Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n act_n parliament_n power_n 1,452 5 5.0027 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A19394 An apologie for sundrie proceedings by iurisdiction ecclesiasticall, of late times by some chalenged, and also diuersly by them impugned By which apologie (in their seuerall due places) all the reasons and allegations set downe as well in a treatise, as in certaine notes (that goe from hand to hand) both against proceeding ex officio, and against oaths ministred to parties in causes criminall; are also examined and answered: vpon that occasion lately reuiewed, and much enlarged aboue the first priuate proiect, and now published, being diuided into three partes: the first part whereof chieflie sheweth what matters be incident to ecclesiasticall conisance; and so allowed by statutes and common law: the second treateth (for the most part) of the two wayes of proceeding in causes criminal ... the third concerneth oaths in generall ... Whereunto ... I haue presumed to adioine that right excellent and sound determination (concerning oaths) which was made by M. Lancelot Androvves ....; Apologie: of, and for sundrie proceedings by jurisdiction ecclesiasticall Cosin, Richard, 1549?-1597.; Andrewes, Lancelot, 1555-1626. Quaestionis: nunquid per jus divinum, magistratui liceat, a reo jusjurandum exigere? & id, quatenus ac quousque liceat?. 1593 (1593) STC 5822; ESTC S118523 485,763 578

There are 21 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

ecclesiasticall no man may be imprisoned Therefore the vntying of this knot resteth vpon the whole matter here disputed of viz. whether that statute 10. Eliz. doe not warrant her Maiestie to graunt by her Highnes letters patents power to imprison for such contempt as this obiection importeth To prooue that her Maiestie may not so graunt nor they take such authoritie the Note-gatherer affirmeth that the commission bindeth them precisely to crimes punishable by the ecclesiasticall lawe and to proceede according to the ecclesiasticall lawes of this Realme and not according to the temporall quoting fiue statutes for this albeit there be in none of them any such matter but both the first and second part of this obiection is vntrue For the commission though nowe that power be not altogether vsed graunteth the execution of foure statutes vnto them and alloweth them to proceede aswell by Iuries as by course of the lawe ecclesiasticall And when Doctor Grindall was Bishop of London sundry crimes ecclesiasticall by vertue of the commission were tried by Iuries before him and certaine Iudges and other professours also of the common lawe being then in that commission Yet is the Note-gatherer vpon this vntrue ground bold to inferre that to doe otherwise is to encroche vpon the temporall iurisdiction and to make an hotchepot in one commission Truely this his collection is not worth an hotchepot that is a pudding as Littleton doeth expound that worde For the temporall Iudges are not to proceede in matters of ecclesiasticall iurisdiction and therefore their iurisdiction is not encroched vpon though in such matters ecclesiasticall attachements or imprisonments be vsed or fines imposed seeing they themselues cannot in those causes vse or impose them When the whole Realme at the beginning of her Maiesties reigne was visited by vertue of this statute by Diuines Ciuiliās and Common Lawiers in that seruice imploied who had authority by their seuerall cōmissions to attache imprison fine c. aswell as to vse censures ecclesiasticall al which they did accordingly then and at that time none of these quicke narrow sighted fellowes lately sprung vp were to be found that could see more then the reuerend Iudges and could so roundly tel her Maiestie that she did graunt more authoritie to her Commissioners then by that statute was giuen to her selfe Oh belike it was lawe then and good iustice against Papistes but to deale against pretended Reformatists it commeth farre too short But the Treatisour vrgeth this matter yet further he saith that no learned man wil affirme any Iurisdiction by that acte 10. Eliz. to be vnited to the crowne but spirituall or ecclesiasticall And that none such can affirme that any iurisdictiō c. repugnant or offensiue to the Common or Ciuill Policie of this Kingdome is established by that Acte for that there is none Antinomy or contrarietie of lawes Whereupon he woulde inferre that Attaching Imprisonning and Fining c. by vertue thereof is not warranted to be graunted In answere whereof let him vnderstand that his argument followeth not vpon either of those Antecedents For the first though the matters of iurisdiction thereby vnited to the crowne be onely ecclesiasticall yet the maner of conuenting or punishing in them is not in that Acte so restrained but that such other courses may be vsed as to her Maiesties wisedome shall seeme most fitte which by and by shall be shewed God willing For the second we deny the maner of conuenting and punishing established by the commission to be repugnant or offensiue any way to the Ciuill Policie of this kingdome for it is warranted by that Acte This point if the wordes of that whole clause be aduisedly weyed and considered will be made most plaine In the exercise of a criminall iurisdiction there is the matter wherein it is bestowed the maner of conuenting and sanction or penaltie to be inflicted vpon offenders which are to be considered Now the matter of this iurisdiction and authoritie graunted to her Highnes and that may be assigned ouer by her Maiestie vnto Commissioners is visiting reforming redressing ordering correcting and amending all such errours heresies schismes abuses offences contemptes and enormities whatsoeuer which by any spirituall c. Yet what course is to be holden in calling and conuenting and what kind of penalties or censures shal be inflicted vpon offenders by that authoritie are by no wordes of that acte expresly graunted to her Highnes or mentioned that they may be assigned by her vnto the Commissioners and therefore of necessitie to be supplied by those generall wordes viz. According to the tenour and effect of the letters patentes For els by such an interpretation of theirs we should haue matters for a Iurisdiction but neither any maner to conuent and compell to come afore the Commissioners nor yet punishment to lay vpon enormious offendours against whom it was intended Which because it is very vnreasonable therefore that opinion whereupon it necessarily followeth must needes be more absurd and without ground of reason Yea say other of them be this as it may and let them seeke out what processes c. may and shall be vsed by the Commission Ecclesiasticall for it is contrary to the lawe to graunt by Commission authoritie to inflict any punishment vpon a faul●… which by lawe ought not to be inflicted and therefore they gather that the Queene cannot authorise nor any man may take power to attache to fine or to imprison men by that Commission Thus farre it is true that a Cōmission may not be graunted to alter or change any lawe in force but I trust it is not contrary to the Common lawe and custome of the Realme by acte of Parliament to alter and change that which stoode otherwise afore at the Common lawe If this so did by the course of the Common lawe no man may be put to the racke or torture especially about felonies or murders thereby to drawe him to confesse of himselfe or of other men his complices Yet is it notorious that in Wales and the Marches thereof the President and Counsaile there established doe vse and lawfully may put men to such torture by warrant of instructions onely sent vnto them from time to time vnder her Maiesties gratious hand This their authoritie I take it is deriued from these 1 38. H. 8. ca. 28. Rastall Wales 32. wordes in an Acte of Parliament The President and Counsaile there shall haue power and authoritie to heare and determine by their wisdomes and discretions such causes and matters as be or hereafter shall bee assigned to them by the Kings Maiestie as heretofore hath bene accustomed and vsed Which doe conteine no more particularitie of authoritie nor yet are of so much pregnancie to that purpose as the wordes that establish the Commission Ecclesiasticall be for Attachment fine and imprisonment to be vsed if it shall please her Maiestie so to commit them The deuise of the Commission Ecclesiasticall was for assistance and ayde of Ordinary Iurisdiction
thereby authorised 14 That by the statute her Maiestie may commit authoritie and they may take and vse for ecclesiasticall causes attachments imprisonments and fines 15 That an ecclesiasticall person may be depriued of his benefice without enditement or prosecution of partie 16 That after fortie dayes an excommunicate person may be otherwise punished then vpon the writ De excomm capiendo and that the said writ may and ought to be awarded vpon contempts rising on other causes ecclesiasticall then any of those ten crimes that be mentioned in the stat 5. Eliz. cap. 23. 17 Of a prohibition what it is where it lieth not and where it doth and how it ceaseth by a consultation and of the writ of Indicauit 18 An analysis or vnfolding of the two speciall statutes touching Premunire with sundry questions and doubts about that matter requiring more graue resolution THE FIRST PART OF an Apologie of certeine proceedings in COVRTS ECCLESIASTICALL wherein is chiefly shewed what matters be incident to Ecclesiasticall conusance and so allowed by Statutes and Common law CHAP. I. That a seuerall royall assent is not required to the executing of euery particular Canon IF no Canon or Constitution Ecclesiastiall might now be put in vre but such as her Maiesties expresse assent is first had vnto then do all their other opinions against the ordinarie iurisdiction ecclesiasticall stand in no stead and might be spared because this would serue to cut off all at once which they shoot at For none that exercise ordinarie iurisdiction haue hitherto had it in particularity which by the oppugners seemeth to be meant otherwise then by permission of law vnto euery of their proceedings Neither in trueth for the infinitie of it and troublesomnesse to procure such assent from her Maiestie for euery particular matter dioecesse of this Realme from time to time were it possible to be vsed Now if Ordinartes from whom either mediately or immediately appellations do lie vnto her Maiestie in the Chancerie by reason of the want of such particular assent vnto the execution of euery canon shall according to this conceit haue nothing to doe then cannot the Queenes delegates neither to whom appellations from Ordinaries doe come haue any thing wherein to bestow their trauell and therefore this point seemeth first of all meet to be cleared and to be bestowed in the first ranke The absurdity of this opinion whosoeuer were the hatchers of it will easily shew it selfe For if matters testamentary matrimoniall which all they grant to be ecclesiasticall right of tithes and sundry other causes which shall be also prooued so to be shall not ne can not by reason of this want be dispatched as now they are by ecclesiasticall iurisdiction and yet can not be dealt in by any other authoritie according to any law now in force then is there a maine imperfection in the policie of this Common weale viz. For men to haue a right and yet no likely or readie meane to come by it and for grosse oftences to be committed that are by law punishable and yet no man sufficiently authorized to execute such lawes The iudgement of whole Parliaments kept in seuerall Kings and Queenes reignes since that act whereupon this fancie seemeth to be grounded so many as haue had cause to speake of the iurisdiction ecclesiasticall doe also fully conuince it The 1 25. H. 8. ca. 19. statute for delegates vpon appellations doth argue that Ordinaries might without further leaue obteined as in former times they did execute their iurisdiction ecclesiasticall For if there were to be no more ordinarie proceedings till the king should giue his assent to the execution of euery canon for what vse should appellations from the decrees and iudgements of Ordinaries be there prouided for Likewise 2 27. H. 8. ca. 20. 32. H. 8. cap. 7. two statutes were not long after prouided in assistance of iurisdiction ordinary and for the better and speedier recouerie of tithes in Courts ecclesiasticall according to the course of the ecclesiasticall lawes in that behalfe And the 3 34. 35. H. 8. cap. 19. like was also enacted for recouerie of pensions procurations c. withholden In the time of K. Edward the sixt in 4 1. Ed. 6. cap. 2. a statute since repealed by queene Marie a great number of particular causes of iurisdiction ecclesiasticall are there by the way rehearsed that Ordinaries other ecclesiasticall Iudges might and did then deale in In the time of queene Marie before the supremacie was giuen vnto the Pope the 5 1. Mar. cap. 3. act for not disturbing of diuine seruice or preaching reserueth the iurisdiction that Ordinaries then had for punishment thereof by lawes ecclesiasticall ouer and aboue the penalties of new thereby inflicted In the Queenes Matesties 6 1. Eliz. cap. 2. time that now is by the act for vniformitie of Common prayer Ordinaries c. may enquire c. and punish the violations of that act by censures c. as heeretofore hath bene vsed in like cases by the Queenes ecclesiasticall lawes The Statute De excom capiendo reckoneth 1 5. Eliz. ca. 23. vp particularly diuers Crimes and offences Ecclesiasticall punishable by that iurisdiction which were hindered much from punishment that apperteined for want of due execution of that writte De excom capiendo and therefore prouideth remedie therein Which necessarily argueth the continuance and approbation of execution of Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall by Ordinaries without further obteyning of leaue By the statute against periurie made at the same time 2 5. Eliz. cap. 9. it is prouided that it should not extend to Courts Ecclesiasticall but that offenders in periurie or subornation in a Court Ecclesiastical shall and may be punished by such vsual and ordinarie Lawes as heretofore haue bene and yet are vsed and frequented in the saide Ecclesiasticall Courts which prooueth the vsuall practise of Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall hitherto vsed without any speciall assent to be lawfull The statute against vsurie prouideth 3 13. Eliz. cap. 4. that such vsurie as is aboue ten pound in the hundred by yeere shall not withstanding the other penalties there newly inflicted be also punished and corrected as in times past by the Lawes Ecclesiasticall And by the 4 13. Eli. cap. 10. statute of dilapidations the remedies that by the Lawes Ecclesiasticall were afore giuen against executors and administrators of incumbents are there extended also to donees and alienees to be by the same authoritie dealt with In the which clauses of statutes there is no repeale of any former particular statute or Lawe nor any generall non obstante conteined And therefore if those Parliaments had bene of this iudgement that no Canon might now be put in vre without the Royall assent first obteined there woulde haue bene added these or some like words viz. They the said Ordinaries first obteining the royall assent for the putting in vre of such Canon as they minde in that cause to
