills, That if any in A§fe vouch Record ami fail, he (ball he adjudged lor
it D^feif or without taking of tie AJpfe; and yet in Allife againft baron and Feme, who vouch Record and
fail, and at the Day the Baron makes Default, the Feme may be received. Br. Parliament, pi. 9. cites
\\ :n 1 . .. Jcisfeem to crofs one avother, fiich Conftmclion fhall be made that both fliall ftand tose-
ther. MS T..b. 21 Jan. 1; 10. tit. Forfeiture. Horton v. Hinton.
i o^'i r B * ■ 2s - Mh 7- trj)< l Sm J lt " cr °f s T anothcT * and "° Claufe of M>* Obfiann
, 54 . Vl >• ,s u C( ' ntu,ncd >nthe2d Statutes fo that the one may itand with theother
in Cafe of tne kxpohtion ought to be that hoth itand in Force • Per Dver Ch l'
Warden v. D. 347. b. pi. 12. Hill. 18 Eliz. Wefton's Cafe. ' J *
Smith. 86. It Lavs and Statutes [can contrary to one ancther, yet it by Inter
prestation ithey may fluid together, they ihall itand: Per Bode'rid^e J
who laid it is a Rule in Law. Roll. R. 91. pi 4, Mich , 2 fi'
B. R. in Cafe of the King v. Dr. Folter. P 4 * j ^'
87. Upon all A£s of Parliament there mult be fuch a Conftrucnon
made, as that one Claufe may not fruftraU and deitroy another Hard
344 Pi- I. Hill. 15 & 16 Car. 2. in Scacc. in Caie ol Stevens v Duck-
worch. ' ^ Ul - N
88. By Powel J. if there are two ABs of Parliament direBly contrary to
one another the fame ^ons the laft mall only be taken for Law. But
per Holt Ch. J. It they ihould both generally refer to the fame Seffions
1 do not know which to take tor Law. 6 Mod. 287. Mich a Arm B r'
in Cafe ot St. Clement's v. St. Andrew's Parifh.
°DuZls°! , 8 9- Where the Terms and Letter of a Statute are obfeure and diffi-
0-Y\, "It to be "nderftood, we mult refort to the Intent of the Makers. See
PLC 57. b. in Cafe ot VVimbilh v. Tilboys.
90. When one Branch is obfeure in an Aft of Parliament, Expofitors
us dtp examine the other Branches; for often times by the Intent of one
Claufe the Senie ot the other may be known. PI. C. ,6* in Lord
Zouch s Cafe. *" ^-uiu
91. Obfeure Statutes ought to be interpreted according to the Rules
of the Common Law; Per Winch J. Win. 86. in Cafe of Hidclord v
ft£2?!L M ffi Where the ^nnbg of a Statute is dubious, JongUfageisM
JLLm.****™* r ° expound ,t by; for Jus tj Norma kquendi is govern*} bv
in* of a* AH Ufage ; and the Meaning ot Things fpoken or written mult be as it has
rnenr by rh t ^ k "f 1V 2-n ° *** by C ° m, " 0n Acce P ta «°° i Per Vaughan
S JulgL ^ h ( J". , £«#• l6 9- Hill. 23 & 24 Car. 2. C. B. in Cafe of Sheppam I v
and common ^O'UOiU is. Hi.
Acceptation of the Words, then it is rather an Oppredion of thofe concerned than an F,, rv r ,
Aft, efpecially as the Ufage may be circumlWd Vaugh. 170 in S £ a "%°fi"on of the
Jh Where /n Aft of Parliament is dubious, the Conferences are to be
conjulered, and Care is to be taken that fuch an Interpretation be not out
upon it as will quite elude the Force of it: But where 5" pC fhe
Confluences are not to be regarded ; for that would be to aifume a Le!
fi^SESL** loMod -™- Mich <* Geo - **• *«*
Wotd^fl^ffT^ 111 !!^ 11 ? ^ Autn °rity of Parliament, every
KcL^^fpkV^icLioHT"' m ° ft ftron ^- a ^ *« *«*
95. It was faid by Horton, That a Statute penal, as the Statute of Pro - tutes.
viiion cvc. ihall be taken Stritii Juris ; but a Statute made for Common ^ ee ?}■ S 8 /
Remedy for * General Mifchief, may be taken by Equity. Br. Parliament, *j^ ' „?^
pJ. 13. cites 11 H. 4. 76.
