| |
| | Entick v. Carrington, 19 Howell's State Trials (1765) |
 | | Bathurst J. said he had seen the Habeas Corpus and the Return, and that this was a commitment by a secretary of state.) The King and Earbury, Mich. 7 Geo.2, 2 Barnard 346, was a motion to discharge a recognizance entered into for writing a paper called The Royal Oak. |
 | | H. 8, chap.11, and in the statute of the same king touching precedency; and it is observable, that he is called in these two statutes by the single name of secretary, without the addition, which modern times has given him, of the dignity of a state-officer. |
 | | It seems the chief justice was a little incorrect in his report; for it should seem as if he meant to punish only the writer of false news. |
| www.constitution.org /trials/entick/entick_v_carrington.htm (14399 words) |
|