lawe then can it not bee auoided but that the Treatisour in very deede had such an vnduetifull and slaunderous purpose and reach in his words aforesayd To the second degree of their bare affirmations such speaches of Temporall Courts practise or forbearing to practise as these following bee doe belong videlicet that such a generalloathe or such like ex officio was neuer offered nor taken for you may perceiue he is not resolued throughly whether of these two hee had best insist vpon or take for his issue And that the common lawes haue euer reiected and impugned it Likewise that it was neuer put in vre by any Ciuill Magistrate of the land but as it is corruptly crept in amongst other abuses by the smister practises and pretenses of the Romish Prelates and Clergie-men which asseueration as it is in that part voyd of all likelyhood where it is surmised that the practises pretenses of Clergie-men did first shoulder this oath into Ciuill or Temporall Courts so is it yet an implied kind of confession that it is not such an Alien to the Ciuill pollicie of the Realme nor by it wholie reiècted impugned as in his treatise he beareth vs strangelie in hand Besides that such implication is flat repugnant contradictorie to y e Note-gatherer who writeth that it was neuer vsed here to make men accuse themselues for by this accusing he meaneth giuing of oaths to defendants touching discouerie of some their owne offences Lastly that where losse of life libertie or good name may ensue the Common law hath forborne oathes As for losse of life it is yeelded to be true which he here saith but not so for the other two for the Starre-chamber being a Temporall or Ciuill Court imposeth oathes where both infamie may and doeth follow for punishment and where libertie is restrained most often by imprisonment and sometimes also by banishment Vnto the other head of their bare affirmations which is what the Common lawe holdeth in this behalfe such of their speaches as these following doe appertaine videlicet to giue oath they meane to the defendants in causes of life and death is contrarie to the Iustice of the lande This albeit it no way impugne any practise Ecclesiasticall yet is it flat repugnant to the Note-gatherers assertion spoken vnto in the 1 ca. 10. pag. 93. second part Agayne that the Common lawes haue not appoynted an oath to bee vsed but according to the right institution thereof and that in causes capitall or criminall these lawes neither vrge by oath nor force by torment a thing most cruell and barbarous and therefore agaynst torturing he alleageth master Fortescue in his booke De laudibus legum Angliae It is wholie besides my purpose either to auow or disauow here the course of finding out trueth by torture yet much might on both sides probablie bee sayd therein both by reason and also by graue authoritie That the defendants oath in causes capitall neither is vsed nor allowed by the lawes of this Realme I doe yeeld vnto him as afore I haue sayd but for torture let me neuerthelesse put him in minde that it may perhaps be thought of very hard to haue it thus affirmed that the torturing of supposed Capitall offenders not only vsed in Campes but also within the Marches principalitie of Wales euen in time of peace well warranted by her Maiesties instructions and by Act of Parliament in the Tower of London for matters of treason should all of them be accounted absolutely contrary to lawe or which is more to bee courses most cruell and barbarous The other poynt thereof which is of not vrging a defendant by oathe in any cause criminall is the maine point here trauersed betwixt vs and therefore may not be caried thus away by him per petitionem principij without some sound reason All these aforesayde speaches I doe muster amongst their bare affirmations and haue the longer stoode vpon them because themselues doe not so much as assaie or vndertake to prooue most of thē by any colourable argument or authoritie for that the reasons which they tacke on vnto some of them doe not hang together by any consequence and for that diuers of them might bee granted without any detriment to the cause which wee defend for they be but voluntarie speaches let slip at randome this therefore commeth vnder his mistaking of the true issue yet they be such as seemed not vnmeete to bee mentioned least if the Author of them doe happilie holde them for sound reasons hee should complaine to haue a piece of wrong offered vnto him for that all his booke was not spoken vnto and answered Next doe follow those their reasons to be discussed which they take from the lawes of this Realme and first concerning such of them as be made out of Statutes and afterward we will come to their booke cases That which hee speaketh of Magna charta albelt he handle it last yet for the ancientie seemeth to deserue the first ranke he auoucheth no particular part thereof but taking as graunted a contrarietie belike in his opinion not trauersable to be betwixt proceeding by this oath and the sayd Statute he onely in high wordes telleth vs of a most iust curse of Anathematizing laied by the Bishops then against all wilfull infringers of that Charter If I should gesse what poynt thereof it is which hee intendeth to bee so contrary to these oathes I would take the nineteenth chapter thereof if any to bee meant both because putting to an oathe is there mentioned and for that I haue heard it to like purpose alleaged by some other Howbeit the Treatisour hauing farre better insight as seemeth in lawe then hee that so alleaged it thought good to skippe it ouer without all allegation for feare it would not so wel helpe his turne The wordes are these videlicet No 1 Magna charta ca. 19. Bailiffe shall from hencefoorth put any man to his open lawe nor to an oathe vpon his owne bare saying without faythfull witnesses brought in for the same I must confesse that these wordes are some thing too obscure and darke for mee to vnderstand what is positiuely and preciselie meant by them and so much the rather because I know not the vsage afore that time which thereby was ment to be remedied except I should coniecture that the bare saying there spoken of is to bee referred to the man that taketh the oath and not to the Bailife and then would it seeme to establish that practise which is vsed in waging of lawe with two or more witnesses or handes concurring with his oath that sweareth Howsoeuer it be in verie deed to be vnderstood it is easie inough to gather what can not be meant by it First therefore it cannot any way be extended to proceedings and courtes Ecclesiasticall for whatsoeuer is in that Statute graunted after confirmation of the Churches liberties except it bee otherwise plainely expressed is referred to Courtes
the Imposers of them to be in a Praemunire for incroching vpon the Kings rights and prerogatiues and for conuenting subiects by forrein made Lawes and for practising Antichristian Decrees and Popish Canons which hee sayeth appeareth by the Praemunire brought by Hunne against a person suing the said Hunne for his yoong deceased infants bearing-cloth by the name of a Mortuarie in an Ecclesiasticall Court howe doth this inferre that it is Praemunire either to encroch vpon the Kings rights prerogatiues though this peraduenture by some circumstances may amounte sometimes to no lesse or to conuent subiects by foreine made lawes It may not be thought that euery intrusion deteiner or concealement which is incroching vpon the Kings right or rauishment of his wardes which hee ought to haue by his Prerogatiue Royall is straightway and necessarilie a Praemunire neither were the Kings Temporall Courtes in this case encroched vpon because they could not giue remedie for deteining a Mortuary if this were so in trueth to be accounted neither yet is there so much as any mention made of foreine lawes which the Ecclesiasticall Court then proceeded by or practised This course of the Treatisour is rather to prophesie then to reason thus to tell vs afore hand vpon the very bringing of the action of Praemunire by Hunne what the iudgement was in that matter yea and vpon what ground the iudgement was giuen in a cause which neuer receiued iudgement for any thing I can learne To this point he also mentioneth the Praemunire wherein blind Nixe sometimes Bishop of Norwich was condemned and addeth to the aforesaid two points that by that also appeareth Iudges Ecclesiasticall are in Praemunire whensoeuer they exceede their Iudiciall authority But if euery exceeding of authoritie were a Praemunire then what Iudge is there of any court of either sort so skilfull or alwayes so aduised but might iustly feare that at one time or other he shall not escape this rigorous doom of Praemunire In trueth this example prooueth all his three points iust alike that is none of them at all I doe verily beleeue the Treatisour neuer sawe that Record if he haue either he makes verie bolde with his Reader or else with the Arte of reasoning thus to collect I haue perused the Record 1 H. 25 H. 8. Rot. 42. Suffolk it selfe it containeth a suite of Praemunire brought against the saide Bishop by the Kings Attourny generall on the Friday after the P●…rification pleading the Statute of 16. Ric. 2 and adding that al Indictments Presentments and Impetitions in any court of the Kings 2 B. Nixe his condemnation in a Praemunite or in any Court of a subiects which is in any sort deriued or diduced from the Kings crowne duely taken or found are to be tried iudged in that Court where they were found or in some of the Kings Courts and not in any Ecclesiasticall Court and that whereas there was an old custome in the Towne of Thetford that whosoeuer should trouble any of the Kings or Duke of Lancasters tenants commorant in that Towne and shoulde call them by citation into an Ecclesiasticall Court out of the Deanery of the saide Towne shoulde thereby forfeit and he also that should execute such processe should also forfeit 6 shillings 8. pence which custom by a Iurie of twelue men being accordingly presented before the Maior the said B. cited the Maior two others to appeare personally before him in his Mannor and Chappell at Hoxne or Hoxstone in Suffolke The Maior and the one of the other two appearing and hauing nothing obiected but that presentment made were by the B. enioyned vpon paine of excommunication at the next court of the Kings to be holden in Thetford to call the same Iurours together and therepublikely to adnull and reuoke the said presentment as being against Gods Lawe so that saith the Record the B. did in an Ecclesiasticall Court iudge of the presentment being duely made in the Kings court and enioyned the reuoking and disanulling of it against the King his regalitie crowne c. wherevpon immediately the Bishop appeared and desired libertie of imparlance till monday next after and had it graunted vpon good mainprise c. On the prefixed monday the B. appeared againe and said he could not deny but that he was culpable in all the premisses put himselfe thereupon into the Kings hands c. so had iudgement to be from thenceforth out of the Kings protection and al his lands and tenements goods chattels to be forfeited to the King and that he should remaine in the custody of the Marshall quousque c. but presently vpon special grace of of the Court he was let to baile in a far lesse summe then afore for his appearance in Easter terme next after At what time hee appeared by his Atturney and both he and his pledges were discharged by vertue of an Act of Parliament made the same yeere Whereby wee may see that encroching vpon the Kings rights c. is not heere specially assigned for any cause of such iudgement and much lesse is the practising of any Canons or forreine made Lawes for they are not once mentioned and least of all that euery exceeding of their authoritie by any Court shoulde be a Praemunire For the originall and onely cause hereof was the B. enioyning of the Maior and of another townesman of Thetford vpon paine of censures to adnull and make voyde a presentment first duly made in a temporall Court of the Kings It is also to be noted out of the generall Atturneys bill in this Record where it is saide that presentments c. found or made in the Kings or in a subiects Court which is in any sort deriued from the Kings crowne must be tried there or in some of the Kings Courts and not in an ecclesiasticall Court that at this time Courts ecclesiasticall were not holden to be deriued any way from the Kings Crowne as no we they are and so bee acknowledged and indeede by conferring the times I finde that this fault of the Bishop was done in Nouember 24. H. 8. hee was attainted in Hilarie terme 25. H. 8. which is a yeere and more after and it was in a Parliament time that was continued till 30. Martij next aster Now the supremeheadship ouer the English Church was not yeelded vnto the King vntill the Parliament by prorogation holden the third of Nouember then next following viz. 26. H. 8. That which the Treatisour collecteth by Cardinall Wolseys Praemunire and the whole Cleargies also for assenting to and assisting the Court Legatiue which the saide Wolsey had erected hee himselfe doth sufficiently confute for albeit hee doe affirme that Wolsey was in a Praemunire for preiudicing but ecclesiasticall Courtes and not the Kings and thence gathereth thus How much more those which practise Antichristian Lawes and Popish Canons repugnant to the royall Matestie and policie of this laend yet doeth hee by implication contrary his owne
5 44. Ed. 3. 33. benefice a man is to be sued in Court Christian. But this lieth not but where a Clerke is in as an incumbent for if he be in as an vsurper of the Church being full or as a trespasser there lieth action of trespasse and not spoliation But if two 6 38. H. 6. 19. incumbents be in and the one claimeth by one patrone and the other by another there lieth no spoliation but where both claime to be in by one patrone or by meanes of one patrone then lieth action of spoliation and not otherwise For where the right of Aduouson may come in questiō there lieth no spoliation for that cannot goe to a Spirituall Court And againe a litle after 7 38. H. 6. 20. Spoliation and debate vpon an appropriation shal be determined in the Spirituall Court Touching tithes where they are to be sued it appeareth by actes of Parliament thus The 1 13. Ed. 1. ca. 5. Westm. 2. plea for tithes shall passe in the court Christian as farre foorth as it is derained in the Kings court In the next Kings 2 9. Ed. 2. ca. 1. Artic. Cleri dayes thus In tithes oblations obuentions mortuaries sithence they are proposed vnder these names the Kings prohibition shal holde no place 3 Ibidem cap. 5. And againe the Kings prohibition shal not lie for tithes of a Mill newly erected Likewise in the dayes of K. Richard the 2. it is thus 4 1. Ric. 2. ca. 13. conteined in a statute The Clergie complaine for that the people of holy Church pursuing in the spiritual court for their tithes and their other causes which of right ought and of olde times were woont to perteine to the spirituall court and that the Iudges of holy Church hauing conisance in such causes and other persons thereof medling according to the lawe be malitiously endited c. and by secular power oppressed and be forced by oathes obligations and many vndue meanes compelled to ceasse vtterly against the liberties franchises of holy Church It is enacted that such obligations made by violence should be voide and the enditors of malice when the enditees be acquit should incurre the paine of those that procure false appeales c. Likewise the preamble of a 5 23. H. 8. ca. 9. statute in K. Hen. the 8. dayes doeth argue that matters of tithes are to be heard and determined by Iudges Ecclesiasticall The same is also proued by that where in 6 24. H. 8. ca. 12. another statute it is said thus Inconueniences haue arisen by reason of appeales out of the Realme to the See of Rome in causes testamentarie causes of matrimonie and diuorces right of tithes oblations and obuentions And in 7 27. H. 8. ca. 20. the preamble of another statute Deteiners of tithes pursuing such their detestable enormities and iniuries haue attempted in late time past to disobey contemne and despise the processe lawes and decrees of the ecclesiasticall courtes of this Realme in more temerous and large manner then before this time hath bin seene And therefore it 8 Ibidem was then enacted that for subtraction of tithes offerings and other dueties of holy Church the partie grieued may by due processe of the kings ecclesiasticall lawes of the Church of England conuent the person offending before the Ordinarie and also compell him to yeelde their saide duties And likewise for any his contempt disobedience or other misdemeanor vpon complaint to any of the Counsell or to two Iustices of the peace to haue him committed vntill he shall be bound to giue due obedience to the processe proceedings decrees and sentences of the ecclesiasticall court of this Realme And 1 32 H. 8. ca. 7. afterward by another statute of the same King it is enacted that for denying to set out tithes for deteining withholding or refusing to paye tithes or offerings Ordinaries may proceede according to the course and processe of the ecclesiasticall lawes And in the 2 Ibidem preamble thereof it is directly affirmed that by order of the common lawes of this Realme a man cannot haue any due remedie against deteiners of tithes And the 3 2. Ed. 6. ca. 13. like also appeareth by the statute of tithes made in K. Edwardes reigne That which is afore affirmed and determined concerning tithes oblations obuentions and mortuaries may likewise be said of pensions portions corrodies procurations indemnities and other such dueties ecclesiasticall For it is enacted that 4 34. 35. H. 8. ca. 19. for these denied ecclesiasticall persons themselues may make such processe against the person denying or against the Church charged as heretofore they haue lawfully done and as by and according to the lawes and statutes of the Realme they nowe lawfully may doe And the person conuict according to the ecclesiasticall lawes shall pay to the plaintife the things recouered and his costes CHAP. VI. That suites forright of tithes belong to the ecclesiastical Iurisdiction and how farre is shewed out of the bookes and reportes of the cōmon lawe so of places of buriall and Church-yardes and of Pensions Mortuaries Oblations c. THe reportes of iudgements and opinions of the Courtes at the Common lawe conteyned in the bookes of termes and yeeres called booke-cases and other treatises of that lawe are no lesse plaine pregnant in this matter An 5 M. 44. Edw. 3. fol. 32. attachement vpon a prohibition was sued against a plaintife in a Court Ecclesiasticall surmising that he did sue there for hay and money which touched neither matrimony nor testament but vpon shewing the libel which proued it was for tithes oblations a consultation was granted for the spiritual court to proceede And 6 M. 22. Ed. 4. fol. 24. passim alibi where the right of tithes is in question it is triable in the Court spiritual Likewise 7 38. H. 6. fol. 21. so soone as it appeareth that the right of tithes comes in debate the Lay court shal cease shal be out of iurisdiction quod fuit concessum The same is testified in the booke of Assises 1 22. Assis. fol. 75. For if the Kings patentee of tythes renewing in a Forrest that is in no Parish in which case the tythes doe belong to the King haue cause to sue any that ought to yeelde tythes and ought to seuer them from the nine partes such suite shall goe to the spirituall Court In the booke of Entrees in the precedent of a 2 Prohibition consultation 2. consultation graunted it is thus said In causis de decimis de testamento velmatrimonio quando sub eo nomine proponuntur prohibitioni Regiae non est locus And so 3 Bracton lib. 5. cap. 2. Bracton saith Non pertinet ad Iudicem secularem cognoscere de ijs quae sunt spiritualibus annexa sicut de decimis alijs Ecclesiae prouentibus 4 Bracton lib. 5. cap. 16. And againe afterward Mutatur
