1. 1 Lord Raym. 65.
2. 2 Hawk. P. C. 84.
3. 4 Inst. 176.
4. 2 Hawk. P. C. 84.
5. 2 Hal. P. C. 108.
6. Ibid. 110.
7. 2 Hawk. P. C. 85.
8. 1 Hal. P. C. 580. 2 Hawk. P. C. 82.
9. A practice had obtained in the secretaries office ever since the restoration, grounded on some clauses in the acts for regulating the press, of issuing general warrants to take up (without naming any person in particular) the authors, printers and publishers of such obscene or seditious libels, as were particularly specified in the warrant. When those acts expired in 1694, the same practice was inadvertently continued, in every reign and under every administration, except the four last years of queen Anne, down to the year 1763: when such a warrant being issued to apprehend the authors, printers and publishers of a certain seditious libel, its validity was disputed; and the warrant was adjudged by the whole court of king's bench to be void, in the case of Money v. Leach. Trin. 5 Geo. III. B. R. After which the issuing of such general warrants was declared illegal by a vote of the house of commons. (Com. Journ. 22 Apr. 1766.)
10. 1 Hal. P. C. 86.
11. See Vol. I. pag. 355.
12. 2 Hal. P. C. 88 - 90.
13. Ibid. 98.
14. 2 Hawk. P. C. 74.
15. 2 Hal. P. C. 77.
16. Stat. 30 Geo. II. c. 24.
17. 2 Hal. P. C. 82, 83.
18. Bracton. l. 3. tr. 2. c. 1. § 1. Mirr. c. 2. § 6.
19. See Vol. III. pag. 160.
20. Mod. Un. Hist. vi. 383. vii. 156.
21. 2 Hal. P. C. 100 104.
22. 1 Hawk. P. c. 75.