It is a Principle in the Common Law, that Statutes penal fhall be taken ftriiftlv, arid not extei d d
by Et-uity in their Prejudice, againft v. horn the Pain is inflicted; but on die other Side there are fe-
veral Cafes where the general If ords fhall be refiraiifd and abridg'dyfor the Benef.t of him againft ivhom the
Penalty is inflicted. See PI. C. 17. b. in the Cafe of Keniger v Fogaffa.
Penal Laws are not always taken ftrictly, but fbmetimes by Equity. Ar?. See 2 Brownl. no, in. 116.
in Cafe of Crofs v. Weftwood. See PI. C. b6. b. in Cafe of Partridge v. Strange. Ibid. 1 24. in
Cafe of Buckley v Thomas.
Penal Stature being made for the Publick Service, and Good of the King and Realm, as the Statutes
that make Soldiers running away Felony, may well be taken liberally according to the Intent of the
Makers. Cro. C. - I . The Soldier's Cafe — So may a Penal Statute which is to prevent a general Mif-
chief, as \ R. 2. cap. 12. againft Efcapes by Warden of the Fleer. 2 brownl. 302. Arg. in the Duke of
Lenox's Cafe, cirt-s Pi. C. Piatt's C.i'e For tho' it is penal againlt the Warde.i, yet it is beneficial as
to all others, and for that Reafon fhall be taken by Equity ; for every Statute is penal againlt fome
Body ; but fincethe taking it by Equity will be more beneficial than prejudicial to the greater Number
of People ; therefore by the Rules of Law it may be extended by Equity. See PI. C. 36. b. Piatt v. the
Sheriffs of London.
Chancery will aid Remedial Laws, tho' they are call'd Penal, but not by making them more Penal,
but to let them have their Courfe ; Per Lord Wright. Ch. Prec. 21 5. Hill. 1702. in Cafe of Attorney
General for Hindley v Sudell, He-keth & al'.
The Rule that Penal Laws fhail not be taken or conft rued by Equity, holds in Cafes of Laws that are
Penal upon particular Ptrfor.s; but not if made for the Publick Good, and the Peace and Safetv of the
Realm. Arg. 1 3 Mod. 24.2. Pafchr. 1 3 Ann. in the Houfe of Lords, in Cafe of Roper v. Ratclifr.
* S. P. Tho' it be a penal one. Arg. 10 Mod. 117. in Cafe of Fleetwood v. Thornby.
96. Every Statute which is penal, and which goes in Derogation of the
Common Lava, ihall be taken ltriftly, and this is a common Saying; and
a penal Statute is f'uch as gives Corporal Pain, as Imprifonment or For-
feiture of Money. Keihv. 96. pi. 6. Mich, 22 H. 7. Anon.
97. Altho' a penal Statute Ihall not be extended to Equity in the Ex-
polition of it, yet it Ihall be fo expounded that the true Intent and Mean-
ing of it may be known. (Mich. 1650, B. S.) For if the former fhould be,
the Expolition would be too large and arbitrary ; and if the latter mould
not be, the Expolition would be too narrow, and would extenuate the
Force of the Statute, and hinder the true Intent and Meaning thereof.
2 L. P. R. 527. Tit. Statute.
98. A Penalty 'in an Aft of Parliament implies a Prohibition, tho' there As | n tn e.
are no prohibitory Words in the Statute ; Per Holt Ch. J. Carth. 252. Calt: of r^ 1 "
Mich. 4 W. & M. B. R. in Cafe of Bartlett v. Viner. Stamteonly
inflicts a Pe-
nalty by Way of Forfeiture, but docs not mention any avoiding of the Simoniacal Contract, yet it has
been always held that iuch Contracts being againlt Law, are void. So if a Scrivener contracts for more
than 5 s for procuring the Loan of 100 1. fuch Contract is void ; Per Holt Ch. J. Carth. 252. in Cafe of
Bartlett v. Vinor. Skin. 322. S. C.
99. The Statute of Mdrlebridge 52 H. 3. 23. oflVa/fe, is a Penal
Law, and yet becaufe itis a Remedial Law, it has been interpreted bv
Equity. That Aft fays Finnarii non faciant vafium \ and it has been re-
folv'd that the Word Firmarii lhould extend to Strangers, and that this
Aft extended to Waile Omittendo, tho' the Word is Faciant, which li-
terally imports Active W~alte. Arg. See 10 Mod. 282. Hill, i Geo. 1.