assises and the other booke case of 34. H. 6. both which admit a party to sue in the Court ecclesiasticall do seeme to me only therefore to reiect a partie and to require proceeding ex officio Iudicis because it was presumed that a party would not prosecute to haue the sinne alone punished but rather for satisfaction of the thing promised to him Yet this in truth may be otherwise by the law ecclesiasticall So that vpon all that which hath herein bin last spoken it might probably seeme to some that punishment of periury or breach of faith euen arising vpon a temporall cause should be still by the Common law of ecclesiasticall conisance so that penance for the sinne be but enioyned and no temporall amends required which doubt is to be referred to the reuerend Iudges resolutions That disturbance of diuine seruice is also punishable by iurisdiction ecclesiasticall the statute thereof made in the time 3 1. Mar. cap. 3. of Q. Marie doth prooue for though it do prouide punishment temporall therefore yet it reserueth the iurisdiction that Ordinaries had for punishment thereof by lawes ecclesiasticall Not to frequent or come to diuine seruice at times appointed is declared to be subiect to proceeding and censures ecclesiasticall aswell as to other punishments by the statute 4 1. Eliz. cap. 2. for Vniformitie of Common prayer and so is both that and neglect of the Sacraments by the statute De excommunicato capiendo heeretofore often alleged prooued to be of Ecclesiasticall conusance Long afore that statute vpon a prohibition brought a consultation 1 Reg. pag. 50. a. b. was granted whereby the Ordinaries proceeding ex officio against one that refused to receiue the Communion is allowed and warranted And so doth the litle 2 Goodall of the liberties of the Clergie Treatise of the liberties of the Clergie report this offence to be of Ecclesiasticall conusance Thus much touching offences ecclesiasticall being referred to impietie towards God CHAP. IX That simony vsury defamation or slander beating of a Clerke sacrilege brauling or fighting in Church or Churchyard dilapidations or waste of an Ecclesiasticall liuing and all incontinencie are punishable by Ecclesiasticall authority and how farre AMongst such crimes as be offences against iustice I do place simony first as participating also not a litle with the former sort yet rightly sorted hither because it is as a buying and selling of such things as be not in trueth res mancipi as the olde Romanes spake things lying not in commerce betweene men to be bought and solde This fault the said 3 Ibid. in fine statute De excommunicato capiendo sheweth to be punishable by iurisdiction ecclesiasticall That vsurie is likewise it doth appeare by authoritie of diuers Parliaments The king and his 4 15. E. 3. cap. 5. shall haue the conusance of the vsurers dead and the Ordinaries of holy church shall haue the conusance of vsurers on liue as to them apperteineth to make compulsion by the censures of holy church for the sinne and to make restitution of the vsuries taken against the lawes of holy church By annother later act made against vsurie 5 11. H. 7. cap 8. there are reserued to the spiritnall iurisdiction their lawfull punishments in euery cause of vsury And so is it expresly also mentioned in the aforenamed statute De excommunicato capiendo but this iurisdiction is since somewhat restreined because 6 13 Eliz. cap. 8. vsurie can not now therby be punished nor corrected except it reach aboue the rate of tenne in the hundred by yere By a consultation in the 7 Reg. pag 49. b. Register which was granted in allowance of proceeding against one for his vsury it is thus sayd in this behalfe Quta in articulis Cleri continetur quòd si Praelati imponant alicui poenitentiam pro peccato prohibitioni nostrae non est locus vobis significamus quòd ad correctionem animae praefati S. in hac parte viz. pro vsura dum tamen nihil aliud attentetis quod cedat in laesionem dignitatis nostrae in curia Christianitatis procedere poteritis prohibitione nostra non obstante But this fault sinne of Vsurie is mixti fori that is to say in some respect is of temporall in other regard of eccllesiasticall conisance not only by the statutes of the Realme as you haue heard but also euen by the law ciuill albeit in a diuers sort For in countreyes where that law hath place if it be 1 D D. in l. Titia ff soluto matrimonio called in question whether a contract be vsurarious or not the court ecclesiasticall doth determine this but for to pronounce such a contract void and to execute that sentence belongeth to a temporall court For cause of defamation it is 2 Stat. circumsp agatis 13. Ed. 1. recorded by an olde statute that it is alreadie granted it shall be tried in a Spirituall court And againe In 3 Artic. cleri 9. Ed. 2. cap. 4. defamation prelates shall correct by penance corporall the kings prohibition notwithstanding but if the offender will redeeme the penance with money the prelate may freely receiue the money though the kings prohibition be shewed By the preamble also of the statute for 4 23. H. 8. cap. 9. citations it is plainely argued that defamations belong to the comsance of iurisdiction ecclesiasticall so they be duely and according to law prosecuted Also by the bookes of Common law it appeareth throughout the arguments made in the great case of prohibition in the time of 5 T. 12. H. 7. fol. 22. Henry the seuenth that the suite for defamation belongeth to ecclesiasticall iurisdiction for there aswell by those Sergeants that stood against the consultation as the others and by the Iudges also that granted the consultation the originall cause being defamation it is yeelded that the punishment of slander or defamation is belonging to the Spirituall law Whereas there is a Prouinciall constitution that decreeth a slanderer or defamer of another to be ipso facto excommunicate this is allowed by 6 Reg. pag. 49. a consultation in the Register vnto a court ecclesiasticall And it is there added to this effect viz. Si in causa diffamationis ad poenam canonicam imponendam agatur tunc vlterius licitè facere poteritis quod ad forum ecclesiae noueritis pertinere prohibitione nostra non obstante One that sued 1 Reg. pag. 51. 2. another in a cause of diffamation in court ecclesiasticall was there condemned in expenses to the defendant who was absolued for that the plaintife failed in his proofes The plaintife to hinder the execution of the sentence and to escape without expenses procured a prohibition Yet vpon debating of the matter a Consultation was herein also awarded So that wee see both the Principall and the Accessarie cause to be of ecclesiasticall conisance If saieth 2 Liberties of the Clergie by the lawes of
and the other is forbidden to be done 1 Arg. l. 13. cùm ita ff de rebus dubiis A disiunctiue argueth seueral things that had neede to be expressed by seuerall wordes And by like reason it cannot be meant of witnesses depositions for if the partie conuented shall be content de facto though he be not compellable by lawe as this opinion presupposeth to denie the intention of his aduersarie then no Lay witnesse might in any such other cause ecclesiasticall be vsed either to depose with oathe or without oathe because both be forbidden and so no plea in any such other ecclesiasticall cause coulde be holden which is afore prooued to be otherwise and therefore consequently that is not the meaning of these wordes of the writte which is by 1 Fitzh nou na breu fol. 41. a. Fitzherbert and others that follow him enforced Touching the writ of Attachement thereupon whether as it is set out in the Register it may be holden to haue bin an originall writ at the Common law drawen at first by the grauest aduise in the Realme to be so perfite as that nothing further then is expressed by the words neede therein to be vnderstood to come by the true meaning may partly be gathered by that which followeth First it is said pone talem episcopū not vsing letters for his name as in most of the other writs Next a Bishop who in that he hath a Barony is presumed to haue temporalties whereon to be distreined is here appointed to finde vadios plegios Thirdly it hath laicos homines foeminas as if women were not homines seeing homo is the cōmon gender Fourthly though the prohibition whereupō it is framed forbiddeth both recognitiōs to be made and oathes also to be taken by lay men yet the Attachement wholly omitteth the making of recognitions And yet howe many oathes soeuer should be giuen if none answeres or depositions doe thereupon euer followe which two the opinion that we impugne meaneth by recognition what colour of preiudice doeth or can growe that either Prohibition or Attachement should neede to be awarded Fiftly neither by Ciuill nor Canon lawe neither yet by practice doth any sommons or citation goe out of an ecclesiasticall court in such sort as this Attachement assigneth to be a preiudice vnto the royall dignitie viz. ad comparendum coram eo ad praestandum iuramentum pro voluntate sua ipsis inuitis For it were a grieuance giuen euen at the Canon lawe if an Ordinarie should either call any being not a partie or necessarie witnesse in some matter depending or should call witnesses against their will not being first required and hauing their charges offered or if he should do it when there is no cause but 2 Pro voluntate sua for his owne pleasure as this writ implieth Sixtly the proceeding hereby condemned is saide to be done in praeiudicium graue coronae dignitatis nostrae regiae But if no matters be thereby drawen from the kings courtes as in deede none be though you followe the interpretatiō thereof by some enforced then what preiudice commeth to the crowne For though lay men be vrged to depose vpon their othes in all other causes besides that be of Ecclesiasticall conisance what damage or detriment doth the Crowne and dignitie royall thereby susteine more then it doth by their compulsiue deposing with othe in causes Testamentarie and Matrimoniall which this opinion admitteth and alloweth of For if none other causes Ecclesiasticall then those two could conueniently be proceeded in nor any remedy could be giuen by a court Ecclesiastical for want either of the parties answere or witnesses depositions vpon othe yet could not Temporall Courts as the Lawe standeth giue any more remedy in them And so no preiudice to them or to the Crowne that Courtes Ecclesiasticall do proceed as they do to the determination of such causes Nay rather on the other side it were a preiudice to the Crowne that subiects should offend and no good meanes should be found by Law to punish them or to haue a right yet no way for them to come by it Seuenthly that which is there condemned is said to be 1 Consuetudine praed vsi fuerimus semper libettatibus huiusmodi Prohibition in Rastell tit Prohib nu 6. contra consuetudinem regni nostri which doeth strongly argue that vrging parties in other Ecclesiastical causes to put in their answere vpō their othes or witnesses so to testifie is neither by that fourme of Prohibition forbidden nor by the Attachment thereupon ment to be disallowed For first the custome of diuers Courts Temporal requireth parties answeres vpon othe and likewise alloweth Writs of sub poena and other processe in sundry cases to compel witnesses to come in and to testifie their knowledge And againe in Courts Ecclesiastical the custome hath alwayes bene to require othes of parties and witnesses though otherwise vnwilling in maner as is a fore touched Which may appeare both in that the Lawes Ciuill and also Canon which they deale by doe require it and that no bookes of Actes Ecclesiasticall as I am verely perswaded can be shewed whether of olde or later times by which it may not appeare that this course of compelling parties and witnesses to take othes in other causes then those two hath bene vsed so often as occasion hath required And therefore not this but some other maner of proceeding it was which by the Writte of Attachment is meant to be contra consuetudinem regni Lastly this fourme of Attachment mentioneth not so much as excepting of compelling to take othe in causes Testamentarie and Matrimoniall albeit the prohibition haue that exception And therefore for auoyding of iarre betwixt them something must necessarily be vnderstood to haue bene at first in the Writ it selfe whereof this is a minute further then is here expressed And why shall not then the clause de catallis debitis be vnderstood therein aswell as this other seeing so strong probabilities doe leade it and so many absurdities and inconueniences be thereby auoyded which the late enforced interpretation doth necessarily inferre with it selfe Therefore wee may conclude this second point that to debarre Courtes Ecclesiasticall in any cause of that Iurisdiction from exacting parties conuented to put in their answeres vpon their othes or from compelling such witnesses by censures to testifie who being required and their necessary charges being offered doe neuerthelesse refuse to testifie a trueth is not nor yet can be the meaning of that Prohibition or of the Attachment thereupon The last point of the three to be touched is concerning the true meaning of those wordes of the Writte whence these controuersies haue flowed It is therefore to be remembred that it was very vsuall for men in those dayes at making of any contracts whether in matters of Lay fee or others for their more securitie to make faith or othe for performance This they either did priuately for
to make such a briefe abridgement of so long a writ For it doeth not appeare that before the imprinting it was perused allowed by any the Iudges then being or by any others deputed by publike authoritie for the reuiewing and correcting of it No doubt if it had bin that I speake of nothing else so many grosse errors in the Latin both against cōgruity al sense as in every leafe almost of the copie which the Printer followed are to be found could not haue so escaped without cōtrolement and amendment But the former wordes set downe by Rastall at large in the writ in selfe where neither of these last recited clauses are to be found are too cleare in this point to be dimmed by any such light colours But if hereupon it be perhaps graūted as the authour of the Treatise doth that witnesses may take oath depose willingly in other ecclesiasticall causes at the request of some of the parties I must then call to their minde that I haue shewed afore that following their owne interpretation they may not though they be willing Yea though witnesses might if they were willing how can a reasonable man entend that the partie to be sued will come in at all but much lesse answere if he may not be cōpelled vnto neither viz. neque ad recognitionem faciendā neque praestandū sacramentū as Fitzherbert in his natura breuiū also doeth vnderstand and reade it And the wordes reach vnto all lay persons not distinguishing a partie from a witnesse Againe by that their interpretation of recognition oath they could neuer haue such witnesses that be indifferent as in part is afore touched For if witnesses may not be vrged to sweare or to answere further then they list themselues then will they onely answere to the matters propounded by him who produceth them and wil refuse to answere the Interrogatories propunded by the other partie for his defence by whom they were not requested to come Which course vpon the matter taking away all testimonie that ought to be indifferent for either partie in such pertinent matters as are to be demaunded is contrary to the lawe of God of nature of nations and to the very qualitie of a witnesse Decius saith 1 Decius in l. 2. C. de edendonu 43. Si testis deposuit pro vna parte interrogatus pro alia noluerit respōdere illi fides adhiberi non debet quia praesumitur supprimere veritatem And so the course being most vnreasonable that whereupon it followeth must needes be also very absurde and against Iustice. By all which premised discourse it is made I hope manifest whether Fitzherbert had good ground out of that fourme of Prohibition and Attachement to 2 Nou. nat breu fol. 41. litera a. gather not onely that Ordinaries must expresse a particular cause in all their Citations but also that if they expresse any cause at all in the Citation that it seemeth by that writte it must bee a cause matrimoniall or testamentarie For seeing they haue none other meanes besides Citations to summon men to their Courtes What is this latter collection built but vpon a doubtfull seeming else then an asseueration implied that none other of the causes afore proued to be of ecclesiasticall conisance shall euer be dealt in by any court ecclesiasticall and so vpon the matter in no court at all for that temporall courts be out of iurisdiction in those matters Which howe it may be defended from grosse absurditie I would gladly learne from any that patroniseth this opinion But if the lawe were so in deede that none should be called into ecclesiasticall courts but for those two causes I marueile what the Preshyteries so much doted after especially by sundry fauourers of this interpretation would doe here in this Realme when their Cōsistorial power should be so lopped that they could not call any man before them but either in testamentarie causes which they make in other mens dealings to be meere Ciuil causes or matrimoniall many of which also they now seeme willing to abandō as temporall matters for they should be driuen either to be kings of molehils or else to preache in the most vehement veine they haue against that lawe and those magistrates which in such sort would restraine them as if they were both Antichristian at least for hindering and so impounding of the pretended gouernement of Christ that thereby they might at length be set at libertie to deale in their Consistories against all crimes whatsoeuer according to their owne platfourmes Yet herein they should deale very vnequally because they will not nowe suffer that vnder this gouernment which themselues would practice against crimes in a farre more ample and peremptory maner then either nowe is done or were meete to be suffered In the bookes of the Common lawe I finde also some cases that giue strength to this interpretation For an 1 M. 44. E. 3. fol. 32. Attachement vpon a Prohibition was sued because they sued in a spirituall Court for haye and money which touched neither matrimonie nor testament and after vpon shewing the Libell which prooued that it was for tithes and oblations a consultation was graunted Likewise 2 M. 38. H. 6. fol. 14. a Prohibition was sued foorth of the Chauncery directed to the Iustices of the common Pleas to make an Attachement because the defendant had sued the plaintiffe in the spiritual court for debt which did not touch matter of matrimonie nor testament whereof the conisance belongs to the Kings Court and thereupon a prohibition was granted thence Wherein it is woorth the noting that Fitzherbert in his 1 Fitzh Prohibition nu 5. Abridgement leaueth out these words for debt contrary to the booke it selfe at large and also 2 Brooke Prohibition nu 6. to Brooke I will not say it was to giue colour to his opinion in his Natura breuium as if he ment to haue it sound that no matter at all but either matrimoniall or testamentarie might be sued in court spirituall whereas by these two reports it may appeare that Prohibitions did not lie in this respect for that the parties were sued and called into the ecclesiastical court against their wils in any other cause whatsoeuer then those two but onely for suing there for chattels debt which did touch neither matrimony nor testament Whereof may bee gathered that euer since the first framing of this writ either none in this point hath knowen the lawe vntill Fitzherbert for nō est instandum inproposito or else those words doe carie another meaning then is now fathered vpon thē which that they doeboth in the affirmatiue for ours negatiue against theirs I hope is somewhat plainely prooued And therefore we may conclude that these two last opinions the one for not citing any person in any other cause then these two the other for not citing laie men for not vrging them to take oath in any other cause
