puty. Thus, it is faid in Dyer, that the office of car- 7 6. pl. 10. ver, being an office of truft, cannot be exercised by deputy. § 65. But ministerial offices which are not of truft, and do not require any particular fkill, may in general be exercised by deputy. And all offices which may be affigned, may be exercised by deputy. For, cui licet quod majus eft, non debet quod minus eft non licere. Earl of 9 Rep. 46. § 66. Lord Coke fays, there is a great difference 9 Rep. 48 b. between a deputy and an affignee of an office. For an affignee is a perfon who has an estate or interest in the office itself, and doth all in his own name, for whom his grantor fhall not anfwer, unless it be in fpecial cafes. But a deputy has no estate or intereft in the office, but is the officer's fhadow, and doth all things in the name of the officer, and nothing in his own name, and for whom his grantor fhall answer. Kett, § 67. A deputy cannot, in general, make a deputy; for a deputy being only one who is authorized himself, he cannot delegate his authority to another. But it Parker v. has been held that a steward of a manor, who is au thorized to exercise the office by himself, or his fufficient deputy, may enable another perfon to take a furrender out of court. 1 Ld. Ray. 658. § 68. Offices of inheritance may be exercifed by 1 Inft. 107. deputy in cafe the perfons entitled for the time to the office are incapable of exercising it in perfon: as, where fuch offices defcend to infants or women, or to a per Collins, 69. Duke of Buckingham's Cafe, Dyer, 285 6. 1 Inft. 165 a. Vide 2 Bro. fon under the rank of a knight. Thus, the office of Earl Marshall of England, and also that of High Constable of England, may be exercised by deputy. $ 69. Humphrey De Bohun Earl of Hereford, held the manors of Harlefield, &c. of the king by the fervice of being conftable of England, and had iffue two daughters. Upon a question how the daughters, beParl. Ca. 158. fore marriage, could exercise the office, it was resolved, that they might make their sufficient deputy to do it for them; and, after marriage, the husband of the eldest might do it alone, 2 Bro. Parl. Ca. 146. $ 70. In the cafe refpecting the office of Great Chamberlain of England, which was heard in the House of Lords in the year 1782, Lady Willoughby of Erefby, (the wife of Mr. Burrell), who was the eldest of the two fifters, and coheirs of Robert Duke of Ancafter, claimed this office; and contended, that, if there was any ground to fay that the office had descended to both the fifters, ftill that the right to exercife the office belonged to Mr. Burrell as the husband of the eldest. And, in fupport of this claim, it was insisted, that the office of Great Chamberlain of England was an hereditary office in grofs held in grand ferjeanty; and, in the cafe of coheirs, when the eldest happened to be a feme covert, descended upon the eldest, and was to be executed by her husband: and that this was perfectly agreeable to, and warranted by, the usage in all fuch great offices as had in the course of time defcended to heirs general. The office of fteward of England had defcended in two inftances to the the eldest daughter. The office of conftable of England had come to Humphrey de Bohun by his marriage with the eldest daughter of Milo Fitzwalter. The office of Earl Marshall of England came to Roger Bigot Earl of Norfolk, in right of his mother Maud, who was the eldest daughter of William Marshall Earl of Pembroke. The following question was put to the judges "The late Duke of Ancafter having died feised of "the office of Great Chamberlain of England, leaving "Lady Willoughby of Erefby, and Lady Charlotte "Bertie, his fifters and coheireffes; does the faid "office belong to the eldest alone, or to both; or, " in either cafe, is the husband of the eldest en"titled to execute the faid office, or may both fifters "execute it by deputy; and how muft fuch deputy "be appointed? Or does it devolve upon the king "to name a proper person to execute the office dur"ing the incapacity of the heir? The judges deli"vered their unanimous opinion, " that the office belonged to both fifters; that the husband of the "eldest was not, of right, entitled to execute the said "office. That both fifters might execute it by de 66 puty to be appointed by them; fuch deputy not being of a degree inferior to a knight; and to be 66 approved of by his majesty." The Lords certified accordingly. $ 71. With Qualifica $71. With refpect to the oaths required to be taken, tions required and the ceremonies to be performed, as qualifications for holding Offices. for holding offices, it is enacted by the 18 Cha. 2. ft. 2. f. 1. that no perfon fhall be chofen to any office of magiftracy, place of trust, or other employment relating to the government of any city, corporation, borough, cinque port, or other port town, who fhall not have received the facrament, according to the rites of the church of England, within one year next before fuch election. And that every perfon fo placed or elected, shall take the oaths of allegiance and fupremacy. S 72. By the statute 25 Cha. 2., commonly called the Test Act, it is enacted, that all officers, civil and military, (except those of inheritance appointing deputies), and all who have any place of truft or employment in the king's household, fhall take the oaths of allegiance and fupremacy and teft, the next term in the King's Bench or Chancery, or Quarter Seffions, and receive the facrament within three months, and give in a certificate thereof, provea by two witneffes, to the court wherein they take the said oaths; and in cafe of neglect, fhall be difabled to hold the said offices, &c. and forfeit 500 1. § 73. An act is paffed regularly every year to indemnify perfons in office who have neglected to qualify themselves according to what is provided in the test act. $ 74. Though $74. Though the words of the statute 13 Cha. 2. are so very strong as to make elections to offices void, and thofe of the teft act, to make fuch perfons difabled in law to all intents and purposes whatsoever to hold fuch offices, yet it has been held, that the acts of perfons not qualified according to these statutes may be valid as to strangers. For otherwise, not only those who no way infringe the law, but even those whose benefit is intended to be advanced by it, might be fufferers for another's fault, to which they were in no wife privy. § 75. The intention of the ftatute 13 Cha. 2. was to exclude perfons who were not of the church of England from all offices which concern the government, and is to be confidered as prohibitory upon the electors quoad fuch perfons. A diffenter, therefore, being ineligible to fuch office, cannot be fined for refufing to accept it. § 76. The corporation of London, by a bye-law, impofed a fine of 600 1. upon every person who, being elected, should refuse to serve the office of sheriff. The chamberlain of London levied debt on a perfon named Evans for the penalty of his refusal to serve the office of fheriff, who pleaded the ftatute 13 Cha. 2., averring that he was a proteftant diffenter within the toleration act, of fcrupulous confcience, and therefore had not received the facrament. The plaintiff replied the 5 Geo. 1. which confirms members of corporations in their respective offices, although they have not received the facrament. To this, the defendant demur red, Harrison v. |