B. R. Hammond v. Webb.
100. The Preamble is a* Key to open the Minds of the Makers, and Preamble.
the Mifchieis they intend to remedy; Per Dyer Ch. J. PI. 369. in Cafe !?"tfp V Q^
of Stowel v. Zouch. Lftt. 70 a.—
hk is not a Guide to expound Statutes always ; Per three JuP.iccs. Jo. 164. Mich. 3 Car. B. R. in Cale
of Barker v. Reading.
lie in the Expofition of Statutes to confine the General If eras of the ena&ing Part to anv
Words, cither introducing it, or to any fuch Words even in the Preamble it (elf: It is true-,
Jiyj | ■ commend* a Conftruction which agrees with the Preamble, but not fuch as may empni
ing Part to it. Per Cur. S Mod. 144. Trin. 9 Geo. in Cafe of the King v. Althoes.
Lord 'is could by no Means allow the Notion that the Preamble fhall ri-
id that becaufc the Preamble is too narrow or defecliv..
' General Words fhall be restrained from its full Latitude, and frorn
1 would otherwife, and of themfelves import, which ( i with fome Hcut)
on, ani tnftanced in the Coventry Act, which, if it had recited the Bar-
Nofe, and the 1 : &ing Claulc had been General, viz. Againft the cu;
of ai : or defaced, k might with equal Reafon be objeded, that
ihe ( '■■'•' -' ' .<•■■■■ ■ the Eye, wbnld hot have been within the Acl, becaufe not within
Wiv.s's Rep. 52.0. Trin 17 16. in Cafe of Copeman v. Gallant.
There were 101. There was a Time when there were no Preambles to Afts of Par-
or . no liamenr, and yet they were good, and even now Preambles are no more
- s to , 1 n • t * c t • ■ 1 • 1 j 1 j 1
Acts of Far- than Recitals ot Inconveniencies, which do not exclude any other to
liamentfe- which a Remedy is given by the e g Pare: Per Cur. 8 'Mod. 144.
Trin. 9 Geo. in Cale of The King v. Althoes.
r.he ComAions were mentioned in the Act, and feldom the Lords, and vet as may appear by the Rule of
Summons to the Parliament, tiiey were all there prefent. D. 144. b. Marg. pi Co.
Prrf.riptia:. 102. My Lord Coke in his Book on Littleton, takes a Difference be-
L/^- , '\/' tween Negative Statutes declaratory of tht Common haw, and Negative
9 ' Statutes Int'odutlory of a New Law; but Richardlbn Ch. J. and Noy.
ink- Attorney General held againft Lord Coke's Opinion, That in neither of
, in the the Cafts a Pvefcrrption can he ngair.lt a Negative Statute. Jo. 270. 8
' % Car. in iti ... Windfor Lord Lovelace's Cafe. "
the Manor of Er.iy is Contra in fupport of Co. Litt. 115. a. That againft r the laft there is no
Prescription, bat in t e firffCafe no Alteration is made, and therefore a Prefcription may as -a ill
he .. infttha -■■■ tl e < ammor L t , id thai is the Reaibn that a Man may prefcrfbeto hold a Lc~t
more ice ir ihe "Year, tho' the Stitute of Magna Charta be Negative, that a Leet be holden
A '.an may prefirtie againft an Affirr. ative Statute, but not againft one that is in the Negative. See
Ai'f. 2 Buiil. 30. in Cale at Jo: es v. smith.
Arg. Show. 103. All Prescriptions and Cajioms will be foreclofed by a New Aft of
4 2 °- — s | e Parliament unlels raved. Parliamei
Elmerlafe. London and Dr. Birch v. the King.
104. In all Cafes of Statutes which are with Provijbes the Law up-
on them fhall be taken generally, but in fuch Particulars only as are re-
trained by the Provifo. Arg. 3 Le. 132. pi. 184. Palch. 28 Eliz.. B. R.
in Cafe oi Wroth v. the Countels of Suiiex.
ioj. Where the / 'rovifo ot an Aft of Parliament is directly repugnant tc
the Purvkw i the Provifo lhall itand, and be a Repeal of the Purview, as
it (peaks the lalt Intention of the Makers. Gibb. 195. Hill. 4 Geo. 2. B.
