of the plaintiffs that the bonds were, pro turpi caufá; that Lord Rochford, having a confidence placed in him by the king, had abufed that confidence, by felling his recommendation; and that, upon the public policy of the law, fuch an agreement ought not to ftand. On the other hand it was argued, that it was allowed this was not an office within the ftatute of Edw. 6. that it was merely an office refpecting the king's private, not his public character; and that if it was turpis contractus, that might have been pleaded at law. Lord Thurlow expreffed his doubts, whether it might not have been brought upon the record at law by a plea, and made a defence there to the action; but thought that not a fufficient reafon to prevent his interpofition, the court of law never having determined that it could be fo brought there as a defence. He then, admitting that it was not within the ftatute Edw. 6. but treating it as a matter of public policy of the law, and fimilar to marriage brocage bonds, where, though the parties are private perfons, the practice is publicly detrimental, ordered the injunction to be continued till the hearing; and afterwards upon the hearing ordered it to be perpetual, $94. Offices may be loft. 1. By forfeiture. 2. By How Offices acceptance of another office incompatible with that may be lolt. which the person holds. 3. By the determination of the thing to which the office was annexed. $ 95. It is a general rule that if a perfon does any Forfeiture act which is contrary to the nature and duty of his office, or refufes to perform the fervices annexed to it, the office is forfeited. For in the grant of every office grantee § 96. Lord Coke fays, "there are three causes of "forfeiture or feisure of offices, for matter of fact; 66 as, for abufing, not ufing, or refufing. Abusing or "mifufing; as if the marshall or other gaoler fuffer "voluntary escapes, it is a forfeiture of their offices. "So if a forefter or park keeper fell and cut down "wood, unlefs for neceffary brush, it is a forfeiture "of their offices; for deftruction of vert, is de"ftruction of venifon. As to non-ufer there is a dif "ference, when the office concerns the adminiftration "of justice, or the commonwealth, and the officer ex officio, or of neceffity, ought to attend without any demand or requeft; there the non-user or non"attendance in court is a forfeiture. As the office of 66 66 chamberlain in the exchequer, prothonotary, &c. "in the common pleas, &c. for the attendance of "these and the like officers is of neceflity for the ad"ministration of justice. So the attendance of the "clerk of the market is of neceffity for the common"wealth. So of holding the fheriffs tourn. But "when the officer ought not to attend or exercise his "office but on demand or request to be made by him "to whom he is officer, there non-ufer or non"attendance is no caufe of forfeiture without demand or request made. But when the office concerns any "man's private property, and the officer ought ex officio to attend his office without request, there the non"ufer or non-attendance is no caufe of forfeiture, "unless "unless the non-ufer or non-attendance is cause of prejudice or damage to him, whofe officer he is, in fomething which concerns his charge. As if a "parker or cuftos parci does not attend one or two days, and within these days no prejudice or damage 66 happens, it is no forfeiture. But, if by reason of "his absence persons unknown kill any deer, it is a "forfeiture of his office. As to refufal it is to be "known, that in all cafes when an officer is bound upon request to exercise his office, if he do it not upon request, it is a forfeiture. As if the steward "of a manor is requested by the lord to hold a court, "which he does not, it is a forfeiture." § 97. A Filazer of the court of common pleas was absent from his office during two years, and farmed it from year to year without leave of the court, for which he was discharged, and no record of the difcharge was entered on the roll. And upon his bringing an affife this was held a good discharge. Vaux v. $ 98. If a tenant in tail of an office commits a for- 7 Rep. 34 b. feiture it shall bind the iffue, by force of the condition tacitè annexed by law to fuch eftate. But, if an officer for life commits a forfeiture, this fhall not affect the person intitled to the inheritance, Bro. Ab. Pl. 7. § 99. If the deputy of an office in fee does any act by which the office is forfeited, the inheritance of the office is thereby loft. But if a perfon having an office of inheritance, leases it for life, and the leffee commits 2 Lev. 71. a forfeiture, this fhall not forfeit the inheritance. M 4 3 288. § 100. It Bro. Ab. Tit. Office, Pl. 51. Nevill's Cafe, Woodward v. Poph. R. 119. 2 Vern. 174 § 100. It is held in fome cafes that where there are two joint officers, the forfeiture of one, is a forfeiture of the other; for both are one and the fame officer, and the office is entire. Acceptance of an incom14. de Office. § 101. It has however been determined that where an office is granted to two, and one of them is attainted of treafon, the other fhall not forfeit. § 102. Sir Edward Nevill and Henry Nevill his fon were keepers of Alyngton park with a certain fee during their lives, and the life of the longeft liver of them. Sir Edward Nevill was attainted of treason, and the question was, whether the king fhould have the office by the attainder. It was refolved that, being only an office of skill and confidence, the fame was not forfeited to the king; but that the furvivor fhould hold the fame, with the profits incident thereto, during his life. § 103. Where an ecclefiaftical office is forfeited, the benefit of it goes to the king as fupreme ordinary. S104. Where a principal officer is authorized to appoint inferior officers under him, if fuch inferior officers commit a forfeiture, the fuperior officer fhall take advantage thereof, § 105. A perfon may lofe an office by the acceptance of another office, incompatible with that which he already holds. And all offices are incompatible and inconfiftent where they interfere with each other. For For that circumftance creates a prefumption, that they cannot be executed with impartiality and honesty. $106. Thus Lord Coke fays, that a forefter by 4 Inft. 310. patent for life having been made juftice in eyre of the fame foreft hac vice, the forefter fhip became void: for thefe offices are incompatible, because the forefter is under the correction of the juftice in eyre, and he cannot correct himself. S107. Upon a mandamus to restore a perfon to the place of town clerk, it was returned that he was elected mayor and fworn, and therefore they chose another town clerk. And the court was ftrongly of opinion that the offices were incompatible, because of the fubordination. Rex v. Pergam, Milward v.' of the Prin cipal. Howard's Cafe, Cro. Car. 59. S 108. An office may be loft by the deftruction of Deftruction the thing to which it is incident. As if a perfon grants the office of parker, and afterwards deftroys his park, the office, together with all cafual fees annexed to it, is gone. For the office, being only an acceffary, muft follow the fate of the principal. For although the grantor of the office could not appoint another perfon as long as the park continued, yet when the park itself was determined and difparked, the office, which was appendant thereto, should also be determined. And it was faid that if one grant the office of steward of a manor, with all profits of courts; and the manor is afterwards deftroyed, the office of steward, together with the cafual profits annexed to it, is determined. § 109. In |