ecclesiasticall whatsoeuer but either testamentarte or matrimoniall are voyd of all ground of law nay are contrary to Statute lawe to Common lawe to practise for time immemoriall and also vnto reason in some sort CHAP. XIII That iudgement of heresie still remaineth at the Common law in Iudges ecclesiasticall and that the Prouiso touching heresie in the Statute 1. Eliz. cap. 1. is onely spoken of ecclesiastical Commissioners thereby authorized THe two other opinions remaining that respect matters handled by Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction and come next to be treated of for the affinitie of them and because they both depend vpon one and the selfe same grounds I purpose brieflie to handle together viz. whether the iudgement of Heresie nowe lieth rather in the Common lawe then Ecclesiasticall and whether nothing may at this day be adiudged heresie but according to the statute primo of her Maiesties 1 1. Eliz. cap. 1. reigne For in the true vnderstanding of that statute the decision of these two opinions will wholie rest It seemeth by the latter the author of them thinketh that before the statute 2. H. 4. Ordinaries at the Common law might not by their iurisdiction Ecclesiastical proceed to the condemnation of an heretike and therefore seeing all former statutes made against heretikes stand now repealed he gathereth that no heretike may be delt with but according to the said statute made in the first yeere of her Maiesties reigne This opinion it may be he gathered out 2 Fitzh in noua nat br fol. 269. D of Fitzherbert his Noua natura breuium yet I thinke rather it was his owne conceit both because he doeth not alleage Fitzherbert for it and for that Fitzh leaueth euen at the Common lawe authoritie in the whole Conuocation of a Prouince to condemne an heretike albeit he there also hold that at the Common lawe before such statute a Bishop in his dioecesse could not so condemne But I haue shewed in the twelfth chapter hereof by very great and good opinion the law in this point to be mistaken For proofe that it is so I also touched it something in the 8. chapter For in the Preamble of the statute it is thus conteined The 3 2. H. 4. cap. 15. dioecessans of the realme then complained that they could not by their iurisdiction spirituall without aide of the roiall Maiestie what not at all Nay but not sufficiently correct nor restraine the malice of heretikes Why because they wanted authoritie at all to deale with them No but because the heretikes goe from dioecesse to dioecesse and will not appeare before the dioecessans but contemne the keies of the Church and censures of the same So that had it not bene for their fugitiuenesse their refusing to appeare and contempt of the keies the ordinarie dioecessans had Iurisdiction spiritual to correct and restraine them In which respect and for better assistance of their former iurisdiction it was then first prouided that heretikes should be attached and imprisoned Other authorities out of Statutes I there in the eight Chapter alleaged also to this purpose The wordes of the Statute made primo of her 4 1. Eliz. cap. 1. Maiestie from which this second opinion is gathered doe make the matter cleere that nothing thereby is meant but that Commissioners for causes ecclesiasticall according to that Act termed by the common people the high Commission shal not haue authoritie to adiudge any matter or cause to be heresie but onely such as hath bene so adiudged by the authoritie of the Canonicall Scriptures or by the first foure generall Councels or by any other generall Councell wherein the same was declared Heresie by the expresse and playne wordes of the Canonicall Scriptures So that the iurisdiction of Ordinaries and of the Conuocation still remaineth as it did afore at the Common lawe But I muse greatly what colour or pretence he could haue to gather the first of these two opinions out of the aforesayd words for doeth he or can he thinke that the ordering determining or adiudging of a matter to be Heresie by the Commissioners ecclesiasticall there spoken of is a iudgement at or according to the course of the Common lawe as the Common law is taken in vsuall signification Or shall it be imagined that wheresoeuer any matter by occasion comes in to bee mentioned in a statute as for 1 13. Eliz. c. 12. example naming matters of faith mentioning errors in doctrine or the doctrine of the Sacraments that the determination of all such points and what and how many speciall matters are conteined vnder those generall heads whatsoeuer shall by reason of such incident mentioning of them in a statute be put ouer to the iudgement of a Iurie or to the determination of Temporall Iudges What other may conceiue I know not for my part I must take it till I be better informed to be so simple a conceit as is worthie rather to be dismissed with laughter then to be confuted with further reason CHAP. XIIII That by the Statute her Maiestie may commit authoritie and naturall borne subiects may take and vse in Ecclesiasticall causes attachments imprisonments and fines THe next opinion that comes to be treated on is Whether the Queens Maiestie by her letters patents vnder the great seale of England may authorise the vse of any other processe in matters ecclesiasticall then by citation as by letters missiue attachment or such like whereunto I adde the other two of the same author depending vpō the same string whether her highnesse may so authorise the vse in matters ecclesiastical of any other coërtion or punishmēt as by fine or imprisonment These opinions if they be not well grounded vpon lawe seeme to me to touch her Maiesties prerogatiue roiall and supreme gouernment that was yeelded vnto her highnesse by statute very deeplie whosoeuer be Author of them And if this authoritie that is hereby impugned be in trueth a preheminence vnited and annexed to the Imperiallcrowne of this realme by Parliament and if he be a man of any qualitie so that hee hath taken the oath of Obedience let him vse good aduisement how it may stand with such his oath and allegeance They are pretended both by the Treatiser and the Note-gatherer to be grounded vpon 1 Magna charta cap. 39. these words of Magna charta viz. No free man shall be taken or imprisoned or be disseised of his free hold or liberties or free customes or be outlawed or exiled or any otherwise destroyed nor we shal not passe vpon him nor condemne him but by lawfull iudgement of his peeres or by the lawe of the land Whereupon the Note-gatherer also doeth collect that none may be attached but such as be first endited But the end why this law was made and the time when it was made are needfull to be considered The ende was this that the Kings of this realme should not chalenge an infinite and an absolute power to themselues as some kings elsewhere did
Treatiser putteth vs in minde of viz. that in K. H. 3. time there was a iust sentence of curse and anathematization denounced by the Bishops against the violaters orbreakers of the said great Charter But what if Bishops should vse the like authority now to excommunicate indefinitely and aforehand all such as shall hereafter breake some temporall law it is to be doubted that the Treatiser would not in this case be the same man nor yet affirme it to be a iust sentence but would rather threaten them with a Praemunire for their kindnesse It is assured that par in parem non habet imperium and none authority can so binde it selfe by any law but that vpon good occasion and by like power it may be abrogated againe Yet how litle this plea of ours is needfull in this case is sufficiently shewed Yea rather the defenders of these such like opinions against the rights and liberties of the Church of England notoriously knowen so to be by the reported lawes customes thereof to them that know any thing in either had need more iustly to feare that censure of the Bishops if it be so iust if so be they cary any feare at all or reuerence vnto the censures of the Church which be so iustly inflicted as themselues do yeeld As these opinions do onely reach and shoot at the commission ecclesiasticall to impound and streine the authority thereof vnto so narrow a roome as that her Maiestie should thereby haue no seruice done by those her subiects which are imployed therein wherby the fansies of the fauorites of these men might more freely growe without discouery or any such penal●…ie as they thinke they need care for so for the iust defence herein of that commission I may allege the words of the same statute whereby it is established 1 1. Eliz. cap. 1. viz. They shall haue full power and authoritie by vertue of this act and of the said letters patents vnder your highnesse your heires or successors to exercise vse and execute all the premisses according to the tenour and effect of the said letters patents any matter or cause to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding By which words tenor literarum is signified whatsoeuer tenent in se viz. that which is expresly conteined in them by the effect of them is vnderstood whatsoeuer is within the true and vnforced meaning of any such letters patents So that if attachment fine imprisonment c. be either in the letters patents expresly conteined as in trueth they be or vndoubtedly meant by them then the vse and excercise of these shall thereby sufficiently be warranted and authorized vnto her Maiesty for granting and to the commissioners for so executing And if any doubt otherwise might be made yet there be two clauses in the words aforesaid that be called verba siue clausulae operatinae and do therefore supply many defects and wants in the exercise of a iurisdiction delegated by the Princes rescript The first of them are those words Full power authoritie and the other is the generall non obstante in transcendenti viz. of any matter or cause whatsoeuer But to all this is answered by some that these words viz. according to the tenour and effect of the said letters patents do worke thus much that her Maiestie need not grant all but so much iurisdiction as her Highnesse thinketh meet and that so many or few of them so they be two atleast may thereby be authorized vnder her Maiestie to exercise such iurisdiction It is true that those words so worke and import so much but doeth it heereof follow that nothing else is meant or can be comprehended thereby Nothing say they for other processe then citation or other censures or punishment then excommunication c. her Maiestie can not commit vnto them else might she also giue them authoritie to hang men What is there no more difference with these men betwixt attaching fining or imprisoning and plaine hanging What will they then say of the Starre Chamber which may impose all those three and yet cannot put any man to losse of limme or of life and this is great reason For we are taught by the Ciuill lawe and I thinke it is agreeable also to the lawes of the land that wheresoeuer an authoritie is giuen in neuer so generall or pregnant wordes it cannot be drawen foorth to reach vnto any mutilation of limme or paines capitall except they be plainely expressed Other some as the Treatisour doeth answere this obiection in this sort but yet to the ende of prouing othes of the parties in causes criminall to be vnlawfull a matter to be handled in the thirde part viz. that how general soeuer the words of the acte be in one place yet are they to be restrained to this particular viz. none other then such iurisdiction ecclesiasticall as may be lawfully vsed and entending per petitionem principij that such oathes be contrary to law But in this his interpretation he saith he contrarieth diuerse great learned men in that lawe whom it behoueth with a more narrowe eye to beholde this statute lawe Truely halfe an eye of a meane learned man will serue to discouer that he cautelously leaueth out one member of the disiunctiue alternation which is in that statute For it is thus viz. all Iurisdictions c. whatsoeuer by any Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall power or authoritie hath heretofore bene or may lawfully be exercised c. So that if either it haue bene exercised at any time or hauing not bene put in exercise yet lawfully may be it is here graunted to her Maiestie And were it in deede meete either in temporall or spiritual Iurisdictiō to leaue it to the dispute determinatiō of euery priuate subiect that is dealt with what may be lawfully and what may not so be done in either lawe The Treatisour nor any other cannot in answere hereof say that the worde lawfully must also be vnderstood as repeated in the first member First because it is a disiunctiue proposition and therefore that word should haue bin expressed in the first part if it had bin to be drawen vnto both and not to haue bin put in the second part onely Secondly for that it would then take away from her Maiestie all such ecclesiasticall authoritie being most lawfully in her Highnesse as was heretofore exercised by or vnder the Pope by vsurpation and therefore most vnlawfully Neuerthelesse the matters graunted and exercised by the commission which are by him chalenged I trust God willing shall be also otherwise prooued lawfull and warrantable Against imprisoning by vertue of the commission one of the speciall matters nowe in handling the said Treatisour obiecteth that such parties as refuse to sweare to answere the articles exhibited against them are imprisoned without baile or maineprise whereas by the lawe ecclesiasticall they ought not to be imprisoned but to be proceeded against as pro confessis It is true that by Ordinary authoritie