R. Attorney General v. Chelfea Water- works Governors.
Reference. 106. Where the PrarogatiVd cap. 1. wills that the King pall have : ■
\*^~V~^J Lands and Tenements oj his Tenant, who dies feifed, his Heir within Age y
&c. except the Poffe/fions of the Jrch-bipop of Caterbary between Tine and
Tecs, this lhall be intended of Pofleihons which the Arch-biilmp then
had, and not thole which lhall be purchaled or Efcheat after ; Qusere of
Efcheats. Br. Parliament, pi. 83. cites 16 E. 3. and Fitih. Livery 29.
Br. P 1 07. If ' AQion 1 h ifte be now given generally againft Tenant m Tail of*
mem, pi. 6S. tcr pcffibility of Ifjuc cvc. treble Damages lhall be recovered againlt him
wiihout mure \\ ordsj For thole are adjoined- to it by rhc former Sta-
tute. And when it is given in a New Cale, all that is adjoining to it is
given wich it likewife. Br. Waite, pi. 6S. cites 12 H. 4. 3.
108. In Ccnitruction of General References in A£ts of Parliament,
fuch Reference mult be made only as mayjland with Redfon and Right. 2
1 oq An \£t lately made fliall betaken v:ithin the Equity of an Ail Statutes
made long fin**. See 4 Rep. 4. a. Mich. 14 & 15 Eli.. Vernon's Cafe. ™*£ ™
fn if f«fc» into (fee ConfirtiSion of one another. Barnard. Chan. Rep. 276. Hill. 1740. in Cafe of 23iatli0
I), ii COlOU cites it as the Opinion of Ld. Ch, J. Hale in 1 Vent. 244. and that the Statute of 14 Eliz.
re* tins 10 Churfch Lea-fa was was a Kind of Appendix to 13 Eliz. relating to the fame Matter. And
fays, The Ld Chancellor held, That in the principal Cafe, which was upon the Statute 1 Jac. 2. cap.
17 S. 7. this Pule of Conduction holds more ftronglv, this Statute being aContinuancc of the Stature
of [21 & 2; Car. 2. cap. 10] of Distributions ; For the Statute 1 Jac. 2. is a Continuance of that of
Car. 2. with three additional Claufes, and therefore is to be considered as if the Statute of Car. 2. was
repeated, and n 1 by it. See Vent. 246. Baity v. Murin.
.So theSta me of 1 3 E 1. De Mjercatoribus fliall b- eonftrued within the Statute of A&on Burnel
11 E. 1. as to felling Land at a Reafonable Price. [See (E. 11.) Statute 15 E. I. the Notes upon the
Words (Reafona! at.)]
Tho a fubfepjent Statute may a be 'within the Meaning cf the Jff precedent, as the Sta-
tute of 32 H 8. of Wills within the Statute 2- H 8. of Jointures, yet that i; when the later Statute
is within the I- ' Ion as the former. Per Holt Ch. J. 2 Ld. Raym. Rep. 102S. Hill 2 Am re in Sir
William Moore's Cafe.
no. When a Thing is named certain, and after General Things, the Where a
Word Subfequent fliall be referred to the General Words, and not to that ^"^fli,
which is Certain. Arg. Le. 2.39. Mich. 32 & 33 Eliz. B. R. in Guild- ^ Kcd by a
ford's Cafe. Statul m
this by General Word; of the Statute fhall not be toll'd. PerHutton j. Jo. 26. Hill. 20 Jac. C. B. itl
Cafe of St3nden v. the Urtiverfity of Oxon and Whittoa.
in. Always in Statutes Relation fliall be made according to the Matter
precedent. 6 Rep. 76. b. Parch. 5 jac. in the Court of Wards Sir Geo.
112. Relative Words, in an A& of Parliament, will make a Thing pafs
as well as ir it had been particularly exprelied in the A& it felf Raym.
54, 55- Mien. 14 Car. B. .' . in Cale of Wheatly v. Thomas.
'113. A Thing, which has no Exiltence but by a late Act, may receive
Benefit from a former Act by an Equitable Conit'ruction. See 2 Jo. 63.
Mich. 26 Car. 2. B. R. Pluinmer v. VVhitchcott.
114. When a Remedy is given by a Statute, and no Alt ion is given by
the lame Statute for Recovery of the Penalty, the Pajty lhall have an Ac-
tion of Debt ; Per Jones J. Popb. 175. in Cafe of VVelden v. Vefey.
