LICENS'D By COMMAND this 23d of July 1688. JA. VERNON THE KING'S Visitatorial Power ASSERTED BEING An Impartial Relation of the late Visitation of St. Mary Magdalen College in Oxford As likewise an Historical Account of several Visitations of the Universities and particular Colleges Together with some necessary Remarks upon the Kings Authority in Ecclesiastical Causes according to the Laws and usages of this Realm By NATHANIEL JOHNSTON Doctor in Physic Fellow of His Majesties College of Physicians in London Pereunte Obsequio etiam Imperium Intercidit Tacitus 1 Histor LONDON Printed by Henry Hills Printer to the King 's Most Excellent Majesty for His Houshold and Chappel And are sold at his Printing-house on the Ditch-side in Black-Fryers 1688. TO THE Judicious Reader AS soon as His Majesty had been pleased to lay His Commands upon me to Collect materials for this Subject I could not but reflect that it was to Treat of a matter that I knew not any had Writ upon before and of such a largeness that it takes in not only the Case of Magdalen College but regards all other Corporations and Societies of that Constitution and spreads it self into some branches of the Prerogative Royal Wherefore the nature of the Thing requires a Treatise of me not altogether unsuitable to the Dignity of the persons concerned viz. The King and the Universities which would induce persons of all Ranks to peruse it who desire satisfaction in a matter of such importance both to the Prince and Subject This suggested to me a necessity of enquiring into Records of preceding ages and to render the Work at least a Collection of various instances in several Cases of Visitations Therefore finding no compleat History of any Visitation of our Universities except that of the long Parliament I judged it necessary to give an Impartial account of the proceedings from the Kings Mandate for Mr. Farmer to the close of the Visitations by the Lords Commissioners whereby this and after ages might have an Authentic Precedent if any occasion should happen of this kind and that people concerned might know their Boundaries and in this part I followed the Registers Original Papers Authentic Copies of Letters and Orders or the Diaries accounts of such as were present and actors in the disquisition and in this particular I have used as much diligence as I could not to be imposed upon and had finished most of this before the Oxford Relation was Printed and wherein I differ from that I have done it upon the best Intelligence I could obtain After the finishing of this I judged it not improper before I entred upon Answering the Objections I found urged by the Vice-President and Fellows of St. Mary Magdalen College to clear the Kings Prerogative over the Universities in making and Abrogating their Statutes or dispensing with them and placing or dis placing of their Members which obliged me to consider the matter not only in General but also to descend to many particulars and shew who by the Kings Authority or sufferance have exercised the like Authority In which I have endeavored to follow the most approved Authors and surest Records I have the rather enlarged upon this head that I might afford variety of Cases whereby the distinct claims of Right of Visitation might be Illustrated and this Tract might be a Repertory whereby upon emergences the Original Records might be enquired after If some may judge me too tedious I desire them to consider that it was not enough to clear the point of St. Mary Magdalen College but likewise to discover in what other Cases the Kings of England had exerted their Prerogatives The Contemplation of this led me to touch tho' with a trembling hand the Regalia of our Kings and look into the Laws and usages of former times and in what sort the Soveraignty and Supremacy of our Kings in matters of Ecclesiastical cognizance are declared by the Laws in being In which part I treat of the Kings Authority abstractedly from Doctrinal Religion This I the rather have done that the Subjects of all conditions may observe how great the Authority and Prerogative of the King is in dispensing with University and College Statutes since by the plain and direct Laws that Assert the Kings Right in opposition to all Foreign powers his Supremacy is so Established in Ecclesiastical matters and causes that it is applicable to other purposes than at the first view may appear obvious which I leave to the discussion of those better versed in the Laws than I shall ever presume to be Nevertheless I hope in the treating of this subject it will be owned that I have Introduced no Novelty but Copy'd what is found in History or the public Records and brought to light a Prerogative inseparable from the Royal State of our Kings which some for want of consulting the same have not so well discerned It is to caution the Heads and Fellows of our most eminent Universities not to contend with their Sovereign that I have so copiously produced Instances of the practice of former times and have so largely treated of them before and since the Reformation It was for this end solely and not in the least to erect Trophies for any Victory over the unfortunate that I have pointed out these Sea-marks that others may avoid dashing themselves against the Rock upon which the British Monarchy is so firmly placed that no Tempests of open Rebellion or the highest swelling Seas much less any single Billow can be able to shake It is far from my Intention in this to enter into any dispute about the limits of Ecclesiastical or Secular power It is sufficient that I shew it in some particulars of known practice without examining the grounds any more than as declared by the positive Laws or practice of the respective Sovereigns I know some may look upon this as a matter treated of ex superabundanti yet I thought my self obliged so far to enter into a dissertation upon it as I might thereby make it appear that by the extensiveness of the Sovereignty Universities much more private Colleges both which the Law accounts among the Creatures of the Crown must own a subjection of themselves and their private Statutes to the King as Supreme Neither hath it been any desire to render the Kings Prerogative greater than the Laws and usages of our Kings do manifest that I have shewn how it hath been insisted upon even against some exemptions of the Apostolic See or to Establish any Paradox but only to Assert the just Rights of the Crown at least according to my Reading and do with all deference submit what I have composed to the Judgment of the Learned in our Laws But to leave this I desire the Candid Reader will peruse the Contents of the Book in the following Pages before he enter upon the whole whereby he may see the connexion and sequences of the matter and he must not expect that those Contents are exactly according to the