Ecclesiasticall and for rounder proceeding and for more grieuous punishment at least in these dissolute times more feared then can or may by Ordinarie Iurisdiction be inflicted Therefore if by the general words of that Acte 1. Elizabeth both these proceedings whereof wee here speake and many other particularities of maner persons times places and other circumstances might not be warranted then the authoritie there giuen to her Maiestie were of none vse at all neither could it possibly be practised But I thinke this power here by these opinions impugned may be also prooued directly out of the words of the very Acte thus whatsoeuer by any Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall power or authoritie hath heretofore bene or may lawfully bee exercised or vsed for visitation c. or reformation c. of all maner errours c. and enormities whatsoeuer that is vnited to the Crowne and by that Acte may be committed ouer by her Maiestie But Attaching imprisoning and such like corporall coërtion by some Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall power or authoritie hath heretofore lawfuly bene exercised And therefore may be appointed by her Maiestie to be now exercised by the Commissioners Ecclesiasticall For proofe of the Minor I am to put you in minde what corporall punishments and chastisements the superiours of euery Regular person as of Monke Frier and Nunne might and did lawfully from time to time lay vpon them that were vnder their Ecclesiasticall obedience and yet euen after their professing they remained still the Kings subiects Likewise when the statutes against Heresies were in force these Attachings imprisonings and other corporall chastisements were then lawfully exercised and vsed by Ecclesiasticall power and authoritie Lastly 1 1. H. 7. ca. 4. Bishops and Ordinaries may lawfully at this day punish and chastise Priestes Clearkes and religious men within their Iurisdiction being conuicted of incontinencie by committing them to warde and prison there to abide for such time as shall be thought to their discretions cōuenient for the qualitie and quantitie of their trespasse So that we may conclude that if any such power haue bene vsed then her Maiestie may as it please her vse it still and appoint the same to be vsed by her Highnesse Commissioners howe and vpon whom she thinketh good The Treatisour himselfe testifieth that diuers euen of the learned sort do hold and affirme and that very confidently that the Acte and Commission thereupon doe giue full power and authoritie for any course soeuer for the gouernment in causes Ecclesiasticall that shall be mentioned in the letters Patents This he exemplifieth by sundry examples though holden by such learned men which neuerthelesse he accounteth contrary to Lawe whereof some fall in most fitte for this place because they are bent against the saide Commission and others for other places of this Apologie First he thinketh it very absurde and not warrantable that the Commissioners Ecclesiasticall shoulde commaunde Iustices of Peace to assist any for attaching and imprisoning of offenders till they giue bonde for appearance And saith this is against Lawe and Iustice. The onely reason he rendreth of this his assertion is for that Iustices of Peace bee Magistrates and Commissioners of Recorde authorised as well as the other Belike himselfe is some Iustice of peace Hoc vrit hominem qui imperare non parêre didicit And will he then vpon his learning deliuer That no Magistrate or Commissioner of Recorde may be commaunded by another though no lesse be warranted by his Commission Hereupon would follow that Iustices of Peace and Sherifs might not be commanded in any case by the Iudges of either Benche by the Exchequer by the Iustices of Assisse by the L. Treasourer by the L Chauncellour or L. Keeper nor yet by the whole Counsell boord He thinketh it also not iustifiable that any Magistrates should be commanded by the Ecclesiasticall Commissioners to assist in Attaching or to attache any vpon a warrant called Quorum nomina For reason of vnlawfulnesse hereof he alledgeth that no cause or matter is therein expressed or declared But this might be de facto omitted in any other warrant as well as in that and yet is it vntrue that in this kinde of warrant no cause is declared But admit it were otherwise what Lawe of the Realme is against it And if the like warrant shall come from the Lords of the Counsell to him or any other Iustice of the Peace to be ayding and assisting vnto some Messenger in attaching of certaine persons to be caried vp vnto them as Prisoners whom the saide Messenger shall name vnto them will hee refuse to intermeddle in the seruice as surmising the Lords to do therein against Lawe because they commaunde him being a Iustice of Recorde and for that they signifie not by their Warrant what the particular cause is where with they minde to charge such persons that are to be Attached But if in so doing their Lordships doe nothing contrary to Lawe howsoeuer he doe foolishly and vndutifully to refuse to giue his assistance why shall the Lawe anymore be against the Commissioners doing but the like and that by expresse Warrant of her Maiesties letters Patents Another reason why such Warrant should not be iustifiable he doth alledge because the names of such persons to be Attached be not set downe by the Commissioners but are referred ouer vnto others to set them downe Mine answere hereunto is First that the Warrant of Quorum nomina is very rarely vsed by the Commission and the rarer the better Secondly when it is vsed the names of the parties are set downe and allowed afore by the Commissioners and not by others for anything that I can learne Neuerthelesse there may be good and weightie occasions to omit this course as when such Warrant is directed to a man of qualitie and good credite that he may put in the names for this ende lest when one is serued he bewray all to the rest whose names be also in the same Warrant that they may conuey themselues out of the way Howsoeuer it be in this behalfe I thinke the Treatisour will be long in finding out how this should be reckoned to be contrary to the Lawes of this Realme Hitherto touching the challenges made to some particular points in the maner of exercising that Commissun But the Note-gatherer to cut off all these particular disputes alleadgeth that it may be thought the whole Commission is voyde in Lawe For that as he surmiseth it beareth date in Iuly but was signed in Nouember next after 1 18. H. 6. cap. primo contrary to a Statute What was this quarrell which is now picked against it worth the practise of abusing a Counsellours name to procure a copie thereof Well both the Preamble and body of the statute also doth cleare this cauill For by the Preamble it appeareth that the mischiefe to be remedied was for that by grauntes antedated long before the King graunted them other grauntees who in very trueth had the first
contagious plague vnto it Lastly Accusation may not be vsed for gaine and lucres sake For such Accusers especially are odious to all men Another heathen writer could say thus heereof 1 Quintil. siue Tacitus de claris Orator The vse of this gainefull and bloudie eloquence is sprung vp of late times by corrupt custome and was deuised as one Aper was woont to say but instead of a iaueline or dart to thrust men thorow with In locum teli repertus So that if men could keepe themselues strictly within these former boundes then prosecution by Accusation would neither be so perilous to the Accuser nor yet so hurtfull vnto others but that it might still haue a tollerable and profitable vse in Christian Common weales And then that which Tullie writeth might haue place where hee sayth that 2 Pro S. Roscio Amer. it is profitable to haue many Accusers in a Common weale yet so as that men be not abused by such Accusations And thus much for prosecution of crimes by a partie CHAP. V. Of the seuerall acceptions of this word Officium the signification of Inquisitio Quaestio Crimina ordinaria extraordinaria Cognitio ordinaria or perpetua extraordinaria the reason why Enquirie by Office came in place of Accusation of Enquirie generall and speciall Enquirie speciall ex officio nobili siue mero mixto promoto and the priuileges of proceeding ex mero officio aboue the other NOw because the aforesaid Cautions be so hard to obserue and for that Accusation is so odious and of so perillous consequence albeit these foure points were kept in case either the Magistrate or people among whome wee liue should not so construe our doings as perhaps we doe sincerely meane them therefore where there be so many difficulties incident to Accusation lest crimes and offences should remaine wholly vndiscouered and so vnpunished to the great detriment of the whole body of the Common weale and Church It was very necessarily prouided in most places of the world to haue the Iudges office by Enquirie to supply this want and scarsitie of Accusers and parties which is the other generall meane afore spoken of whereby offences may be brought into question examination The Office or duetie of the Iudge is the cause efficient of this prosecution and Enquirie is the peculiar effect and act which in Criminall matters that cause produceth or the course whereby the Office doth proceed and is that kinde of prosecution which is counterdiuided against Accusation and prosecution by a partie The word Officium in the Ciuill law from whence it is taken hath diuers acceptions It signifieth either priuate dueties and thinges of conueniencie to be regarded and practiced in the common life and societie of man with man or els some more publike function And in this latter signification we reade of it to be taken two wayes By the first for a ministeriall function vnto some Court hauing iurisdiction And by the second for the power authoritie or iurisdiction it selfe of the Court I doe obserue three seuerall ministeriall functions termed in the Ciuill lawes by this name Officium The first are those persons that were publikely appointed to present crimes vnto the Magistrates as in these words 1 L. ea quidem C. de accus inscrip Quae per officium praesidibus nunciantur The second denoteth vnto vs an Apparatour as in these words 2 L. 1. C. de Ap. parit Procoss lib. 12. Officio quod tuis meritis obsecundat non Curialem quenquam nec excaeteris corporibus volumus aggregari c. The third an Actuarie that entred the acts of the Court as in these lawes 3 L. 11. C. de Numerarijs Actuarijs li. 12. Officio tuae magnitudinis datis precibus postulant c. And againe 4 L. 1. C. de offic Comitis sacri patrimonij Officium Hellesponti adijt rogauit c. In both which lawes by the word Officium an Actuarie is vnderstood But Officium signifying the authoritie and iurisdiction of the Iudge is that power whereby he may deale of himselfe without the petition or instance of a partie And this Office is exercised either in actions Ciuill or in Criminall In actions Ciuill 5 L. 56. ff locati l. 51. §. fin ff de act empti sometimes the Iudge doth of Office decree a thing which he findeth to be equall besides the action and besides the bond whereupon the action riseth and 6 L. Si longiùs §. 1 ff de iudic l. cum siliusfam ff de reb creditis l. 7. C. de iudic alibi passim sometimes also vpon a point in equitie hee relieueth by his Office such as the strict law giueth none action vnto Calistratus reduceth all causes Ciuill wherein a Iudge hath conusance extraordinarie vnto these two generall heads Per cognitionem 1 L. 5. ff de extraord cognit viz. extraordinariam siue officio Iudicis factam aut de honoribus siue muneribus gerendis agitatur aut de re pecuniaria disceptatur A Iudge exerciseth his authoritie extraordinarie in causes Ciuill either when hee taketh knowledge of bearing offices and functions or of causes pecuniarie But in causes Criminall hee practiseth this authoritie of Office aut cum 2 Callistratus ibid. de existimatione alicuius cognoscitur aut cùm de capitali crimine quaeritur when hee sitteth to take knowledge whether a mans honour or reputation ought to be atteinted or when he enquires and makes inquisition of some crime capitall viz. whereby a mans libertie countrey or life may bee endamaged This Office Ouid touched 3 Ouid. lib. 1. de Tristib in these wordes Iudicis Officium est vt res ita tempora rerum Quaerere The effect of the Iudges Office and the course which hee thereupon doth followe is called Enquirie Inquirere saith Bartolus est 4 Bartol in l. transigere nu 13. C. de transaction quasi intus quaerere diligentiùs abdita indagare secreta detegere in iudicium deducere It is to search into a matter deepely and carefully that is kept close to bring it to triall of iudgement which it deserueth This Enquirie in the old common wealth of Rome was more commonly called 5 l. 1. § item illud ff de S. C. Syllan Quaestio Which word hath two significations in that lawe The one more generall signifying any enquirie The other that enquirie and examination which was vsed vpon bond slaues and men of the meaner sort by torture Quaestionem sic accipimus sayeth the Ciuill lawe to this purpose non tormenta tantùm sed omnem inquisitionem defensionem or as another reading hath it detectionem mortis Where we see that the worde Inquisitio is also vsed Of this worde Quaestio such as dealt by it were called Quaesitores and so doth 6 Virgil. 6. Aeneid Virgil call Minos a Iudge quaesitorem Out of which by abbreuiation came the
further care I thinke it will not be so supposed The like then may be sayd of Ecclesiasticall officers and offences notwithstanding all generall Enquiries in Senes or Synodes and in visitations But it will perhaps be sayd in the one Court they may bee presented by the sworne men and in the other by enditement of the grand Iurie at Sessions and Assises c. It is true they may be but how many I pray you are so found out and endited from time to time by the grand Iuries of their own enquiries knowledges if either some partie grieued in particular doe not giue euidence or the Iudges or Iustices of themselues do not informe them and vrge them notwithstanding the straitnesse of their charge and oath and that they be taken out of the seuerall parts of euery shire But be it that some notorious murtherer or felon is soby them endited at some times how many other offenders in penall statutes being men of any reckoning in the shire are endited at all thorowout the Realme in many yeeres if none of the bench do take care to vrge the Iuries as Recusants in comming to diuine seruice such as haue and keepe Reteiners and giue liueries contrary to statute onely to band in quarrels and to mainteine bad actions or yet such as goe excessiuely in apparell or which violate the statutes appointed for not eating flesh vpon certeine dayes Nay it falleth out often times that the more to giue edge to such Iuries to do their duties euidence hath bene giuen vnto them in these offences yea such and so good as vpon lesse euidence they would perhaps haue endited a man of felonie to the hazzard of his life especially if he were but some base fellow Now when none almost will be found to giue euidence sauing in such a cause where he findes himselfe or some of his pinched yea and not in such neither if the other partie be a man of any tolerable reckoning or ability and very few albeit themselues do perfectly know it or haue reasonable good euidence giuen against some man of power that will finde an enditement against such an one although both he that giueth the euidence secretly and all the Iurie may be in some hope not to be knowen who it was that did principally stirre in it because they be sworne to keepe the Queenes counsell their fellowes and their owne can it then with reason be imagined that any man almost will be found voluntarily to become an Accuser and to prosecute at his owne costs and charges Experience teacheth that most men will not few that dare and those onely such as take themselues in some particular respect wronged We see in a great multitude of penall statutes at the Common law how men by third parts and moities of forfeitures besides great priuileges in proceeding are as it were allured and entised to informe against offenders yet very few notwithstanding such great gaine as thereby might be got are found besides such as make an occupation of it that will voluntarily preferre informations albeit there be enow that want the money and could well be content to finger it out of what male factours purse soeuer it came The reasons of this backwardnesse in informing I take to be the charge trouble common obloquie and offence taken by them that be prosecuted and thereby feare and perill to come vnto some further mischiefe vpon their procurement or for their fauour Now where men that are so well hired and by reason the Queene is partie to such informations so fully in all reason protected will not lust not or dare not preferre matter penall against others shall wee looke for better courage to be shewed by priuate persons against offenders in Ecclesiasticall crimes where they can expect no such countenance nor remuneration to lighten the other burthens and dangers and therefore either of Office to be prosecuted or must be wholly left vnpunished In riots committed and done vpon others we see iust cause of griefe for the iniury receiued and thereby occasion giuen to seeke lawfull reuenge There was good remedy also prouided for them at the Common law Yet in the time of king Henrie the seuenth for a further remedie and repressing of them by the Lords of the Starre-chamber the State was driuen to make a statute By authority whereof their Lordships proceed in that and others ex officio albeit in many causes they haue some partie grieued that by way of complaint promoteth and prosecuteth the office Yet the proceeding is as was touched afore by way of enquirie in that no man there sueth for priuate recompense but the scope of the whole processe is criminall ad vindictam publicam vel corporalem vel pecuniariam applicand●…m fisco non parti So that where men haue ●…ust cause of griefe yet was it thought very expedient requisite to prouide a sharper course by way of enquirie of office How much more then is this course needfull to be holden for punishing Ecclesiasticall crimes which by the policy of this Realme haue no other punishment and where no man hath for the most part any priuate iniury whervpon to complaine himselfe Here perhaps it will be said that he which can giue information of a crime to a iudge may accuse or procure a presentment in an Eccelesiasticall Court if it be of that iurisdiction or may informe and procure an enditement if the cause be Temporall or els that it were meet his information be not beleeued but that he should be holden as a slanderer and a malicious person We are to remember that if this Dilemma viz. either thou must accuse and prosecute him c. or else thou art but a slanderer had not quiddam tertium to minister answere vnto it many grieuous faults should passe vnpunished and many poore men should be sore pinched For experience teacheth that 1 Clarus ibid. q. 6. often times euen in crimes publikly committed you shall hardly finde witnesses that will depose their direct knowledge when it tendeth to the offence of some man of countenance that may do them a displeasure after And therefore they will either say they saw it not heard it not marked it not or at that time remember it not Yet it is knowen that a witnesse is vrged by the religion of an oath and is not entended to thrust himselfe into the matter willingly which as it ought to serue to take away all offence conceiued by him whom he toucheth so ought it to wash away all feare and other affection in the witnesse Then how much more probably may it be supposed that there is many a meane man though otherwise able to giue good and true information perhaps of three or foure witnesses which doe know the matter more fully and touching other particularities sufficient for a Iudge to enquire and to looke into the partie so denounced who neuerthelesse in many respectes dare not become an open Accuser or a preferrer of presentment of
