Where the sheriff makes execution in franchise it is good, for he is immediate officer to the court; otherwise where bailiff makes execution in the guildable; and the lord of the franchise in the first case shall have his remedy for infringing the franchise. 11 H. 4. Br. Execution. 32.
The King party.
If the sheriff without Non Omittas serve process within liberty or franchise that hath return of writs it is good. 11 H. 4. 9. 20 H. 7. 7. But the lord of the franchise shall have action upon the case against him. Fitz. Nat. bre. 95.[23] But if the King be party the lord hath no remedy, for the writ for the King is always Non Omittas in law. 41 lib. Ass. 17. Cromp. J. P. 164.[24]
Where the King is party the venire facias shall make mention of non omittas; for where the King is party the sheriff shall not write to the bailiff of the franchise, but serve the process himself. 41 Ass. p. 17. Br. Fraunches & Liberties, 18.
The King hath no other minister than the sheriff, and where the King is a party no franchise shall be allowed. Fitz. Chal. 129.
Where the King is party as against felon or otherwise in action, the franchise shall not take place, but the sheriff ought to enter the franchise and serve the process, unless this clause licet fuerimus pars be in the charter, in which case it seems otherwise. 38 Ass. p. 19. Br. Fraunches & Liberties, 31.
If the King grant returna omnium brevium, yet he shall not have return of the summons of the exchequer. 22 Ass. p. 49. Br. Patentes, 32.
Arrest by sheriff.
Per Glynn Ch. J. Mich. 1658; if one be arrested by the sheriff of the county within a liberty, without a non omittas, yet the arrest is good; for the sheriff is sheriff of the whole county, but the bailiff of the liberty may have his action against the sheriff for entering his liberty[25]; but upon a quo minus, a sheriff may enter any liberty, and execute it impune. R. S. L. 116. cites Pract. Reg. 72. Viner, Franchises, (B.) 6.
Non omittas,
Capias utlagatum,
Quo minus.