NE EXEAT REGNO, is a writ which issues out of Chancery on the application of a complainant, to prevent his debtor from leaving the realm, being, in short, the capias of the Court of Chancery. It is directed to the sheriff of the county in which the debtor is ; and commands him to cause the debtor to give sufficient bail or security, in the sum of—l., that he will not go, or attempt to go, into parts beyond the seas, without leave of the court ; and in case he shall refuse, to commit him to prison until he shall do it of his own accord, &e.
The writ cannot be applied for unless in a suit, that is, unless a bill is already filed; but a plaintiff may apply for it in any stage of a suit, whether the writ is prayed for by the bill or not. There must be a debt in equity actually due at the time when the writ is applied for ; fer the writ is not obtainable for a demand on which a party can be held to bad at law. The affidavit must also show that the defendant is going abroad, or it must show facts which prove that conclusion, and that the debt will be in danger if he quit the realm. The writ may be moved for ex parte, and issues until answer or further order. A defendant may apply to discharge the writ on putting in his answer.
This writ is founded on the real or supposed prerogative of the king to restrain his subjects from departing from the realm. The " Natura
Brevium " contains two forms of writs, one of which has for its object to restrain a clergyman from going abroad without the king's licence ; and commands the sheriff to take security from him or commit him to prison ; the other has for its object to prevent a layman from going abroad without the king's licence ; but it requires no security from the party, and differs in several other respects from the other writ. These writs are both entitled De Securitate Invenienda, &c., and seem to be in substance, though not in name, writs of Ne Exeat Regno. From the former the present writ seems to be derived.
It is said that the object of the writ, as applied to clergymen, was to prevent them from having frequent intercourse with the Papal see. Whether the prerogative on which these writs were founded was a usurpation on the part of the crown or not, is a matter which has been somewhat discussed. The opinion that such a power as that which is exercised by this writ, " appears to have been unknown to the ancient common law, which, in the freedom of its spirit, allowed every man to depart the realm at his own pleasure" (Beanies), is a vague surmise, expressed in language equally vague.
(A Brief View of the lVrit Ne Eccat Ilegno by Beanies.)