any lands or goods, in prejudice of a ſubjects right[1]. On proof of which, as the king can never be ſuppofed intentionally to do any wrong, the law queſtions not but he will immediately redreſs the injury; and refers that conſcientious taſk to the chancellor, the keeper of his conſcience. It alſo appertains to this court to hold plea of all perſonal actions, where any officer or miniſter of the court is a party[2]. It might likewiſe hold plea (by ſcire facias) of partitions of lands in coparcenary[3], and of dower[4], where any ward of the crown was concerned in intereſt, ſo long as the military tenures ſubſiſted: as it now may alſo do of the tithes of foreſt land, where granted by the king and claimed by a ſtranger againſt the grantee of the crown[5]; and of executions on ſtatutes, or recognizances in nature thereof by the ſtatute 23 Hen. VIII. c. 6.[6] But if any cauſe comes to iſſue in this court, that is, if any fact be diſputed between the parties, the chancellor cannot try it, having no power to ſummon a jury; but muſt deliver the record propria manu into the court of king's bench, where it ſhall be tried by the country, and judgment ſhall be there given thereon[7]. And, when judgment is given in chancery, upon demurrer or the like, a writ of error, in nature of an appeal, lies out of this ordinary court into the court of king's bench[8]: though ſo little is uſually done on the common law ſide of the court, that I have met with no traces of any writ of error[9] being actually brought, ſince the fourteenth year of queen Elizabeth, A.D. 1572.
In this ordinary, or legal, court is alſo kept the officina juſtitiae: out of which all original writs that paſs under the great ſeal, all commiſſions of charitable uſes, ſewers, bankruptcy,
p 4 Rep. 54. q 4 lnſt. 80. r Co. Litt. 171. F. N. B. 62. s Bro. Abr. tit. (tcivtr. 66. Moor. 565. t Bro. Abr. t. diſmes. 10. u 2 Roll. Abr. 460. w Cro. Jac. 12. x Yearbook, 18 Edw. III. 25. 17 aſſ. 24. 29 Aſſ. 47. Dyer. 315. i Roll. Rep. 287. 4 Inſt. 80. y The opinion of lord keeper North in 1682 (1 Vern. 131. 1 Equ. Caf. abr. 129.) that no ſuch writ of error lay, and that an injunction might be iſſued againſt it, ſeems not to have been well conſidered.