115. Wherever a Statute enatls cr prohibits any Thing/or the Advan- ibid. 53. in
tage of any Perfon, that Perfon ihall have Remedy to recover the Advan- Cafe of Aflv-
tage given him, or to have Satisfaction for the Injury done him contrary by v. White.
to Law by the fame Statute ; lor it would be a line Thing to make a
Law by which one has "a Right, but no Remedy unlefs in Equity. Per
Holt Ch. J. 6 Mod. 26. Mich. 2 Ann. B. R. Anon.
116. General Words in penal Statutes are often rejrrain'd by Equity ; As Q^^Tl
if an A£t fays that whoever does fuch an Act lhall be a Felon, and fuller g^uity&'c.
Death, yet this extends not to Peribns Non fans Memorise, or Infants ^s^r^J
very young. So if a Statute makes all Receivers, or who lhall give
Meat or Drink 6vC. to Perfons guilty of fuch or fuch Offence to be Ac-
ceifories, if they are conufant of the Fact, yet this will not be conitrued
to extend to the Wile of fuch guilty Perfon, tho' the Generality of the
Words extended to Infants, Non fanae Memorise, and Wife, yet they
are not included in the .Intent. See PI. C. 465. a. &c". and many more
Illuftrations and Examples there. Pafch. 15 Eliz. in the Cafe of Eyfton
117. Tho' the Stature of 1 Eliz.. makes m .-' ' all Leafes by BifliopS
&c. to all Intents and Purpofes, yet fuch a Leafe is not void againft the
Lelfor himfelf. Arg. Mo. '3 15, 316. pi. 455- cites it as adjudged Mich.
su Eliz. in cheCafe of Sale v. Biihop ot Litchfield.
33 11S. Lands
118. Lands are dif gavel led by Aft of Parliament to all Intents and
Purpofes, and made dependable as Lands at Common Law to the eldelr.
Son only. The Generality of the rirlt Words are rejtrain'd by the parti-
vr Conclufton ; and adjudg'd that this only takes away the Payability
of the Lands, and not the Power to devife. Lev. 80. Mich. 13 Car. 2.
B. R. Wifeman v. Cotton.
119. Tho' the Words of an Aft are general, yet they ought to be
daily conitrued to avoid an apparent Injury. Arg. 8 Mod. 7. Mich. 7
Geo. in Cafe of the King v. the Bilhop of Armagh.
120. There are many Cafes of Inftances or Examples given in Afts of
Parliament, which yet do not rejirain the Remedy or Purview to that Par!:-
r, or from extending to other Cafes of the like Nature. Went.Oxf.
Executors 67. upon Stat. 4 E. 3. 7. De Bonis Afportatis&c.
12 r. It is a Rule and Law of Parliament, that Regularly Nova Confii-
tutio fttturis fqrmam impopere debet, non pr
S C upon *- 22 : A Ne ^ Aft has m *- etro fP e ft to ta)
the Con-' PkuntiJl was intitled before the Commencement thereof. 2 Mod. 310.
ftraflron of Trin- 3° Car. 2. B. R. Gil more v. Shooter.
i" 2. aga in ft Frauds and Perjuries as to Actions for Marriage-promifes, without Note or Writine
after the 24th June &c. 2 Lev. 22-. S. C. Vent. 330": SC 2 Show. 16. S C.
123. Statutes may have a Retrofpccl. 10 Rep. 55. Trim n Jac.
Chancellor &c. of Oxford's Cafe, and cites PI. C. 207. a. the Cafe of
Straddling v. Morgan, upon the Statute 31 H. 8. cap. 13. which gave the
PoifeHions of Abbies to the King in the fame Estate as then they were ;
and D. 231. Mich. 6 & 7 Eliz.. the Abbot of Ramley's Cafe, and the
Statute 13 Eliz. cap. 4. which fubjefted the Lands &c. of Treafurers
and Perfons accountable to the Queen, to the Payment of their Debts ;
and Sir Chriitopher Hanton's Caie refolved upon the faid Statute.
1 24. AJife againft Baron and Feme, who pleaded Record in Bar, and
faifd at the^ Day, -md yet the Feme was received, and was not a Dif-
Loujtritttioii, notwithstanding ltrift Words. Br. Parliament, pi 31
cites 13 All." 1.
125. Upon the Statute of Weftminfter 2. cap. 40. it was faid, That
Statutes which rejirain the Common Law, pall be taken StricJi Juris. Br.
Parliament, pi. 7:. cites 18 E. 4. 16. and 21 H. 7. 21. Per Cur. that the
Statute of Weftm. 1. cap. 20. de Malefatlortlus in Pants & Vivariis, frail
not extend to Porefts ; Quod nota.