they could or did say by way of Objection and given such Answers to them as the matter required and shall take notice of the late Treatise called A Relation of the Proceedings c. Containing only matters of Fact published on purpose to make the generality of the people favor the Ejected Whereas I hope to make it appear that the King might have proceeded in a summary way and if he had pleased inflicted severer punishments upon them than the Commissioners have done and tho' at some times there seems to be a dutiful behavior in the Fellows and expressions that were agreeable to the condition of humble Subjects and a plea of tenderness of Conscience in not daring to break their Oaths yet in effect whenever they were put upon a pinch whether they would yield to the King's Authority and acknowledge themselves to have acted contrary to their Duties they never would own they had been in the wrong which was the true cause why those that refused to subscribe the submission that was at last proposed to them were so Expelled and however some might at first Interpose for them as the Bishop of Winchester did in the following Letter yet in the progress of this Discourse I shall make it clear that in former times greater punishments than that of Expulsion even to Imprisonments have been Inflicted upon such as have shewed less obstinacy and contempt of the Authority of their Sovereign I now proceed to the Bishop of Winchesters Letter to my Lord President upon the first noise of the Mandate §. 3. The Bishop of Winchesters Letter to my Lord President My Honored Lord. THe Obligation I have upon me as Visitor of St. Mary Magdalen College Oxon occasions this Address For I am informed that great endeavors are used with his Majesty to Recommend one Mr. Farmer who is not at present nor ever was Fellow of that College to be President of it which is directly contrary to the Statutes of the Founder as I am confident some who promote Mr. Farmer 's Interest cannot be Ignorant of And were there not many persons now actually Fellows and several who have formally been in particular the Bishop of Man and Dr. Jessop very Eminent for their Learning and Loyalty and every way qualified according to the Statutes I should not press your Lordship to lay the concern of the College which hath upon all occasions expressed it's Zeal and forwardness in defence of the Crown and as I particularly know in the great affair of the Succession before his Majesty who I hope will leave them to the Rules of their Statutes which have (a) (a) The contrary to this will be made out in Ancient and late times by several instances of this College and others hitherto excepting in the times of Rebellion been constantly observed and which will be the highest satisfaction to that truly Loyal University and promote his Majesties service which has always been the endeavor of Farnham Castle April 8th 1687. To the Right Honorable the Earl of Sunderland President of the Council and One of his Majesties Principal Secretaries of State. These Your Lordships most humble Servant P. Winchester I now shall proceed to give an account what the Vice-President and Fellows did and begin with their Petition to the King upon their notice of the Kings Mandate §. 4. To the King 's Most Excellent Majesty The Petition of the Vice-President and Fellows of St. Mary Magdalen's College in Oxford Most Humbly Sheweth VVE have been Credibly Informed that Mr. Anthony Farmer who was never of our Foundation has obtained your Majesties Recommendation to be President of this your Majesties College in the Room of Dr. Henry Clark lately Deceased We do therefore with all Submission as becomes your most Dutiful and Loyal Subjects most humbly represent to your Sacred Majesty that the said Mr. Anthony Farmer is a person in several respects uncapable of that Character according to our Founders Statutes and do most earnestly beseech your Majesty as your Majesty shall judge fittest in your most Princely Wisdom either to leave us to the discharge of our Duty and Consciences according to your Majesties late Most Gracious * Not Toleration as the Oxford relation hath it Declaration and our Founders Statutes or to Recommend such a person who may be more serviceable to your Majesty and this your Majesties College And Your Majesties Petitioners shall ever Pray c. Charles Aldworth V. P. Henry Fairfax S. T. D. Alex. Pudsey S. T. D. Tho. Smith D. D. John Smith D. D. Tho. Bayley D. D. Tho. Stafford L. L. D. Main Hammond S. T. D. Rich. Strickland M. A. Henry Dobson M. A. James Bayley M. A. John Davys M. A. Jas Thompson M. A. Francis Bagshaw M. A. James Fayrer M. A. Joseph Harwar M. A. Tho. Ludford M. A. Tho. Goodwin M. A. Rob. Hyde M. A. Edw. Yerbury M. A. Rob. Holt M. A. Stephen Weelkes M. A. §. 