The Express.
London, England, 1850-12-04 00:00:00

EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.-YESTILILDAT.

&Moll MIL Bum PAW AND TIM ilDere OV uT COCK or
lemma Pus AnD SANDI. or EICIRAKIII, On PAWLS VION INV
lINKAT OF QteMell REIM

BoN♦Nll, CLIME, V. BT♦N9 -SLWISTIitATION CM •
BENEFICE POI NON 11.1141DINCE -JUDOMINT.

The facts of t►is ease were reported in the Express of
Friday last. The short taste of the case ',eerie; on the
point under question were these :—A monition having been
issued by the Lord Bishop of Worcester to the plaintiff in
iser-r, the Rev. Ms. Hawker, vicar of the parish of Church
Huneybeorne, to go into residence, the rev. gentleman
replied that he had gone Into residence. Borne time after
complaint was exein made to the bishop that the ricer was
eosin out of residence, baring glue to his own house near
gleam. The bishop thereupon 'slued sequeetration of
the vicarage ender the statute. An avian was brought by
the vies/ against the present defendant, the secretary to the
bishop, to try the validity of the sequestration, and the paint
sow Lir decision was whether the process was lawful, the
sequestration having been immediately issued without afford-
ing the vicar so opportan.ty to explain the reason of his non-
vendetta.
_

W. Baron Parke now delivered the judgment of the court.
After detailing at length the facts of the ease, hie lordship
°beamed that the main qustion for the consideration of the
court was whether the sequestration ordered by the bishop
sea a proceeding simply ia the nature of a distress to compel
residence, or in proem for previous non-residence. If in ,
porous the bishop should have Mama the incumbent so
opportunity of being heard before sequestra.im was issued ;
for no proposition was more clearly eestabiished by law than
this, that no man is to be punished unless he has had props r
opportunity of answering the charge. The court were of
o-pinion, that although one of the objects of sequestration
under the stm ate was to enforce nil IfECI., it was also meant
so a punishment for non-residence. It was pertly is the
asters of • &stems, and partly as a punishment. It must be
treated ea penal ; for if a sequestration continued • year the
besides was avid; and the same consequence followed the
issuing of two sequestrations within two years. The mart
were of opinion net before the ccierstration was irstud the
ismentomet should have bad an opportunity given Lill of
offering a lawful excuse; maims the statute meant thee the
bishop should sat ex par.*. No such po err was conferred
by the statute; and the bishop, therefore, could not dispense
with that recent* to the due administration of justice. The
curt did not soy that the bishop was to proceed in the hear•
leg with all the formality of the courts of law; still it wee
necessary that the clozrge should be Intimated to the sop
peed delinquent, and that fall opportunity should be M.
lorded him to answer that charge. He did not think that
the simple letter which bad b:en sent to the incumbent was
uflleientfor that purpose, as he wee not thereby called on to
explain. The gnu. election did net issue on an adjudication
declaring that:the plemtiff had been guilty of wilful disobeii-
. cute ; therefore the court were of opinion thao the low had
not been strictly obeyed. He took that opportunity of sug-
gesting that the bishop's odious should in future take ears
that the instrument should et forth the delinquency, and
that the monition should be preceded by an intimation to
I the incumbent to show muse. Under these circumatsnem

ehe 4;;;;tt;;;; O-1 optakia that the plaintiff woo entitled to
mover, sad that *ono nnne be • links do novo.
Ilb• Adamant was amodiagly riounti.