LIBERTY. The general nature of a liberty, as a portion of the royal prerogative in the hands of a subject, has been already described. [FnexcuisE.] Liberties were at first chiefly granted to monastic and other religious establishments, in ease of the consciences of the royal grantors, or in testimony of their devotion to the Church ; and most of those now in existence are derived from an ecclesiastical source. They were afterwards granted as means of strengthening municipal corporations.
Though all liberties emanate from the prerogative, a distinction is usually made between such liberties as have been actually exercised by the crown before the grant to the subject, and such as (being merely latent in the crown) are said to be created de note upon their being granted. The former, when by escheat, forfeiture, or otherwise, they come again to the crown, are extinguished by merging in the general prerogative, and cannot afterwards be regranted as existing franchises : the latter still have continuance for the benefit of the crown or of any subsequent grantee. To the former class belong such privileges as the right to have the goods of felons, &c., waifs, estrays, and wreck, arising within the lands of the grantee ; to the latter, the 'return of writs, the right of holding fairs and markets and taking the tolls, the right of holding a hundred-court or a court-leet, the privileges of having a free warren [WARREN ; PARK], and the like ; and in such cases the franchises, even whilst in the king's hands, are exempt from the juris diction of the ordinary officers of the crown, and are administered by bailiffs or other special officers, as when in the hands of a subject.
The fines paid to the crown for grants or confirmations of liberties are shown by Madox to have formed no inconsiderable part of the royal revenue. In his History of the Exchequer,' he quotes the par ticulars of about 200 liberties, granted principally by King John. The following may serve as a specimen of the terms upon which the parties fined or made agreement with the crown. The men of Cornwall fine Le 2000 marks and 200 marks for 20 lathe) a estimated at 10 marks Garb, for a charter for disattorvsting the county and choosing their own sheriff, The men of Brough fine in 20 marks and 5 marks for a palfrey, for a market on Sunday, and it fair (or two days. The men of Launceston fine in 5 marks for changing their market from Sunday to Thursday. henry do ha Pommeraio tines In 5 marks " that the men of
Lidford may not have a better liberty than the men of Exeter." Alamos de afunbi floes In 100 marks and 3 good palfreys (or a charter of exemption from suit at county courts and hundred-courts for his life. Thomas of York,son of Olivet, fines in one huntsman (wrens fugatorem) that he may be alderman in the merchant's guild at York. Agnes, the widow of Walter Clifford, fines in one good palfrey to have her manor of Witham in Kent, and that the manof the said manor, being her men, be acquitted of attires, and hundreds, and suits to the county courts and aide of aberiffa and bailiffs, and for the king'. letters-patent thereof. The burgesses of Shrewsbury fine in 20 marks and one palfrey that no one shall buy within the borough new skins or undressed cloth, unless he be is lot (in lotto), and assessed and taxed with the burgesses. (SCOT An) Loa.] Many of these franchisee having been found to interfere with the regular and speedy administration of justice, the extension of them by fresh grants was frequently the Aubject of very loud complaints on the Tart of the Commons in parliament, who represented them as preju dicial to the crown, an impediment to justice, and a damage to the people. It appears by the Parliament Roll, that Edward I., towards the close of his reign in 1306), declared that after the grant which ho had made to the Earl of Lincoln for his life, of the return of writs within two hundreds, he would not grant a similar franchise as long as he Geed to any except his own children, and directed that the declara tion should be written in the Chancery, the Gardroho, and the Exchequer. And in 1347, Edward 111., in answer to a strong remon strance, promised that such grants should not in future be made without good advice.
The form in which the crown granted views of frank-pledge (Lima] and other franchises may be seen in the charters granted by King Henry Vi. to Eton College, and King's College, Cambridge. (5' Rot. ParL, 51, 97.) A person exercising a franchise to which he has not a legal title may be called upon to show cause by what authority he does so, by a writ of quo-warrant°, or an information in the nature of a vio-trarranlo. [IsroaltsvoN ; Qco.11'ARRANT0.] And parties disturbed in the lawful exercise of a franciso may recover damages against the disturber in an action,