5. THe foresaid Petition is Endorsed as Dated the 10th of April 1687. And delivered to my Lord President by Dr. Thomas Smith and Captain Bagshaw I find among the other papers delivered me from the Register one from Dr. Thomas Smith read and published at a Meeting of the Fellows at his Return from presenting the foresaid Petition In these words Gentlemen IT is my opinion for I will not pretend to call it by any other Name much lefs by that of advice leaving every one here present to the liberty of his own judgment that his Majesty not having thought fit upon our late Application to him to Revoke his Royal Mandate nor as we pray in the close of the Petition to leave us to our own choice according to the direction of our Founders Statutes nor to recommend such a person as may be more serviceable to his Majesty and to the College We most humbly Petition the King again and represent the several respects referred to in our Petition which render Mr. Farmer incapable of being Elected and admitted President of the College This Method and procedure being most prudent and dutiful and fit to be entered upon immediatly The King having interposed his Royal pleasure and Authority which if it had not been done I readily acknowledge that we not only might but ought to proceed to the Election of a President in that very Instant according to the express Letter of the Statute in every particular But for this let every one concerned be his own Casuist These are my private Thoughts and upon mature deliberation I conceive that I should be very defective in my Duty to the King and my Respect to you whatever Mis-interpretation some possibly may frame of it If I had not made you acquainted with them at this meeting St. Mary Magdalen College April the 14th 1687. Tho. Smith D. D. §. 6. I Insert this for the honor of this Gentleman who is known by his Learned Writings which give account of his Travels to the Port and through part of Greece
and in defence of the Doctrin of the Church of England As also to let all know how happy it had been if the Fellows had hearkned to his honest sober and faithful advice which was assented to by Dr. Aldworth Dr. Fairfax and Dr. Pudsey at their private Conference before proceeding to Election tho' they after changed their minds ☞ It hath been the practice in former times and according to the Canon Laws that when any Superior enjoyned any matter upon Inferiors which they judged to be prejudicial to their Rights It was their Duty rescribere to Write to the Prince or other Superior to shew him wherein by such Mandate their Rights were invaded or what other inconveniences might ensue and not to proceed forthwith to do that which was forbid especially not to proceed to Election as here they did when the King had after their Petition presented to him expressed himself that he would be obeyed In Duty and Obedience therefore they should have stayed their Election and represented their Case more particularly and it is most certain that the neglect of this and the contempt of the Kings Authority were the Original causes of all that hath befallen them but I shall leave this and proceed in the matters of Fact. §. 7. My Lord President to the Bishop of Winchester Whitehall April the 16th 1687. My Lord I Have received your Lordships Letter of the 8th Instant with an Address or Petition inclosed in it from St. Mary Magdalen College in Oxford which I laid before the King who had before granted his Mandate in behalf of Mr. Farmer to be Elected and Admitted President of that College and being since informed that notwithstanding the same they have made Choice of Mr. Hough His Majesty Commands me to acquaint your Lordship that his pleasure is you should not Admit Mr. Hough to be President till further Order from him Lord Bishop of Winchester I am MY LORD Your Lordships most humble Servant Sunderland P. This being sent to the Bishop he returned this following Answer the next Day My Honorable Lord THis Morning I received yours of the 16th Bishop of Winchesters Answer by the hands of Mr. Smith one of His Majesties Messengers In which your Lordship signifies to me His Majesties pleasure not to Admit Mr. Hough to be President of St. Mary Magdalen College Oxon until further Order from him But Mr. Hough being Yesterday Morning presented to me by some of the Fellows of the College as Statutably Elected I did according to the Trust reposed in me by the Founder after he had taken the Oath enjoyned by the Statute Admit him Presdent and am certain when the Statutes of the College are laid before His Majesty he will find that I have not violated my Duty in performance of which I never was nor ever shall be remiss as I desire you to assure him from Farnham Castle April the 17th 1687. Your most humble Servant P. Winchester §. 8. By the Statutes there are five days allowed for the Bishop of Winchester's confirmation ☞ By this it appears how sedulous the new Elected President and the Fellows were to have the Election confirmed presuming that this being done the President would have a Legal Right and could not be removed but by course of Common Law But I hope to shew hereafter that the practice of the Kings of England and of the Visitors appointed either by the Kings or the Popes the latter of whose power our present Laws give his Majesty hath been to dispense with Statutes and to place and displace for disobedience Heads of Colleges and Fellows by the significaton of their Royal pleasure or to Impower Visitors by Commission to do the same and of this it cannot be conceived that the Members of the College could be Ignorant but that they rather were animated to lay hold of this opportunity to see if they could dispute the Kings Authority or which is of equal concern to many render the King's Actions disobliging whereby they might gain the point of raising iealousie and male-contentedness in peoples minds with which designs I will not charge all the Members of the Society But it is too apparent that those who underhand encourged them to persist in their opposition designed some such matter I now pass to their Application to his Grace the Duke of Ormond their Chancellor and the Representing their Case in the best dress they could and shall only note at present that these were like to have little effect since they were the justifyings of their actions upon such slender grounds as in the sequel will be made appear and carried no tokens of relenting or repentance for their by-past disobedience so that the King could not look upon them as any Acts of theirs that might induce him to a Clemency or Pardon where they would not own their failor of duty but were a denial of his Sovereign and Supreme Authority of dispensing and being obeyed contrary to the known Laws and practice of his Royal Predecssors as I shall make clear when I come to Answer their Objections and shew the obligation to their Oaths of owning the Kings Supremacy and the Sovereign Jurisdiction the King hath to alter and make null their Statutes that any ways Impugn his Prerogative over such Societies and Corporations which owe their Foundation and subsistence to the Royal pleasure and may be proceeded against when the King pleaseth by a more sever method of Quo Warrante whereby they may be totally suppressed Whereas the King in great Clemency proceeded only by way of Visitation which is a most undoubted Prerogative of the King that must ever be owned by those who question the extent of the Ecclesiastical Commission I now proceed to the Address the Society made to his Grace the Duke of Ormond as followeth §. 