not so much as iiij s. towards their charges that Iustices of Peace be allowed by Statute at such times as they serue at Sessions of the Peace c whereas Commissioners are employed and serue therein freely at their owne charges with losse of time and intermitting their owne businesse only of dutie and conscience to her Maiestie and to the Common weale So that if it were not in this respect the Commissioners ecclesiasticall both might and would sit still with more ease to themselues and lesse obloquie howbeit by the worst of euery sort of Subiects As for Courts of Ordinaries I knowe some of the greatest of them in England that haue not two matters ex Officio mero prosecuted in them in three yeeres space And for such ordinarie Courts as haue some moe causes of that nature alas what great fee is it for the Iudge ecclesiasticall to haue iij. pence for a Citation or vj. pence for examination of a witnesse or vpon an acte of Absolution or such like to make him desirous in that respect to entertaine the cause seeing hee will hardly be excused with xx pound charges that euery such seuerall matter may put him vnto if an Appellation be brought vpon any errour or mistaking that may happen to be found in his proceedings of Office Besides that the like fees are due to the Iudge no lesse vpon the prosecution of a partie then they be vpon proceeding by office and therefore none inconuenience heereupon more in the one course which this opinion alloweth then there is in the other Yea may some say all prooue not offenders that be so called and that are thereby put vnto trouble and charges It is true yet meet to be called if the law be obserued in this point that there must be afore a sufficient ground of inducement thereto Neither doe all those prooue to be offenders that are prosecuted by a partie or by an Accuser and thereby be put to no lesse charges and trouble euen when besides the malice of the preferrer there was no colourable ground of the accusation The like may be also truely said of many others who be called euen before temporall Iudges and Iustices of the peace either by warrant writte or otherwise Yet is this no cause heereupon wholly to disallow these conuentings And there is no more reason to finde fault with the fees due vnto the Iudges ecclesiasticall in regard that euery one which happeneth to be conuented prooueth not guiltie of the matter imputed to him then there ought to be with the fees that are due to Iudges in temporall Courts for iudiciall or originall writtes c. because many of such suites be commenced as often falleth out in the end without good matter on the Plaintifs or Informers behalfe Thus much in answere to the obiections made against the reasonablenesse and conueniencie of proceeding by Office CHAP. XI That the lawes of the Realme do vse Enquiries and proceedings ex officio and that they allow it in Courts Ecclesiasticall with answere to some obiections that are made to the contrary IN the next place I am to shew that dealing by way of enquirie or enquest ex officio without suite of a partie called by the Common law Office del Court are both mentioned and practised by the lawes of the Realme In 1 Mag. Charta cap. 26. Magna Charta mention is made of a writ of Inquisition of life and member In an olde statute of king Edward the first a seuerance is made betwixt the suite of the King from the suite of a partie and the King is thereby as it were bound to sue and to lend his office for prosecution of the misdemeanours For it is 1 3. Ed. 1. cap. 13. thus prouided that if any take away a woman by force c. the King at his suite that will sue shall doe common right within fortie dayes and if none commence his suite within fortie dayes the King shall sue Which suite being in his owne Court and before himselfe must needs be of office For where there is Inquisitio Enquirie there the King is partie as by another statute of the same 2 Star de Inquis capiend 33. Ed. 1. Kings dayes appeareth De Inquisitionibus coram Iusticiarijs quibuscunque capiendis in quibus D. Rex est pars qualitercunque concordatum est c. In a statute of 3 18. Edw. 3. pro Clero c. 2. king Edward the third arreignment at the suite of the King which is ex officio as a distinct matter from that which is at the suite of a partie is spoken of and so 4 42. Ed. 3. c. 4. are also Commissions of inquisition afterward Furthermore in K. 5 8. H. 6. c. 16. Henrie the sixt his time en quest or inquisition of office is mentioned and in sundrie 6 11 H. 7. c. 25. 1. H. 8 c. 12. statutes both after and afore which are needlesse to be repeated For as I take the matter euery enditement is an Inquisition which if it be at the prosecution of a partie it is as officium promotum but if it be by the Iudges for the Queene in respect of the interest of the Common-wealth then is it officium merum or nobile as afore is declared This maner of dealing in sundrie cases is so vsuall at the Common law that there be whole titles made in the Abridgements touching Inquisition and office del Court viz. of enquiries and matters done by the Iudges vpon their discretions without the instance of any partie In reports at the Common law we finde it said 7 M. 20. H. 6. 38. that Iudges ex officio did charge an enquest to make enquirie of their owne collusion supposed to be committed among them 8 34. Edw. 3. 3. Further One of a Iurie that departed from his fellowes after that he was sworne was examined at his returne by the Iudges ex officio whether he had since spoken with the defendant or no Likewise it is said 9 11. H. 4. 17. that the Court ex officio ought to award an Assise to enquire whether the disseisin were with force by reason of the kings fine In the booke of 10 Assis. lib. 16. pag. 4. Assises The Court ex officio sent a man to prison because they found he had not made fine And a great number of particular articles are there set down wherupon 11 Assis. lib. 27. pag. 138. enquest or inquisition ex officio in the Kings bench is to be made We finde of elder time by 1 Bracton li. 4. c. 8. fol. 302. Bracton where the appellor that prosecuteth makes default or dieth there the king may proceed ex officio And againe there Let the king ex officio suo for his peace proceed to inquisitiō for the suspicion that he hath of the appeale Moreouer where a Parson and Vicar were both willing enough to sue before the Temporall Iudges yet 2 M. 22.
of sir Th. Mores grounded also vpon resemblance of the practise at the Common law vnto the ecclesiasticall in this behalfe viz. that a man may be at that law arrested and imprisoned onely vpō suspicion he frameth two answers The first of them is that at the common law there must be a fact precedent whereby a cause of suspicion must be grounded otherwise there lieth an actiō of false imprisonmēt What If an offence appeare to be done shal this be sufficient without all peril to ground a suspicion against any man whomsoeuer that it was he which did it so to imprison him Neither yet is it generall that a fact must be precedent before a man be arrested For if it be a fact of such qualitie nature as leaueth traces signes after it as murder Coining and such like which be called by Ciuilians facta permanentia in thē it is true that a fact must be precedent But in such facts as leaue no such traces behind them so y t it is not certain whether they be cōmitted at all or not yet probabilities thereof doe appeare as of speaches secret treaties of cōspiracie treason for such facts a suspected partie may be arrested and imprisoned though it be not assuredly knowen whether the fact be committed at all or not And these are called facta transeuntia Neuerthelesse this is not in any sort an answere vnto sir Th. Mores reason For admit that a fact must alwayes be precedent neuer the later this remaineth true that a Iustices onely suspicion may serue to arrest and imprison a man And yet the law ecclesiasticall for which More reasoneth doth in trueth require strōger grounds for enquitie special thē the Iudges only suspiciō as is afore at large in this secōd part declared The Note-gatherers later answere vnto that reason of Mores is that a felonie or murder being done and a fact manifest the partie apprehended and suspected knoweth that he is to answere that facte and not other by-wayes as is vsed in the ecclesiasticall proceedings Trulie of all that euer I heard these answeres be by-wayes and besides all way too of any reasonable answering obiections It may be that the partie himselfe especiallie if he be not guiltie knoweth not till hee be asked the very particular cause of his apprehension But it will be sayd that vpon his examination hee learneth what it is Why sir and so doe all that be conuented in courtes ecclesiasticall know by their examination the matter obiected Then where is the difference and the by-way that this man so talketh of But will you see his clerkelie vayne of reasoning herein For it is as if he had gathered it thus viz. A man arrested knoweth that he is to answere a fact which is committed Ergo Albeit at the common lawe a man may bee arrested vpon suspicion yet proceeding ex Officio is vnlawfull how good grounds soeuer there be for it farre sounder then suspicion For another inconuenience of proceeding by office importing with all a Contrarietie to the lawes of the Realme the Note-gatherer assigneth that thereby the Accessarie may be punished and the principall may escape which is contrarie to the Common law The consequence hereof he goeth about to prooue thus For that as he saieth the Principall may in those courtes be an Informer and a witnesse both against the Accessarie By which saying his slender skill or experience in those lawes appeareth For it is most notorious that there is no better nor more vsuall chalenge exception against an Informer or witnesse then to alleage quod est particeps vel socius criminis praetensi Albeit euen at the Common lawe we vsually see partakers and complices in coining in other kindes of treason and for sundry hainous crimes especially which are secretly contriued to be admitted to appeach and to be witnesses and to giue euidence against others their partners He affirmeth also but maketh no shew of proofe thereof that hereby the two Iurisdictions be confounded and that proceeding of office is derogatorie to the lawes liberties and customes of England In which respect it is sufficient that these be as easilie by vs denied as they be barelie boldly and vntruly by him auouched He further allegeth in three places as if it were a matter very considerable out of Hall and the Actes and Monuments of the Church that by the statute of 25. H. 8. cap. 14. all proceeding of Office is repealed and calleth the statute against Heresie 1. H. 4. the statute ex officio as if it had bene vnknowen before First that very statute 1 1. Eliz. cap. 1. it selfe of H. 8. standeth repealed Secondly it is very vntrue that it did at any time repeale proceeding of Office For it doth not so much as once mention it And therefore what any writers do name the sayd statute of H. 4. thereby repealed as I haue not sought so is it not materiall seeing they misunderstand it if they so write Yea the Notegatherer himselfe yeeldeth that the sayd statute of K. H. 8. doth establish proceeding of Office if he vnderstand what himselfe writeth For it doth appoint and so he allegeth it that from thenceforth proceedings against Heretikes should be vpon accusation or presentment If vpon Presentment then of consequence by the Iudges Office For so all lawes testifie and Presenters be not Accusers or parties For they are seuered counter-diuided euen in that very place one against the other The principall drift of that statute of K. H. 8. was to prouide that an Ordinarie vpon his owne onely suspicion should not call men into the dangerous question of heresie as it seemeth was afore vsed by some of them vpon colour of that statute 1. H. 4. and therefore there repealed The next statute which to the same purpose he quoteth 2 31. H. 8. ca. 14. is so farre from impugning proceeding of Office that for grounding proceeding ecclesiasticall euen in the crime of heresie it prouideth besides Accusation and Presentment not onely information by two witnesses but also enquirie and that is alwayes of Office But do not these men draw neere the lees when they are driuen thus to allege the statute of Sixe Articles being also repealed against proceeding of Office I had thought their courage in the pretended cause of sinceritie had bene so great that they would rather haue quit the place with losse of their cause then once to haue borrowed so much as the shadow of a weapon out of that store house Against this course the Note-gatherer also allegeth certeine bookes printed in king Henrie the eights dayes Cum priuilegio These hee termeth to be the maner of debating that cause in those dayes The first was made by S. German as it is thought and is intituled The diuision of the Spiritualtie and Temporaltie with his replie against Sir Thomas Moore intituled Salem and Bizance The next concerning the power of the cleargie and lawes of the Realme The third intituled Of
will vse no vaine cauillations and delayes or foorth of Iudgement as an oathe of alleageance or they are obligationis introductoria when the very oath worketh the bond in lawe for something afterward to be done But this bonde is only by the 5 Tot. tit ex de Iureiurando Canon and not by the Ciuill lawes sauing in one case that I can call to minde which is the 6 L. vt iurisiurādi ff de operis libertorum oathe of a man once a bondslaue and now set free called libertus that is made vnto his patron to performe some workes or other thing vnto him For in this case the very oathe is obligationis introductorium and maketh the freed man bound by that Law to performe it in vim turamenti Furthermore a promissorie oath whether taken in iudgement or out of iudgement is either necessarie as when it is imposed by the Magistrate vpon his subiect or it is voluntarie An oath assertorie being of chiefest vse and therefore most to be stood vpon and explaned is also either extraiudiciall or iudiciall and both these be either necessary or voluntarie The iudiciall necessarie oath Assertory is sometimes giuen to the defendant when there is formally another partie besides in iudgement sometimes when there is no such partie beside but the Iudge that proceedeth ex officio When there is a partie it is either iuramentum calumniae veritatis or purgationis but if there be no such partie beside it is either purgatorium tantum or partim purgatorium partim inquisitorium The Iudiciall and voluntarie oath is either suppletorium aestimatortum in litem or decisorium Which last is oftentimes confounded with iudiciale iuramentum without further addition by reason of the more frequent vse of it in Ciuill lawe courts in elder times when men durst trust one anothers conscience better then nowe generally they haue cause to doe The decisory oath is either delatum or relatum by the one of the parties that are in sute together Nowe I minde briefly and plainely without tying my selfe to any exact definitions to describe these vnto you with onely quotations of the Scripture where examples of them may be found as I conceiue it for auoyding of tediousnesse by particular rehearsall 1 Gen. 43. v. 3. 1. Sam. 25. v. 26. 1. Sā 26. v. 10 16. 1. Sam. 29. v. 6. 2. Sam. 4. v. 9. 2. Sam. 19. v. 7. Assertorie is when by oath any thing past or present is affirmed or denyed to be A 2 Gen. 24. v. 3. 9. Gen. 47. v. 31. Leuit. 5. v. 4. Num. 30. v. 3. 14. Iosh. 1. v 6. Iosh. 2. v. 12. Iosh. 2. v. 22. Iosh. 9. v. 15. 18. 19. 20. Iudg 15. v. 12. 1. Sam. 14. v. 45. 1. Sam. 28. v. 10. 2. Sam. 3. v 35. 2. Sam. 19. v. 13. 1. Reg. 1. v. 13. 17. Promissorie oath is when any thing is by oath promised to be done or not done In a Promissorie oath there is a double bond before God the one is that it is sinne if trueth be wanting and the other is that he is bound to doe hat which he promiseth But in an Assertorie oath there is no bond but onely this that the matter be true which is affirmed thereby or denyed The effect of a Promissorie oath is that he is bound to make that true which he hath sworne but if it were not in his power to doe it then there wanted in such oath iudgement and discretion except it were in his power to doe it when he swore but became impossible by some casuall euent after happening that could not be before thought on In which case neuerthelesse hee is bound to perfourme it as farre forth as lyeth any way in him so the oath be such which did binde as carying with it none impietie But if the promissorie oath be made touching such a thing as was in his power yet such as ought not to bee done either because it was in it selfe euill or is an hinderance or let of something that is good then in such an oath Iustice is wanting An 1 Gen. 21. v. 31. Gen. 26. v. 31. Iudg. 21. v. 1. 1. Sam. 19. v. 6. 1. Sā 20. v. 13. 17. 1. Sam. 30. v. 15. 2. Sam. 19. v. 23. 2. Sam. 21. v. 17. 1. Reg. 1. v. 29. 30. 51. 1. Reg. 2. v. 8. 23. 24. 2. Reg. 25. v. 24. 2. Chro. 15. v. 14. Nehe. 7. v. 18. Nehe. 10. v. 29. Ierem. 38. v. 16. Ierem. 40. v. 9. Hebr. 6. v. 16. 17. oathe promissorie and confirmatorie is when it is made for more full assurance of some act to be done or not to bee done A 2 1. Sam. 14. v. 24. 28. 1. Sā 24. v. 22. 23. 1. Reg. 2. v. 42. 43. Ezra 10. v. 5. Nehe. 5. v. 12. Iosh. 23. v. 7. In these wordes Nor cause to sweare by them necessarie oath generally whether there be two parties formally or the Iudge proceedeth ex officio is that which a Magistrate causeth those that be vnder his authoritie to take for some conuenient purpose and ende In law it is defined to be 3 Postilla in v. iureiur L. in bonae fidei C. de reb cred iureiur such as you neither may referre or put ouer to the other partie to take his oath to the contrarie nor yet may be refused by your selfe For 4 L. 11. § quita●…it ff de interrog act L. 11. de periurio ff de in litem iurando ibi ex necessitate if you doe you shall be holden as conuicted and the sute must goe against you This necessarie oath is tendered by the Iudge whensoeuer hee seeth cause in equitie to mooue him albeit no partie make petition and then it is called Nobile vel merum Iudicis officium or els it is tendered and ministered by him at the petition of a partie and then it is termed mercenarium Iudicis officium because thereby hee seemeth but as it were to serue his turne that maketh the petition The first of this necessarie sort where there bee formallie two parties is Iuramentum calumniae which is when one is vrged to sweare that hee moues a cause alledgeth or answereth some Iudiciall matter bona fide that is truely directly and not captiously and that he beleeues it to be true and thinkes he can indeede make proofe of it and that hee doeth it not to vexe his aduersary but to relieue himselfe and not of any purpose to delay the sute Necessarium iuramentum veritatis is 5 Mascard de probat vol. 1. pag. 18. nu 6. that which is ministred to witnesses and that also which is ministred to the partie who is to answere vnto Positions or Articles And that also is so called whereby the Iudge doeth interrogate and examine either of the parties or the witnesses to the intent to bee more fully instructed in the cause 1 1. Reg. 8. v. 31. luramentum
