been exploded out of this court.
Among the exertions of authority practised in the Star-chamber which no
positive law could be brought to warrant he enumerates "punishments of
breach of proclamations before they have the strength of an act of
Parliament; which this court hath stretched as far as ever any act of
Parliament did. As in the 41st of Elizabeth, builders of houses in
London were sentenced, and their houses ordered to be pulled down, and
the materials to be distributed to the benefit of the parish where the
building was; which disposition of the goods soundeth as a great
extremity, and beyond the warrant of our laws; and yet, surely, very
necessary, if anything would deter men from that horrible mischief of
increasing that head which is swollen to a great hugeness already."
The mode of process was sometimes of a summary nature; the accused
person being privately examined, and his examination read in court, if
he was thought to have confessed sufficient to deserve sentence, it was
immediately awarded without any formal trial or written process. But the
more regular course was by information filed at the suit of the
attorney-general or, in certain cases, of a private relator. The party
was brought before the court by writ of subpoena, and, having given
bond, with sureties not to depart without leave, was to put in his
answer upon oath, as well to the matters contained in the information as
to special interrogatories. Witnesses were examined upon
interrogatories, and their depositions read in court. The course of
proceeding, on the whole, seems to have nearly resembled that of the
chancery.
It was held competent for the court to adjudge any punishment short of
death. Fine and imprisonment were of course the most usual. The pillory,
whipping, branding, and cutting off the ears grew into use by degrees.
In the reigns of Henry VII and Henry VIII, we are told by Hudson, the
fines were not so ruinous as they have been since, which he ascribes to
the number of bishops who sat in the court, and inclined to mercy, "and
I can well remember," says he, "that the most reverend Archbishop
Whitgift did ever constantly maintain the liberty of the free charter,
that men ought to be fined, _salvo contenemento_. But they have been of
late imposed according to the nature of the offence, and not the estate
of the person. The slavish punishment of whipping," he proceeds to
observe, "was not introduced till a great man of the comm
|