9. The President and Fellows of St. Mary Magdalens College Oxon to the Duke of Ormond then Chancellor May it please your Grace VVE the President and Fellows of St. Mary Magdalens College in Oxford sensible of the Honor and Benefit we enjoy under your Graces Patronage and how much it Imports us to have recourse to your Advice in all those difficulties wherewith we are prest having as we fear displeased His Majesty in our late Election of a President do humbly beg leave to represent to your Grace a true State of our Case and hope you will please to Inform the King how uncapable we were of obeying his Commands His Majesty was pleased upon the Death of Dr. Henry Clark President of this College to Command us by his Letter to Elect and Admit Mr. Anthony Farmer into that Office a person utterly uncapable of it by our Statutes as we are ready to make appear in many particulars And since we have all taken a positive Oath of obedience to them and that Exclusive of all Dispensations whatsoever We humbly conceive we could not obey that Command in favor of Mr. Farmer unless he had brought those Qualifications with him
others quâ Legate as appears in the Decretals where (d) De Officio Legati cap. 1. Alexander the Third resolves that the Arch-Bishop could not hear Jure Metropolitico matters Episcopal that came not to him per Appellationem that is by a Legal way but Jure Legationis he might such as were brought unto him only per quaerimoniam §. 7. The Style of Legates a Latare when first used ☞ The Name of Legatus a Latere is first found in our Historians to be given to Johannes (e) Hoveden Anno 1189.177 a. 10. Anagninus Cardinalis Anno 1189 and altho' the power of these Legates was great yet it is manifest that what they did was only so far as they had the Kings permission so that in some respects it may be said whatever they did in Visitations and other matters was by the Kings Authority and sufferance for which purpose we have that Memorable Letter (a) Vita Hen. Chichelsey ab Ant. Duck Edit 1617. p. 79. from Henry Chichelsey to King Henry the Fifth which I shall give in the words it was Writ in Be Inspection of Laws and Chronicles The Legatines power by our Kings permission was exercised in most Cases was there no Legate a Latere sent into no Lond and especially into your Reagm of Yngland witoute great and notable cause And that when thei came after thei had done her Legacie abiden but litul wyle not over a yer c. And yet evir that was tretyd with or he cam into the Lond whon he should have exercise of his power and how mych shold be put in Execution an a venture after he had bee reseyved he whold have used it too largely to great oppression of your peple A further proof that Legates here could do nothing contrary to the Laws and Customs of the Land appears in this particular I shall now recite ☞ Henry Beaufort the Rich Bishop of Winchester The first Cardinal that was a Privy Councellor who was Cardinal of St. Eusebius Son of John a Gaunt and so of the Kings Blood and was employed by Martin the Fifth as General against the Bohemians and to that end Erected his Cross Anno 1429. 8 H. 6. was sent Legate into England and was made one of the Kings Privy Council and is noted to be the first that of that Order was so Admitted Yet we find that he was to (b) Râ—t parlâ—â— 8 H. 6. N. 17. His protestation to absent himself when matters of difference betwixt the King and Pope were debnted make a protestation that as often as any matter cause or business did concern the King his Kingdom or Dominions on the one part and the Apostolic See on the other which was to be Communed and Treated of in the Kings Council the Cardinal should absent himself and no ways be present at the Communication of the same It further appears how Legates Executed by the Kings Allowance or Connivance the powers given them by the Pope because if they did otherwise no person being the Kings Subject was so great but he was forced to gain his pardon for the Offence if he Committed any Hence we find that even this (a) Rot. Parl. 10 H. 6. N. 16. He Petitions for pardon if he had done any thing against the Laws being the Kings Subject great Cardinal caused a Petition to be Exhibited in Parliament That he the said Cardinal nor none other should be pursued vexed impleaded or grieved by the King his Heirs or Successors nor by any other person for cause of any provision or offence or Misprision done by the said Cardinal against any Statute of provisions or per cause of any Exemption Receipt acceptation admission or execution of any Bulls Papal to him in any manner By all this I hope the Ingenuous Reader will sind The Inference hence that what the Popes Legats did in Visitation or otherwise was by the Kings superadded Authority that what Visitations were made of the University of Oxford by the Popes Legats whereof I shall give several Instances in the sollowing Section doth no ways Infer that thereby the Kings power of Visiting was exauctorated but that whatever they did was in subordination to the Kings pleasure or as allowed by his Laws §. 