126. Where the Plaintiff in Quod ei deforceat vouches, he who is voucFd
cannot vouch over 5 tor in this Point the Statute is ftrift. Br. Parliament
pi. 21. cites 14 H. 7. 17. PerVavifor.
fbi fanti 127. And in Cui in Vita again/ the Alienee of the Baron, the Parol frail
wEitb " 0t demnr lvNoi,a K e °f the He ir of the Baron, but Expeftet Emptor &c.
brought y d iftheASion be brought againft the Alienee of the Baron, there the Parol
againjt the fhall demur by the Age of the Heir of the Baron. Br. Parliament pi.
Jlitnee oj the 21. cites 14 H. 7. 17. "
Parliament, pi. 11. cites 14 H. ;. 1;.
128. Afts which give new Remedies, fhall not have liberal Construc-
tion. 2 Sid. 63. Hill. 1657. B. R. in Caie of Pool v. Neel.
129. Statutes that give Cojls are to be taken ilrictly, as being a Kind S^ 1 - l 7$
of Penalty, 1 Salk. 205. Mich. 2 W. & M. B. R. Cone v. Bowles.
130. It was doubted whether a Gaoler could detain a Prifoner dif-
* barged by the late Statute for Relief of poor Prilbners/er bis tees , And
it was laid, That Treby Ch. J. ofC. B. held he might; lor the Act be-
ing lor giving away the Right of the Subject, it ought to be conftrued
jlnilly ; And Per Holt Ch. J. let an A£t of Parliament be ever lb cha-
ritable, yet if it gives away the Property of the Subject, it ought not to
be countenanced. 12 Mod. 513. Pafch. 13 W. 3. B. R. Callady v.
131. Where the Statute is, That a Man /ha/I import Btil/ion of 2 Marks Statutes,
for every Sack of l> vol imported, and another Statute is made that aMer- where they
chant jhall not be charged but of Ancient Cuftom only, this does not repeal io!1 , ^ ' Pre ~
the hill Statute. Er. Parliament, pi. 52. cites 4 E. 4. 12. f^^i
132. It is a Rule that Leges* Pojhriores abrogant Priores ; But tho' this 1 1 Rep. 64.
holds in Theli, yet it does not hold in Hypotheii, it the laft Act be not b ,- inD ,r.
contradictory or contrary to the Former; but if it be only fo lar dirier- p°r Crs h
ing or difagreeing that by any other Contbuction they may Both ftand fame' Rule
and afterwards 6 R. 2. enacts, That a Man attainted of Praemunire lhali statute 1- E
forfeit Lands, this mall not be extended but only to Lands in Fee, and ;.cap.[i]Da
for Liie, and not to Lands in Tail, and yet all are within the Words ; Mercatori-
and there in Fofter's Cafe the Statute ol 23 Eliz. gave 20 1. a Month to " us > '"'hifk
be divided between the King, the Poor, and the Informer: And after- ^theTe-
wards the Statute ol 28 Eliz. gives Seifure to the King, and 35 Eliz.. gives nam bvSta-
Liberty to the King to purfue by Bill, Plaint, or Information, yet this does tute Mer -
not takeaway the 3d Part irom the Informer; Per Jones J. Jo. 22. Hill. chant « , illaI1
i8jac. C.B. intheCafeofStanden v. theUniverlity ol Oxford and VV'hitten. "way the
the Tenant of the Franktenement had before, but both may well ftand together. And fo D. 50. pi -
5; H. 8'. where it was enacted, That the younger Son fhould have Appeal of the Death of his Father'
this dees not exclude the eldeft Son of his Suit, becaufe there are no Words of Reftraint. And
fee Roll's Rep. 90, 91 &c. in the Cafe of the King v. Dr. Fofter. See Litt. Rep. ziz. Mich.
4 Car. in C. B. the Cafe of the College of Phyficians
See 2 Roll's Rep. 410. Mich. 21 Jac. B. R in the Cafe of Afcue v Eutts.
A later Statute in the Affirmative (han't toll a former Act, efpecally if the former be particular and
the 1 al. 6 Rep 19 b. Gregory's Cafe.
But if The firmer be General, axd the later Particular, the later would controul it. See Ar<*. 2 Show
421 Trin. 6 W.& M. in the Cafe of the King v. the Bifhop of London and Dr. Birch. &
Where 2 Statutes are conjiftent, and may ftand together, the later is no Repeal of the former. Arjr.