CHARLES II.

25

of the monarchy, no corporation had ever yetbeen exposed to forfeiture, and the thing itselfimplied an absurdity: That a corporation, assuch, was incapable of all crime or offence, andnone were answerable for any iniquity but thepersons themselves, who committed it: That themembers, in chusing magistrates, had intrustedthem with legal powers only; and whe^e themagistrates exceeded these powers , their actswere void, but could never involve the bodyitself in any criminal imputation: That such hadever been the practice of England , except atthe Reformation , when the monasteries wereabolished; but this was an extraordinary cafe ;and it was even thought necessary to ratify after-wards the whole transaction by act of parliament:That corporate bodies, framed for public good,and calculated for perpetual duration, ought notto be annihilated for the temporary faults of theirmembers, who might themselves, without hurtingthe community, be questioned for their offences:That even a private estate, if entailed, couldnot be forfeited to the crown, on account oftreason, committed by the tenant for life; butupon his demise went to the next in remainder:That the offences, objected to the city, far from.deserving so severe a punishment, were not evenworthy of the smallest reprehension. That allcorporations were invested with the power ofmaking by-laws ; and the smallest borough inEngland had ever been allowed to carry theexercise of this power farther than London had

HAP

LXTX.

IsiSj.