8. Concerning the Arch-Bishop or Bishops Visitations The other Visitors of the University were either the Arch-Bishops of Canterbury as Metropolitans or the Bishops of Lincoln as Dioecesans or the Local Visitors I shall now endeavor to prove that whatever they did in Visitation as well as other External Regiment was by order allowance or connivance of the Kings of England so that though I shall here after produce their Visitations yet it will appear that the Kings Supreme Authority was thereby no ways prejudiced I need not here enter into the claims our Ancient Kings made to the Investitures of Bishops having touched it before nor how for their Baronies Homage is required of them It is most manifest that our Kings have Interposed their Authority even in allowing or dis-allowing of their persons This is clear by the Speech of Wolstan (a) Ailred de Miraculis Edw. Col. 406.37 Here we may note that the Alteration was by agreement at the Confessors Tomb Bishops allowed by the King. that he had compelled him to take the Pastoral Staff. So King Edward the Third wrote to Pope Clement the Sixth that his Progenitors long since upon Vacancies by their Kingly Right conferred the Cathedral Churches freely on fit persons and afterwards at the Instance of the See of Rome under certain Forms and Conditions granted that Elections should be in the said Churches by their Chapters §. 9. I need not insist upon the Kings of England seizing the Temporalities of Bishops into their hands and so Suspending them a Beneficio for those who will take the pains to look into Mr. Pryns Historical Collections will find many Instances thereof ☞ The Statutes of Provisions the complaints against the Popes Provisions in Mat. (b) Anno 1240. fol. 532.43 fol. 549.18.22 Anno 1246. fol. 669.9 Paris and the Parliaments of King Edward the Third and Richard the Second clear this point And when Anno 1349. the Pope wrote to the King that he would not hinder or permit these to be hindered to receive the Benefices who were by the Court of Rome by Bulls promoted The King Answered that he well would accept those Clerks so provided which were of good condition and were worthy of Promotion but others he would not If then the very admitting the persons to the Dignity and Office were in the Kings power as by the Conge d'eslire is well known it cannot be doubted but that the Exercise of their Government I speak not here of their Sacerdotal Function was according to the Kings Laws §. 10. How far the Canons were allowed in England We may therefore now consider how far the Ecclesiastical Canons were allowed by our Kings and how called his Laws ☞
Ralph de Diceto (c) An. 1175. Col. 597.21 observes that our Kings did in such sort follow the Ecclesiastical Canons as they had a care to Conserve their own Rights hence it is that in the Saxon Laws we find the Kings extending their Commands to the enjoyning of those things in Ecclesiastical matters which by Canons of Councils were agreed to as Sir Roger (a) Cap. 5. N. 6. Twisden hath summed up in Ten particulars ☞ In one of which King Alfred (b) L. L. Aluredi C. 8. pa. 25. Jourval c. 9. Coll. 823. The Decrees of such Councils must be well obeyed when Kings were present reserves to himself the liberty of dispensing event with the Marriage of Nuns In another it appears that the Kings caused the Clergy of their Kingdom to meet in Council and sometimes presided themselves in them tho' the Popes Legat were present as may be seen in Sir Henry Spelmans Councils Page 292.293.189 pasim Ibid. vita Lanfranci C. 6. Col. 1. pa. 7. Florent Wigorn. 1070. p. 434. ☞ It is likewise certain that before (c) Twisden Vindica c. 5. N. 7. p. 99. William the Conquerors time the English Bishops had no Ordinary Courts distinguished from the Lay but both Secular and Ecclesiastical Magistrates sat and Judged together but he finding these proceedings (d) Non bene neque secundum Sanctorum Canonum praeceta not good nor according to the precept of the Holy Canons did by his Charter make a distinction of the Courts that such as were Convented by the Bishop should not Answer according (e) Non secundum hundred sed secundum Canones Episcopales Leges c. to the Hundred but according to the Canons and Episcopal Laws So that in this appears the Foundation of the Tryals in Ecclesiastical Courts according to the Ecclesiastical Laws which yet by our Lawyers are called the Kings Laws §. 11. The Kings Secular Courts determined what matters were to be tryed in Ecclesiastical Courts And it further appears that in Controversies betwixt parties where it hath been disputable whether the Tryal of them appertained to the Kings Ecclesiastical or Secular Courts The Kings Secular Courts have ever been Judges to which Court the cause did belong therefore Bracton (f) Lib. 5. de exceptionib cap. 15. sect 3. fol. 412. a. saith Judex Ecclesiasticus cum prohibitionem a Rege susceperit supersedere debet in omni casu saltem donec constiterit in Curia Regis ad quam pertineat Jurisdictio quia si Judex Ecclesiasticus aestimare possit an sua essec Jurisdictio in omni casu indifferenter procederet non obstunte Regiâ prohibitione Which is agreeable to what we find King William the First did in a Council at Illibon in Normandy Anno 1080. when by the advice of both the States Ecclesiastic and Secular he did settle many particulars to belong to the Cognizance of the Spiritual Judges and concludes that if any thing were further claimed by them they should not enter upon it (a) Donec in Curia Regis monstrent quod Episcopi inde habere debeant till they had shewed in the Court of the King that the Bishops thereupon ought to have it belong to them Whoever desires to be satisfied in the Jurisdiction of the Kings of England in Ecclesiastical matters may sind an Abridgment of them in Sir Roger Twisden (b) Vindicat. c. 5. N. 17. enforced with sufficient Testimonies out of our most Authentic Historians in Eighteen particulars §. 