and matters Temporall betweene which and causes ecclesiasticall as is noted afore there was made both in those times and also long after a plaine seuerance and distinction in the groundes of their seuerall authorities and iurisdictions so that the one was called the Kings Court and the other a Spirituall or Court Christian. and therefore as nothing was in that Charter anewe graunted but confirmed onely vnto the Church of England so is it to be iudged on all handes that the king would not make lawes there to restraine the courses of proceeding ecclesiasticall because it could not be without disanulling and reuoking of that which immediately afore euen by the same Acte hee had first of all confirmed vnto them Secondly a Bailife onely is there mentioned which should put or not put a man to his oath which cannot well and properlie be vnderstood of any but of some officer temporall Thirdly these wordes are no way appliable to the practise of courtes ecclesiasticall for albeit vnder the name of Bailife an Ordinarie might be vnderstood which were very harsh insomuch as a Bailife is but a Reeue of a Baile or Libertie yet is it not holden by any lawe ecclesiasticall that vpon an Ordinaries owne bare saying whether he haue witnesses after to bee produced or not a man may bee put to an oath for there must bee some better matter of inducement to open way to the enquirie whereupon the oath ensueth Lastly this statute will rather hurt then helpe forward these mens purposes if an Ordinarie might here be vnderstood by a Baylife because if I conceiue the matter aright by this is implyed that so an Ordinarie be able to bring in good witnesses he may then vpon his bare saying put a man to his open lawe or to an oath But hereupon would followe that Criminall prosecution without any accuser or other partie and so ex officio mero yea and without any presentment too may bee lawfully admitted and which is most to our present purpose in handling that an oath in such case by him may bee imposed in any matter aswell Criminall as other For heere is no distinction made of any one kinde of cause from another and they which alledge it doe bring it to impugne proceeding by the defendants oath against crimes The allegation of the Treatisour out of the statute of Marlebridge or Marleborough falleth next in time to bee considered the whole wordes 1 Marlebr 52. H. 3. cap. 22. whereof are these none from hencefoorth may distreyne his freeholders to answere for their free holdes nor for any thing touching their freeholde without the kings writ nor shall cause his freeholders to sweare against their willes for no man may doe that without the kings commaundement But the Treatisour leaueth out the first part which sheweth howe the second that he alledgeth is to be vnderstoode And because like the lapwing with her diuerting c●…ies hee would leade vs further and further from the matter herein chiefly to be respected or for that he thought wee would make some aduantage hereof he saith that the kings commaundement importeth here thus much viz. according to the law Iustice of this Realme and for this quoteth a booke thus 2. R. 3. The booke he meaneth as I gesse is in 2 Mich. 2. R. 3. sol 11. these words wheresoeuer a man for offence misprision or otherwise is to make fine or redemption all the Iustices agreed that those Iustices before whome he was committed c. should take suretie and pledges for the fine c. and after by their discretion they should assesse the fine and not the king in his chamber nor otherwise before him but by his Iustices and so is the kings will in statute to be taken viz. by his Iustices and his lawe which to say in effect is all one c. Where you see that the booke speaking of Iustices viz. the men before whome the conuiction was made he referreth this to the Iustice of the land But though it be neither off nor on to our Principall purpose neuerthelesse it seemeth this booke is not truely applied by him vnto this statute and that by the kings commaundement in the statute the kings writ is to be vnderstood as in the first part of that statute is plainely expressed rather then any determination or Act of his Iustices of the Bench. Touching the statute it selfe the wordes doe euidently shew that neither oath in cause criminall nor any Court Ecclesiasticall is thereby meant there is onely forbidden that lords of manors shall not inforce their Freeholders that holde lande of them whether it be by distresse or oathes to answere in their Courtes baron touching the estates they haue in their landes because neither the lordes owne courts in such a case be competent or indifferent for feare of vnlawfull euiction nor the goodnesse or weakenesse of the states men holde are meete to be fished out by their owne oathes in satisfaction of their lordes greedinesse to haue their lands except the king by his writ shall so especially command And yet hereby wee see the statute leaueth it at large at the kings pleasure to warrant euen this course and therefore this is not simply vniust but inconuenient onely for lords so to vrge their tenants He alledgeth further against these oathes a statute as hee saith made 43. Ed. 3. ca. 9. that no man be put to answere without presentment before Iustice or matter of Record or by due proces or by writ originall after the ancient lawes of this land But I doe finde no such statute either in that yeere or in any other like number of Chapter of that king and that Parliament which he voucheth hath not so many Chapters But admitting it what is this to proue an vnlawfulnesse of oathes ministred vnto defendants in matters criminall whereof there is no shadowe of mention it rather speaketh of matters that ought to goe afore proceedings criminall at the common lawe and what makes this against Courts Ecclesiasticall woulde hee haue them to proceede in the selfe same maner that common lawe courts doe hee might aswell exact of them Indictments and afterward tryals by Iuries of twelue and yet Ecclesiasticall courts put none to answere but vpon moe then one of these or at least that which is equiualent at that lawe vnto these at the common lawe For first courts Ecclesiastical haue great vse of presentments and complaints or denunciations before the partie be called to answere as is shewed in the second part Then the defendant is not called neither but by due processe as by letters missiue or by attachment in Courtes of Commission by Primarie citation in Ordinarie Courtes which haue a correspondence vnto originall writs at the cōmon law So that of foure matters wherof some one or other of them is thereby required three of them be vsed in Ecclesiasticall proceedings against crymes His next proofe of this kinde cōming to be discussed is out of the 1 25.
layde downe in the printed Register especially by these wordes of them Recognitiones sacramenta provoluntate sua ipsis inuitis For full answere whereof to auoyde vnnecessarie length and vaine repetition I must referre the Reader ouer vnto the xj and xij Chapters in the first parte of this Apologie He affirmeth also that the practisers of such oathes are for that cause in a Pramunire and therefore gathereth the oathe to be contrary and repugnant to the common lawe I graunt the consequence to be good and sound but how doth hee prooue them to be thereupon in a Praemunire For proofe of this he assumeth that this manner of oathe is contrary to the Queenes regalitie and crowne as if his reasons afore brought had sufficiently euinced so much which wee doe vtterly and resolutely deny vnto him And yet as if he had fully cleared that point he addresseth himselfe to prooue that whereof there was lesse controuersie viz. that what is done by a Bishop or by an Ecclesiasticall Court against the Kings regalitie and crowne hath beene heretofore adiudged to be within the compasse of this worde Alibi contained in the Statute of Praemuuire 16. Ric. 2. For this he alledgeth two books of the common law yet 1 5. Ed. 4. sol 6. Praemunire the first of them doth but speake of an excommunication by a Bishop not of euery dealing whatsoeuer in a matter belonging to the Kings regalitie And what if it had beene twise so adiudged both of them in such corrupt times when as the royall prerogatiue of the Kings of this land to be Supreme Gouernours in all Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall due to them in right and by Gods Lawe was not de facto vnited to the crowne For the Bishops then did not claime their Iurisdictions Ecclesiasticall next and immediately vnder God from the Crowne as now they doe But seeing this parte of Regall power is nowe no lesse truely and fully vested in the crowne then is the Temporall so as the Lawes allowed for the gouernement Ecclesiasticall are termed by sundry Parliaments The Queenes Ecclesiastical lawes and Lawes of the Realme as well as those which were first and originally made heere And the Bishops are proued to haue their authoritie and Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall deriued downe vnto them from the Queenes Highnes vnder the great Seale of England as vpon fundrie incident occasions hath beene shewed afore Is it then the like reason still to comprise their Iurisdictions and Courts vnder that word of Alibi as if their Courts and Iurisdictions were not nowe the Queenes nor yet belonging vnto her Regalitie Nay let such as shall so affirme beware they incurre not hereby the danger of implied if not direct denyall of a part of her Highnesse Royall stile and the breach also of their oathes taken for assistance and defence of all Prerogatiues c. vnited or belonging to this Imperiall crowne Yea and though this might be truely verified of ordinarie Courts Ecclesiasticall yet is there no colour at all so to affirme of the Commission Ecclesiasticall exercised vnder the great Seale of England by force of the same Statute that restores the Supremacie Ecclesiasticall to the Crowne I omit here what is touched else where viz. howe by sundry learned it hath bene thought that by Alibi there was encluded or meant nothing els but matters of that quality there specified which were enterprised by and vnder the Papall authoritie though the Pope perhaps resided not then at Rome it selfe Therefore seeing this is not pregnant ynough for him to driue this matter neerer home to his purpose hee sayeth it is against the Kings Regalitie and so a Praemunire for an Ecclesiasticall Court to holde plea of a matter appertaining to the Iudgement of a Common Lawe Court or to deale in any cause not belonging to Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction The first of these he prooueth by the pardon sued by Barlow Bishop of Bathe and Welles in king Ed. 6. his time by reason hee had depriued the Deane there being a meere donatiue of the Kings If there were but any probable doubt whether thereby hee were fallen into a Praemunire it was wisedome for him to procure a pardon afore hand if he could Alealitis resincertissima yet depriuing of one placed by the King is much more then bare holding of some plea that appertaineth to a temporall Court besides that there was a further matter in it then I last here to open The other allegation of his to like ende taken from a 1 38. Ed. 3. of Prouisours Statute doth make no shew of proofe thereof for it is but thus viz. the King chiefly desireth to susteine his people in tranquilitie and peace and to gouerne according to the Lawes Usages and Franchises of his land as hee is bound by his oathe made at his coronation And are not Ecclesiasticall persons nowe parte of the Queenes people Are not the Liberties and Franchises that bee giuen and confirmed vnto them by the goodnesse of Princes for holding plea in certaine matters the vsages of this Realme Are not the receiued Lawes which lawfully they may practise termed Ecclesiasticall Lawes of this Realme no lesse then temporall be And is not the Prerogatiue royall in and for causes Ecclesiasticall as high and as rightfully setled in the Prince and incident to her Highnesse Crowne and Regalitie as the same is for temporall power and authoritie What cause is there then seeing seu Alibi in the Statute signifieth in true construction anie place whatsoeuer besides Rome that euery holding plea by an Ecclesiasticall Court of a matter wherein it ought not to holde shoulde at this time bee reckoned a thing contrarie to the Queeenes Regalitie more then dealing in an Ecclesiasticall cause shoulde bee in anie temporall Court at Westminster For no Statute of Prouision or Praemunire assigneth these for causes which haue indeede but growen since by collections whiles the Popes vsurpation was continued in this land against which oftentimes the remedie by Prohibition coulde not serue the turne I graunt it is a contempt or great misprision in any but for this a Prohibition and attachment thereupon c. as afore those Statutes they did might sufficiently serue the turne Neuerthelesse all these matters are wholly impertinent to his purpose till he shall haue prooued the particular issue viz. that such oathe as wee treate of is against the Queenes Regalitie c. But if that might be prooued then vpon so generall interpretation of Alibi these oathes would fall into the case of Praemunire by what Court soeuer whether temporall or Ecclesiasticall they should be tendered And that which he vowcheth to the same effect out of Saint Germans booke of Doctor Student receiueth the like answere In the next place I set some of the Treatisors reasons that are made by collection and discourse of reason These collections he maketh partly from examples past and partly at large therefore touching the first of these two he impugneth these oathes and would prooue
