Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	authority_n	ecclesiastical_a	spiritual_a	1,567	5	6.4757	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30662	The case of Exeter-Colledge in the University of Oxford related and vindicated	Bury, Arthur, 1624-1713.; Washington, Joseph, d. 1694.	1691 (1691)	Wing B6190; ESTC R25321	65,452	81

Fellow to be restor'd awarded him Costs and wrote his Name in the Book And what tho his Proceedings in taking cognizance of Mr. Colmer's Cause were illegal and therefore protested against by the College Does a Visitor's stretching his Authority beyond its bounds make his Visitation therefore stand for nothing At that rate he may do as many Illegal Acts as he will and the Wisdom of the Founder in composing this Statute of Visitation consists only in tying him up from doing the College any good and looking to the due execution of their Statutes oftner than once in five years 2. The Commission by which Dr. Masters acted was granted by the Bishop by virtue of that Clause in the Statute that gives him leave to come or send his Deputy to Visit 3. The Bishop stiles himself in the Commission Jonathan Providentiâ Divinâ Exon Episcopus Collegii Exon in Academiâ Oxon Patronus Visitator So that he conceived himself entitled to make out such a Commission no otherwise than as he was Visitor And as such Mr. Colmer had appeal'd to him Ad nos Exon. Episcopum praedictum Collegii Exoniensis memorati Visitatorem legitimum ritè legitimè appellaverit 4. That the Commissary did visit may be inferred from the Notion of a Visitation which the Author himself has given us and we may presume it comes from Dr. Bouchier The Nature of a Visitation says he is a voluntary Enquiry into matters Criminal and Correction thereupon Now Dr. Masters's coming was voluntary he came at no request unless Mr. Colmer's Appeal must stand for a Request And he was to enquire into matters Criminal viz. Whether Mr. Colmer were guilty of Incontinence Ad cognoscendum discutiendum hujusmodi causam appellationis totumque negotium principale cum suis incidentibus emergentibus dependentibus annexis connexis quibuscunque Et ad audiendum hinc inde proposita proponenda ad probationes admittendum He was likewise to enquire Whether the Rector and Fellows had done Injustice in expelling him And that Correction was to follow upon this Enquiry is manifest For if the person that had been censured should have been found a Criminal the Punishment of Expulsion was to have been entirely inflicted For upon Mr. Colmer's Appeal the Bishop had granted an Inhibition by which it was intended he should remain in possession till the re-hearing of his Cause That Dr. Masters's coming was really a Visitation is so clear that the Author is forc'd to have recourse to a distinction betwixt a general and a particular Visitation and therefore calls that of the Bishop in person a solemn and general Visitation But all we desire is to have Dr. Masters his coming and acting as he did stand for a Visitation be it general or particular it is all one to us The Statutes make no difference they give way to no Visitation at all without requisition more than once in five years And that a Visitor's exerting any act of Jurisdiction within a College when he has no Authority but as Visitor has been accounted a Visitation may appear by what hapned in another College in Oxford not many years since where Dr. Morley late Bishop of Winchester was their Visitor and confin'd as the Bishops of Exeter are in our Case to a quinquennial Visitation That Bishop must be allowed to understand the extent of his Authority as well as another and equally concern'd to support it yet when a Member of the College that had been debarr'd of a Fellowship carried a complaint to him as Visitor he refused to take cognizance of it because five years were not elaps'd since his last Visitation And tho he did it afterward he was empower'd by a Royal Commission so that he was not sensible of any Jurisdiction that he had as Ordinary to receive the Appeal and conceiv'd his coming or sending to determine it by his own Authority as Visitor to be as much a Visitation as what the Author calls a solemn and general Visitation or at least concluded that the Statutes by which he was empowered to Visit but once in five years debarr'd him from taking any Judicial Cognizance of the Affairs of the College at other times But the Bishop of Exeter had power to receive and determine this Appeal as Ordinary This is a new Doctrine never heard of in the College before nor perhaps ever thought on till of late That he was apply'd to by Mr. Colmer as Visitor and granted Dr. Masters his Commission as such and that Dr. Masters was receiv'd by the College as the Visitor's Commissary has been observed already to which may be added that the word Ordinarius is not so much as in the Commission nay and that he acted as such by complying with the Statute de Visitatione in not adjourning his Commission beyond the three days limited by the Statute has been opened in the Narrative But when the Bishop was resolved upon Mr. Colmer's second Expulsion to come himself then was this Invention set on foot That the determining an Appeal was no Visitation because the Commission was restrain'd to the hearing and determining that Cause only and he might receive an Appeal as Ordinary This is the next fallacy that the Author goes upon and which has as little appearance of Law and Reason as any of the rest For how comes the Bishop of Exeter to have Episcopal Jurisdiction over the Members of Exeter College The Jurisdictions of Bishops are circumscrib'd within the limits of their several Dioceses which bounds are set to them either by positive Laws in being or by immemorial Custom which presupposeth a Law And they are not only bounded as to Place but with respect to the subject-matter of their Jurisdiction viz. the Causes that fall under their Cognizance Where an Act of Parliament or a Canon received and submitted to as a Law of this Nation does not empower a Bishop to hold Plea there he has no Authority and if a Bishop breaks this boundary and invades the conusance of Causes that are not what the Law calls Spiritual because submitted to the Jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts he incurs the Penalty of an old Statute that of Praemuniri The College being a College of Divines and the Visitor an Ecclesiastical Person has it seems with the help of some misapplied words in the Statutes Ordinarius Visitator and per censuras help'd the Doctor and the Author to dress up a Notion of Episcopal Jurisdiction in this Case whereas the Bishop's Authority is wholly conferr'd upon him by the Statutes and as Visitor only and the Visitation of a College by virtue of a Right derived from the Founder let who will be entitled to it is an act of Temporal Jurisdiction because the Founding of a College and giving them Laws for the good Government of the Society is a meer Temporal Act which a Temporal Lord is as capable of as a Spiritual and such Temporal Lord or other Lay person may equally exercise