12. The application of these Historical Collections ☞ Upon the whole matter we may conclude that what was done by Archiepiscopal or Episcopal Visitation of the University was by the Kings Authority so that tho' we find not that by Immediate Commission the Kings of England Visited before King Henry the Eighth's time yet we have sufficient grounds to Judge that whatever was done was by the Kings power and Authority Therefore Sir Edward (c) Cawdryes Case 5 Reports p. 8. b. How the Temporal and Ecclesiastical Courts were subordinate to the King according to the Opinion of our Modern Lawyers Cooke lays it down for a Rule that as in Temporal Causes the King by the Mouth of the Judges in his Courts of Justice doth Judge and determin the same by the Temporal Laws of England so in Causes Ecclesiastical and Spiritual by his Ecclesiastical Judges according to the Ecclesiastical Laws of the Realm and that so many of the Ecclesiastical Laws as were proved approved and allowed here by and with General Consent are aptly and rightly called the Kings Ecclesiastical Laws of England and whosoever denyeth this denyeth the King to have full and plenary power to deliver Justice in all Cases to all his Subjects without which he were not a compleat Monarch or head of the whole and entire Body of the Realm according to the words of the Statute (d) Stat. 24 H. 8. c. 12. The King the Fountain of Justice that the Kingly Head of this Body Politic is Instituted and furnished with plenary whole and intire Power Preheminence Authority Prerogative and Jurisidiction to render and yield Justice and final determination to all manner of Folke Resiants or Subjects within the Realm in all causes matters debates and contentions happening to occur insurge or begin within the limits thereof c. §. 13. In what particulars our Kings claimed not Ecclesiastical Administration It must be likewise considered that whatever power our Kings Exercised in Ecclesiastical Affairs they never claimed any in those things the School men call Ordinis as the Administration of Sacraments Celebrating Divine Offices c. but in that which is called Jurisdictionis and that being either Internal where the Divine by persuasion wholsom Instructions Ghostly Counsel and the like convinceth the Conscience This is Sir Roger Twisdens observation whereby it is obedient or External where the Church in Foro exteriori compels the Christians obedience As to the first and second none of our Kings either before or since the Reformation took upon them at all to medle either by assuming to themselves a power of Preaching Teaching Binding or loosing in foro Animae Administring the Holy Sacraments Conferring Orders c. But they took upon them the Ordering of such things as were of outward Policy of the Church as what Men were fit to Exercise them and what subjection the Subjects should yield to Decrees and Constitutions made abroad and what Doctrins were publicly to be Taught which might conduce to the quiet Peace and Tranquility of the Subject and their living in Piety and Vertue §. 14. How the Popes obtained greater powers after the Canon Laws were owned here It is further to be noted that the Popes power was enlarged after the Canon Law was received more than it had been before but if we believe Walsingham (a) Walsingham ad Ann. 1297. it was not Read in our Universities publicly till the 25th of Edward the First
prerogative in punishing Offenders in such manner as it was done by his Commissioners §. 3. The Bishop of Lincoln the Ordinary Visitor before Oxford was made a Bishops I now proceed to shew See by King Hen. 8. that the Bishop of Lincoln was the Ordinary Visitor In the Visitation by the Bishop of Tusculum it appears that the Legate Impowered the Bishop of Lincoln or his Arch-Deacon or the Chancellor or others the Bishops Deputies to see to the performance of what he had Decreed By which some show of Jurisdiction was left to him who was the Dioecesan and by the Canons of the Church had the Visitation in Ordinary of all under his Jurisdiction which by succeeding Councils I shall shew * Cap. 4. Sect. 4. §. 10. hereafter was his Right and declared such even without Appeals from him or any Exemption and that they executed it appears by many examples in the Bishop of Lincolns Register yet by the Instances following we find it was often disputed especially if they attempted to do any Exorbitant Act. Robert Grosthead Bishop of Lincoln (a) Wood Antiq. lib. 1. fol. 106. a singular Patron of the University being Dead Henry Lexinton Succeeded who not being content with the usual power exercised by his Predecessors designed to enlarge his Jurisdiction so that the University was forced to defend it self by shewing the Bull of Pope Innocent the Fourth granted to them a little before his Death Dated at Avignion (b) Wood Antiq. A. fol. 48. b. and in Harus de Privilegiis fol. 4. a. the 5th Kalend of October the 12th of his Pontificate wherein he Confirms and Defends their Liberties and Immunities granted top them by Bishops Kings Noble-men and others A 2d was (c) A. D. 24. a. granted by the said Pope directed to the Bishops of London and Salisbury for the Conservation of the persons Liberties and Immunities of the University A 3d. Dated 11th November the same (d) Farus de privil 4. A. D. 23. b. Year Confirming their Immunities Liberties and Customs And a 4th Dated (e) F. F. 75. the same day and place in Confirmation of their Statutes and this was Confirmed after by the Bull of Sixtus the Fourth §. 4. The Bishop of Lincolns complaint to the Pope against the disobedience of the University But it seems that the Bishop of Lincoln Complained to Alexander the Fourth Successor to Innocent that the Clerks in the Castle of Oxford refused to obey the Authority his Predecessors had Enjoyed upon which the Pope by his Bull Dated * Lib. Taxation per Dominum Norwych c. Bulla 14. The Pope confirmes the Bishops claim at Naples the 5th of the Kalends of February 1 o. Pontificatus Decreed that the Bishop might Exercise his Authority notwithstanding any Letters to the contrary heretofore obtained from the Apostolic See or to be obtained unless full mention of the present Bull was Inserted And it (a) Chron. Osnil sub An. 1258. The Bishop Visits appears Anno 1258. 