H. 4. ca. 15. which he termeth the twise damned and repealed Statute and a bloody and boyling lawe will be alleaged for proofe of these oathes In trueth wee should be brought to a very straite exigend if we were forced as he is to runne vnto such repealed statutes for proofe of any principall point in controuersie Yet let vs see howe he assayeth to vntye this knot which he doeth two wayes First he sayth it appeareth not that thereby any authoritie was giuen to impose any such generall oath if then no such thing appeare why doth the Notegatherer so confidently Repugnancie betweene the Treatisour and Note-gatherer and so often affirme that this oath was then first brought in and established and therefore hee calleth that the statute ex officio though ex officio or oath be not once named there thereby confounding the very course of proceeding with that one Act thereof viz. of ministring an oath The Treatisour goeth further and sayth it appeareth not that any authoritie was thereby giuen to compell by oath the prisoner to become his owne Accuser for that and especially in causes of life and death had bene against the lawes and iustice of the land By which restraint in this worde especially he seemeth little lesse then to yeelde that in other cases not capitall this oath is not against the lawes nor iustice of the land But it is very vntrue to thinke that whatsoeuer is wholly forborne in Temporal courts should therfore straight way be accounted to be against them For there is great difference betwixt not vsing or forbearing and plaine forbidding of a thing to be done Furthermore we are commanded in 1 1. Pet. ca. 3. ver 15. Scripture to be ready to giue an account to euery one that asketh vs a reason of the hope that is in vs with meeknes and feare If to euery one much more to a Magistrate What then if he hauing also authoritie to impose oathes will exact it in this case may he not as lawfully doe it as without oath he may aske and interrogate the partie Nowe it is no more lawfull before God for vs being but asked of our fayth or hope euen by a priuate man to dally with him or to say vntruly though it might saue our life then wee may say vntruly when wee be sworne to tell the trueth thereof vnto a Magistrate 2 Ecclesiast 4. ver 30. doe not gaine say the trueth in any case saith the wiseman and againe be 3 Ecclesiast 41. ver 21. ashamed of vntrueth before a Magistrate or a man in authoritie So that hereupon it may seeme to be against Gods lawe to set any man at libertie from answering truely touching his fayth and hope and so in heresie when howe and by whomsoeuer he shal be interrogated yea though danger of death might ensue thereby vnto him His second answere to that statute is that if this oath be implyed vnder the worde of Canonicall sanctions mentioned in that statute then was it no binding law nor gaue sufficient authoritie c. because all lawes of man repugnant to the lawe of God are meerely voyd Where he assumeth as graunted that this oath is repugnant to Gods law which shal God willing be prooued far otherwise The last point which to this purpose he supposeth wil be obiected is that the kings heretofore haue graunted Commissions to examine by oath This he thinketh cannot be prooued and though it could yet sayth he such Commissions are against law and therefore voyde Therefore vntill they be prooued to be herein against lawe this answere will fall to nought and the obiection will remaine till then good and sound And so I ende this tedious Chapter made in answer of all that which I finde brought for proofe that these oathes whereof we argue should be contrarie or repugnant vnto the statutes common lawe or customes of this Realme CHAP. VIII That ministring of such oathes is by the Lawes of the Realme allowed vnto Iudges of Ecclesiasticall courts and some fewe obiections made to the contrary are answered THat the lawes of the Realme allowe it vnto courts Ecclesiasticall which point comes next to be declared these few allegatiōs folowing may suffice 1 〈◊〉 H. 5. ca. 〈◊〉 Ordinaries are authorized to enquire of the foundation estate and gouernance of Hospitals being not of the Kings foundation and of all other matters necessarie in that behalfe and vpon that to make correction and reformation howe after the lawes of holy Church as to them belongeth Now by those lawes Enquirie touching crimes not capitall is made by the defendants oath as in the next Chapter folowing is declared So that if any such faultes be the persons visited are to discouer them vpon their oathes which cannot be entended but that they may be criminall and penall to them selues because the statute sayth that they are to be corrected and reformed If 2 Clerkes be conuicted before Ordinaries of incontinency by examination and by other lawfull proofe requisite by the lawes of holy Church they may be committed to ward But it is shewed afore that examination euen at the cōmon law like as at the Ecclesiasticall is vpon oath So that such oath is by the iudgment of that statute deemed a lawfull proofe requisite by the lawes of holy Church Executors 1 21. H. 8. ca. 5. administrators must giue oath before Ordinaries of the trueth of such Inuentaries as they doe exhibite Yet this may implye in it either periurie or some discouery of a mans owne fault if he haue dealt therein corruptly and fraudulently And another 2 27. H. 8. ca. 10. statute though standing repealed yet giueth good testimonie that not onely Enquirie at an Ordinaries visitation but also that the parties owne examination of whome the enquirie criminall ex officio is made is holden for a due course of the lawe ecclesiasticall not disallowed of by the lawes of the Realme And such examination is done by oath according both to that lawe and to the Temporall in like behalfe as hath bene shewed out of Iustice Brookes abridgement Moreouer 3 1. Eliz. ca. 2. Ordinaries are authorized to enquire to punish c. the violation of the Act made for vniformity of common prayer howe euen as heretofore hath bene vsed in like cases by the Queenes ecclesiasticall lawes But such enquirie generall is prescribed and so was alwayes practised by the oathes of men and the enquirie speciall is and was vsed by the defendants owne oath in case he should stand in deniall The oath of 4 5. Eliz. ca. 1. Supremacie may be giuen ex officio by any Ordinarie to a Clerke being within his iurisdiction yet if such Clerke doe cary a contrary perswasion it vrgeth him to reueale and discouer himselfe and his erroneous opinion by refusall of the oath or els to be foresworne which if he list not to be but rather refuse then falleth he thereby into a Praemunire which
viz. that therfore they may not giue oths but as the cōmon law doth wil not any way follow thereupon because the Q. prerogatiue royall and common lawes are so farre from restraining or forbidding these oathes that as it hath beene prooued they allow them and the Temporall Courts in many like cases vse not so much as a different course from this which is in speciall controuersie Now if it shall be said which also some very learned men do hold as the Treatisour confesseth that the Statute law made the first of her Maiestie warranteth and alloweth this manner of oathe then to shew this to be as he conceiueth it absurde hee telleth vs of some other points also defended vpon the generall words of that Acte and of the Commission by the saide learned men which seeme vnto him to be also no lesse absurdities then is the ministring an oath in a cause criminall therfore the one no better warranted thereby then the other for to what other purpose then this he should bring them I cānot possibly cōiecture The first fault he findeth with such learned mens sayings is for that they iudge it to be warranted by the Act and by the Cōmission to put men to othes none accusation sute or lawful informatiō presentment or indictment iudicially preceeding or depending He may father vpon such learned men what he please but is it likely that he himself would thus obiect as if he required bils of Information Inditements as it is at the cōmon law to be vsed also in courts ecclesiastical seing both himselfe and the Note-gatherer do tie the Commission to causes only ecclesiastical and they also to be dealt in only ecclesiastically Such learned mēs sayings may wel truly be defended as namely whē either the offence is notorious or is knowen to the Iudges themselues to be dangerous scandalous to be suffered For these two cases be out of all those that hee nameth yea though he should most vniuersally take suite for any prosecution by another and information for any priuate credible suggestion or denunciation made The second errour which he assigneth to be holden by them is for that secret information may be admitted suppresso nomine notificantis and he calleth such informations secret accusations and the men malicious calumniators adding that all good lawes and well gouerned common wealths haue such hidden backbyters for apparant accusers But if all good Lawes and well gouerned common-weales do indeed hold such men for apparant accusers then doth it follow that when such Information is giuen there is no want of an apparant accusation Yet in very deede euery relation made to a Magistrate by such as will not prosecute nor perhaps bee seene in the cause for some good consideration is not by any law nor in any common weale that I know of holden for an accusation for a malitious calumniation or for any secret backbiting nor yet deseruedly by any necessitie is so to bee accounted For besides other countreys which I haue read of such priuate informations haue oftentimes their manifolde good vse euen in this Realme yea and amongs ech degree of Magistrates And if they should be 1 Vide 2. part pag. 85. wholy reiected or neglected might sometime bring an whole subuersion vnto vs all I pray were those that gaue the first information of Babingtons damnable conspiracie to be misliked as secret backbiters or was the examination of these traitors and the proceedings vniust because the names of the intelligence-giuers were to this day suppressed By this example then you may wey consider of sundry the like Howbeit such informations in ordinarie courtes Ecclesiasticall be not holden for sufficient ground of Speciall Enquirie except they be very frequent and the offence scandalous and in Commssion courtes they bee as rarely receiued as in any courts Temporall of this Realme whatsoeuer and then but from very great and credible persons The third fault he findeth with such learnedmens opinions is that the Iudge may professe himselfe to be an Accuser which lawlesse proceeding the Iustice of this land he saith detesteth for that no man may be accuser and witnes or Inditour and a Iurour therefore much lesse may the Iudge be an Accuser For answere whereof first the lawes ciuill and ecclesiasticall holde not the Iudge proceeding of office to be any accuser but that whereupon the Enquiry is grounded to represent the accusation and so there is no need for them to pleade such plea as he here surmiseth Secondly that an accuser may in some case and sort be a witnes c. is 2 Vide 2. part pag. 110. 111. elsewhere declared and so his antecedent false Thirdly his reason foloweth not for why might not a Iudge be an accuser albeit neither an accuser could be a witnesse nor the Inditour a Iurour Fourthly if it were true that the Iustice of this land and the common lawe did not vse something which an Ecclesiasticall court doeth may it thereupon bee inferred that therein is a contrarietie and thereby for such difference onely a detestation of the other course This maner of reasoning is more cōmon with him others in these causes then any way sound substantial For the one court doeth it the other doeth it not be no contraries nor yet propositions in any other degree of opposition in that subiectum propositionis in both is not the same and therefore doe import no more but a diuersity For is this which is the very like any good reason viz. an Ecclesiasticall court readeth dissinitiue sentences de scripto but a Temporall court doeth it not in giuing iudgement therefore there is contrarietie betwixt these courts so the reading de scripto in a court ecclesiastical vtterly vnlawfull Whereof I thought it not amisse once for all to aduertise the Reader because this erroneous argument is so vsuall Lastly if all these were to be graunted vnto the Treatisour euen as he setteth them down yet what would it auaile his cause For admit these collections were absurdly gathered from the generality of the words of the Act Commission would it therefore folow that authority to minister oaths to defendāts in causes criminal could not thence be argued without absurdities being wholly another point why if euery thing cannot well be inferred thereon may therefore nothing at all be Yet vpon these such like speeches rather thē reasons of his elsewhere by sundry occasions touched the Treatisour wisheth the said learned men wiselier to aduise these Cōmissioners ecclesiastical to respect the ends expressed in the statute viz. the pleasure of God increase of vertue conseruation of peace and vnitie of this Realme rather then the ample and large words of the statute and height of their Iurisdiction as if these ends could not possibly concurre with tender of such oaths But whēsoeuer he or any other learned or vnlearned haue sufficiently indeed prooued that these cannot stand together I doubt not but that the
Interrogatories be vsed and where they are not written there is no possibilitie of knowing all particularly that shal be demaunded insomuch as one question necessarily riseth vpon the answeres that shall bee made to the former I reade a report of the Canon lawe where in an 1 15. E. 4. 〈◊〉 action of debt brought against the husband and his wife for the wiues debt before the couerture the woman without the husband could not be suffered to wage her lawe And is not this oath of the husbands part though lawfull as farre from that assured perswasion of the very trueth thereof and is there not as great want of the husbands certaine iudgement herein as when an oath is taken to answere articles in themselues finite and certaine though particularly not perused by him afore For nothing to the contrary can be heere I thinke alledged sauing that it may bee the husband himselfe had afore the wager of lawe payde the said debt of his wife There is a 2 2. H. 5. ca. 9. statute saith the Notegatherer which requireth a copie of the Libell put vp in a court Ecclesiasticall to be deliuered to the defendant and thereupon is there a writte framed and put in the Register pro copia libelli deliberanda It is very true which by him is alledged the reason was for that the defendants coulde not then procure prohibitions from temporall courtes without their viewe of the Libell which in that respect was sometime by Iudges Ecclesiasticall denied and the lawe as it seemeth was at that time so taken but if the lawe were not onely so taken but so practised still for my part I should hold it more agreeable to reason and that it would preuent many long delayes and other great inconueniences Neuerthelesse when one thing seemeth cautelously to bee in demaund by the Libell and another thing in trueth not incident to an Ecclesiasticall court is vnder hand shot at then and in such case only vpon apparant probabilities thereof shewed vnto the temporall Iudges it cannot be thought inconuenient for them to graunt a Prohibition yea though the Libell be not viewed afore by them nor cōteine expresly any matter belonging to a temporal court But seeing the statute speaketh but of a Libell it cannot be extended to all articles or Interrogatories whatsoeuer ministred in a Criminall cause especially where there is no likelyhood or colour but that the cause is meerely Ecclesiasticall or where it is handled by vertue of Commission vnder the great Seale of England grounded vpon the statute For if her Maiesties Supreme Royall auctoritie and power Ecclesiasticall granted by cōmission to others be as highly vested in her crowne as is her Temporall then will it bee probably gathered both of them being in their seuerall kindes supreme and the exercise of them cōmitted ouer to others vnder the great seale that the one of them is not to be abridged restrained or controlled by the other In 1 Gen. 21. V. 23. Scripture by the oath that Abimelech ministred to Abraham and which he tooke appeareth that thereby Abraham was to deale well with him or as the Hebrew word is not to deale falsly orlye vnto him nor vnto his children and that he should deale well both with him and the whole Countrey according to the mercie and kindnesse there shewed vnto him which poynts be of greater largenesse and generalitie then that all the particulars falling vnder that oath can possibly before-thought or called to mind at the very taking of it By Iacobs 2 Gen. 25. V. 33. requiring an oath of Esau for confirmation of the sale of his birthright a thing of greater generalitie yea consequence also then Esau could or did then consider may be gathered that an oath may be ministred though euery particular included therein be not specially rehearsed for this oath was approued and stood ratified The like generall league and couenant that was betwixt Abimelech and Abraham was also 3 Gen. 26. v. 29. 31. made sworne betwixt Isaac and the said Abimelech And albeit it be not directly set downe that the king exacted an oath of the Prophet Ieremy yet we 4 Ierem. 38. ver 14. 15. find a promise of the said Prophets then made after the kings charge was laid vpon him of answering truely what he should aske him yea without expressing any particular matters afore-hand what y e king would aske Yet may we not therefore charge the Prophet to haue done this without faith or foolishly vnaduisedly or without Iudgement And it is sure that a godly man ought to haue no lesse regard to performe what he promiseth to deale truely when by his Soueraigne Prince he is in like sort charged then if hee were to answere it vpon his Corporal oath So that we may conclude that it is not vnlawful or vngodly to take an oath that we wil performe some such matter whereof euery particular is not afore-hand or at the very time remembred vnto vs or then can bee called to minde or knowne by vs in distinct and speciall maner CHAP. XVI That after the partie hath answered vpon his oath it is neither vnusuall vnlawfull nor vngodly to seeke to conuince him by witnesses or other triall if he be supposed not to haue deliuered a plaine full trueth and somewhat also in approbation of Canonicall purgations with answere to the Treatisours obiections against them THeir next exception set out afore in this order to be spoken of which this sorte of men doe make vnto the maner of proceeding Ecclesiasticall being of a thing ensuing after the oath and examination is for that Iudges Ecclesiasticall doe not alwayes rest in that which is affirmed or denied vpon the parties oath but doe oft times proceede to a further enquirie by examination of witnesses vpon the poynts denied by the partie A man might iustly maruell what should mooue them thus to require all other men to thinke so well of their single oathes and especially in their owne cause as if they had some indignitie offered vnto them onely because their owne single oathes are not perfitly beleeued but that proofes by witnesses are after made to conuince them of that which is denied by them But for this they bring also some pretence as for the rest of their opinions out of the Scriptures It is said in the Epistle to 1 Heb. 6. v. 16. the Hebrewes that an oath for confirmation is amongst men an ende of all strife Whereupon they gather that whatsoeuer they shall deliuer vpon their oathes it ought to be finall peremptorie to conclude the cause of necessitie without any more adoe The vse of the oath which is in that place spoken of is especially and most properly appliable to two kindes of oathes The first is an oath Promissorie when for more assurance of the promise to bee kept the parties agree that it shall bee taken which thing is argued by the circumstance of the place as being