c. to expel a Fellow that is legitimè convictus c. And this Oath says he is accessary to that Statute and therefore does not tie up the person expell'd from Appealing unless he be legitimè convictus Whether Mr. Colmer was legitimè convictus or no within the intention of the Founder we shall enquire by and by But this fallacy of the Oath being accessary as he calls it to this Statute must not escape without a detection When an Oath is imposed by a Law upon such as Act by Vertue thereof or are bound by it to put it in execution or to obey accordingly there the Oath is relative to the Law and the Obligation of it reaches no farther then the Law carries it But where an Oath is imposed by a separate distinct Law without any such relation there the Law that imposeth the Oath creates a duty of performing it in the genuine sense that the words import and in this case of ours in the plain litteral and Grammatical sense If there were a Statute of the Colledge concerning Appeals allowing them in some cases and restraining them in others and an Oath enjoyned to observe the Statutes or that Statute in particular there the Oath would be what the Author calls accessary But in this case there is no provision made by any clause in any Statute for Appeals at all but particular directions for the final ending of controversies and punishing offences within the Colledge and an Oath imposed to acquiesce in such determination To prove that one may appeal if not expell'd according to the appointment and direction of the Statute he quotes a clause out of the Probationer's Oath si contingat me quod absit juxta formam exigentiam statutorum a praedicto Collegio expelli seu amoveri c. Nunquam c. Whereas the question is upon the Fellow's Oath in which those words secundum formam exigentiam Statutorum do not occur Tho if they were there it would not alter the case much unless it was made appear that Mr. Colmer was not Statutably Expell'd He was Expell'd by the Persons that have authority by the Statutes to Expell and for a crime that by the Statutes deserves Expulsion so that the forma exigentia was at least so far observ'd And if it were screw'd farther and made to extend to the merits of the cause then it were impertinent to impose an Oath not to Appeal and at the same time to leave men at liberty to Appeal when ever they find or think themselves aggrieved His second Argument is that the Statute requires a legal conviction legitimè convictus c. If the Founder had required what we call a legal conviction he would I presume have used the word legalitèr or secundum legem terrae or the like legitimè not being a word that enforces a reference to the Common-Law If he had required a legal conviction he would not have directed the prosecution to be before persons that cannot in a strict acceptation of the word legally convict A legal conviction is upon Oath which the Rector and Senior-Fellows have no power to administer and some of the crimes mention'd in the Stat. de causis propter quas Scholares c. are such as a man cannot be legally convicted of but by Jury as willful man-slaughter manifest perjury c. and yet of these a Scholar may be legitimè convictus within the intention of the Statute Coram Rectore c. who cannot impannel a Jury So that the word legitimè convictus cannot in the nature of the thing import the strictness and formality of a legal conviction But says he the proofs were so far from making a legal conviction c. Proofs making a conviction is another of his Expressions that no body else would have used It is the Verdict of a Jury or the Sentence of a Judge that makes the conviction Proofs are but Evidence and a man may be legally convict without them as when a Jury finds a Verdict upon their own knowledge But according to this Gentleman's interpretation of the Statute the word legitimè convictus must signifie convicted upon such proof as would upon a Tryal at Law be sufficient legal proof to convict and every man that is not so convicted may appeal Which as it is a new-fangled Interpretatton and scarce deserves an answer So it is contrary to the common acceptation of words A legal conviction which he would have the words of the Statute Import may be tho the Evidence be deficient and the Jury corrupt as a judgement of a Court in a cause depending before them judicially is a legal judgment tho there be error in it Every Verdict in a criminal cause is legale judicium parium and is so true in the eye of the Law that the party convicted has no remedy tho he be wronged for there lies no Attaint in criminal matters So the Sentence of the Rector and Fellows in Mr. Colmer's case was legitima convictio because they had conusance of his cause and as the Law of the Realm cuts off Appeals from the Verdict of a Jury in criminal causes so do the Statutes of the Colledge bar all Appeals from such a Sentence Words are to be understood secundum subjectam materiam the word proof generally speaking is understood of proof by Jury which is the Common-Law trial but how many Cases have we in our Books in which that word is otherwise taken because determin'd so by the subject matter Legitimè convictus in the Statutes of a Colledge must of necessity be understood of such a Conviction as the Statutes direct But the Statutes neither do require nor can prescribe what we call a Legal Conviction because they cannot invest the Rector c. with authority to hold a Court and administer Justice according to Law But for a full and clear answer if what has been said do not suffice let us examine how the word Legitimè is apply'd in other Statutes and hear the Founder explaining himself In the Statute de Elect. Rector ejus juramento we find the word Legitimè twice used 1. Where all Scholars in nominationibus electionibus admissionibus aliisve negotiis utilitatem Collegii concernentibus c. interesse habentes ac rite legitimè secundum consuetudinem vocati requisiti and then refusing to give their Votes for the Election of a new Rector are subjected to a penalty Here the word legitimè is explained by per consuetudinem the custom of the Colledge 2 dly Before they proceed to Election the Statute must be read per Subrectorem aut eo absente vel legitimè impedito per Scholarem maximê Seniorem c. here legitimè impediri imports a reasonable cause of absence 3 dly In the Statute de sedendo ad mensam Battellarii nec in aulâ nec alibi intrà Collegium absque causa legitima approbata alium quam Latinum aut Grecum exercitent sermonem sub paenâ pro