42 H. 3. That this Bishop Lexinton made an Inquisition into the Rights of the University and by his Delegates examined in the Chappel of the Infirmaries the Instruments and Charters of their Possessions and Rights appertaining to the Church of Osney concerning the Church of St. Greg. Situated in the Castle of Oxford This Bishop Lexinton persisted in this Claim of Jurisdiction Bishop of Lincoln changeth the Lectures and Statutes and complaint of it is made to the King. so that on the 17th of the Ides of March about Nine Masters of Arts came to St. Albans where they made their complaint before the King in the Chappel of St. Oswin against the Bishop of Lincoln (b) Venerunt ad St. Alban quidum Magistri Oxoniae Circiter 9 Artistae qui querula voce coram Rege Reposuerunt querimoniam de Episcopo Lincolniensi qui contra Statuta Universitatis Antiqua Approbata nitebatur Libertates Scholarium enervare Statutus est dies responsionis ad instans Magnum Parliamentum Mat. Paris ad An. 1257. that he endeavored to enervate the Liberties of the Scholars against the Ancient and approved Statutes of the University and a Day for Answering was appointed at the Great parliament that the Reasons of both Parties being heard they might be appeased It appears not how the matter was determined yet it is manifest that they had resort to the Kings Authority in the matter and his referring it to the Parliament is no more then as in Arduous Causes the Kings refering a matter to his Supreme Court of Judicature the House of Lords which give the Kings Judgment and not as Mr. Pryn mistakingly or willfully applys all such things to the Sovereign power of the two Houses Tho' the King Anno 1257.41 H. 3. composed the business yet the Bishop kept his Official there that * Annales Me. Bustonenses Ms when any Statutes were made by the Chancellor and University he might see that the Bishops Authority was not Infringed as we find that David Arch-Deacon of Derby Canon of Lincoln did that Year the 4th of the Nones of June enter his Protest that they should do nothing in prejudice of the Bishop or his Successor ☞ Here we cannot but observe that the Statutes are changed by a Visitor and how the Members of the University finding themselves aggrieved by their Ordinary Visitor have recourse to the King as their Supreme Judge and Visitor Yet the Bishop of Lincoln as Diocesan Insists on his Privilege to see that no Statutes were made without his Approbation all which power our Kings now have §. 5. The Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Visits The first Visitation I find of the University by the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury was (a) Wood Antiq. Oxon. lib. 1. fol. 205. In hac Visitatione Academias ipsas Metropolitica Authoritate ingressus est M. Parker Antiq. Eccleae Brit. Fol. 198. Anno 1278. 6 E. ◠At which time Stephen Bishop of Paris Visited that University But this seems designed principally to Refute and Condemn some Errors crept into the Schools which in Theology philosophy and Logic he disputed against and with the consent of the Masters Regents and non Regents he Exploded and Condemned with this Censure viz. That if he were a Master of Art that Defended them he he should be Degraded and if a Bachelor of Art should be uncapable of any other Degree The Arch-Bishop appoints Statutes to Degrade and Incapacitate Students from taking Degrees and should be Expelled From hence we may find some Footsteps of a Visitors Incapacitating some besides Degrading and Expelling §. 6. Anno 1281. 9 E. 1. The Chancellor of the University having assumed some Ecclesiastical * Harus de privil Oxon. fol. 13. b. Oliver Sutton Bishop of Lincoln Questions the Chancellors Authority Rights and used to take Cognizance of the faults of Clerks that belonged to the Court Christian Oliver Sutton being made Bishop of Lincoln exacted an
the many Authorities might be brought to prove this more particularly pa. 129. to 137. here the curious may find several Collected by the Author of the Church of England's Behavior under a Roman Catholic King to which may be added the Act declaring the making and Consecrating of the Arch-Bishops and Bishops of this Realm to be good lawful and perfect The ground of which Statute was some Mens questioning whether the same were duly and orderly done according to Law or not The Act lays this for a Foundation Some Paragraphs in the Act 8 Eliz. c. 1. explained 26 H. 8.1 That King Henry the 8th was justly and rightly re-cognized and acknowledged to have the Supreme Power Jurisdiction Order Rule and Authority over all the Estate Ecclesiastical of the Realm and after Recites how the Kings and Queens of this Realm had full power and Authority by Letters Patents c. from time to time to Assign Name and Authorize such person or persons as they shall think meet and convenient to excercise use occupy and execute c. all manner of Jurisdictions Privileges Preheminences and Authorities in any wise touching or concerning Spiritual or Ecclesiastical power or Jurisdiction within this Realm c. Then follows That the Queen being lawfully Invested in the Imperial Crown of this Realm c. and having in her Majesties Order and disposition all the said Jurisdictions Powers and Authorities over the State Ecclesiastical and Temporal The Queens power in matters Ecclesiastical Supreme and absolute c. hath by her Supreme Authority at divers times sithence the beginning of her Reign caus'd divers and sundry grave and well Learned Men to be duly Elected Made and Consecrated Arch-Bishops and Bishops c. and after Fellows which is to be noted that in her Letters Patents for the same she hath not only used such words and Sentences as were accustomed to be used by King Henry the 8th and King Edw. the 6th in their Letters Patents made for such Causes but also hath used and put into her Letters Patents divers other general words and Sentences whereby her Highness by her Supreme Power and Authority hath dispensed with all Causes or doubts of any Imperfection or dis-ability that can or may in any wise be objected against the same c. so that to all those that will well consider of the effect and true intent of the said Laws and Statutes and the Supreme and absolute Authority of the Queens Highness and which she by her Majesties said Letters Patents hath used and put in Ure c. it is and may be very evident and apparent that no cause of simple ambiguity or doubt can or may justly be objected From hence it is easie to infer Considerable Inferences resulting from this Statute that there is in the Crown such a Supreme and absolute power in Ecclesiastical matters as the King may dispense with Acts of Parliament even in such a concern as Consecration Confirmation or Investing of any person c. Elected to the Office or Dignity of any Arch-Bishop or Bishop within this Realm for if there had been no variation by the Queens Letters Patents from the Form and Methods in the Acts of King * 25 H. 8. c. 20.5 6 E. 6. c. 16. sect 3. u. 4. Hen. the 8th or Edw. the 6th or that of Queen Elizabeth 1 o. Cap. 2. there had been no need of Inserting general words or dispensations in the Queens Letters Patents This Note Answers all that can be alleged concerning Mr. Farmers Incapacity Hence may be noted if the Queen could by her Supreme power and Authority thus dispense with dis-ability in Bishops much more may the King with dis-abilities occasioned by College Statutes which at pleasure he can alter and abolish But to return to the 25th of H. 8. Observations upon this Statute by Judge Hoberts Reports fol. 156. The power granted to the Arch-Bishop by the Act is in Ordinary matters such as usually the Pope or Prelates of the Realm dispensed with and in un-wonted Cases also which it seems by the Letter of the Act to be of vast extent so that my Lord Hobert saith that tho' it seems to give power over all Dispensations granted from Rome wonted and un-wonted and all dispensations generally Yet it must have construction such as were allowable and allowed by the Laws and Practice of this Realm for else it should make our Yoke heavier than before Yet I cannot conceive but the power may be extended further than the ordinary power the Popes or Prelates practised See the Statute sect 17.18 where greater power seems to be implyed worthy consideration otherwise there needed not to have been such provision made that in un-wonted Cases the King or Council should allow them and if the Arch-Bishop refused the King might appoint two Prelates or other persons to grant them and it is probable that this Act may be construed to other purposes than a Faculty-Office only §. 6. Some further observations upon the Statute 25 H. 8. c. 21. But I shall conclude this matter with the following Observations upon this Statute which I take to be clear and undeniable First That the Pope did here by his Bulls and Breves grant Dispensations in various Cases Erected Constituted and Visited Colleges and Abrogated their Statutes as I have cleared in the foregoing Chapter Secondly That by this Act the Popes General or Universal power and Authority in England in all Cases was Totally abolished and taken away from him as to the excercise of it Thirdly That some part only of that general power and Authority which was excercised by the Pope was by that Act Vested Lodged and Delegated in and to the Arch-Bishop as the dispensing power for Marriages Bastardy c. and other matters there expressed which was properly to be called the Popes ordinary power and was so lodged and delegated in the Arch-Bishop to save the King from trouble in such ordinary and common Cases but not to take away the Kings ordinary power Supremacy Fourthly That the Popes extraordinary power which he exercised in England is as well abolished here by this and other Acts as his ordinary power But so much of the Popes Authority and power either ordinary or extraordinary as was at any time excercised by him here in England and which is not by the said Statute Vested and Delegated in the Arch-Bishop is by a necessary Construction revived and revested in the King and re-united to the Crown by all those Acts which declare the Kings * See. Stat. 24 H. 8. cap. 12.25 H. 8. c. 20. 21.26 H. 8. c. 1. c. 3. c. 13.31 H. 8. cap. 9.37 H. 8. c. 17.1 Eliz. c. 1. c. 4.8 Eliz. c. 1. Supremacy yea tho' the Statutes had been silent therein for that the Crown by this and other Acts is entirely remitted and restored to all it 's Ancient Jurisdictions and Prerogatives exercised by the Popes from whence our Law
Books say it was Robbed or derived Because such powers being taken away from the Pope and such as had Authority under him and neither settled in any Court or person by the Statute can re-vest or re-sult to none other but the King as Supreme in all Ecclesiastical as well as Temporal Causes which by Sufferance or Usurpation as the Act saith the Pope had excercised Fifthly By the several Acts and Instances whereby the Kings of England since the making of this Act of the 25th King Henry the 8th have exerted their Supreme Authority it is clear that the Crowns Re-assumption of what the Pope had exercised hath been according to the Laws in being of which I now proceed to give Instances in the Kings dispensing with College Statutes of which I shall give some few in several Cases of many hundreds which are to be found in the Paper Office or Secretaries Books §. 7. An account of the Queens Mandate about Electing of a Master of St. Johns College in Cambridge The first Instance I think fit to Insert is as followeth The Course that was held in the last Election of the Mastership of St. Johns College in Cambridge First Bundel Ecclesiastic Universities Paper-Office The Statute of that College appointeth the Twelfth day after the Vacation to be the day of their Election and no other Secondly The greater part of the Fellows of the College were made for Mr. Alvey a Senior Fellow Thirdly The Lord Treasurer being Informed that Alvey was an unfit Man set down an Inhibition in the Queens Name to defer the Election which Inhibition was obeyed Fourthly The 12th day being passed and no further power left to the Fellows to Elect The Lord Treasurer sent a Letter the second time in the Queens Name Nominating Dr. Clayton and Dr. Stainton Commanding the Fellows to choose one of them and no other Fifthly By Authority of those Letters they choose Dr. Clayton By this proceeding it is manifest that the King may not only by a Mandate of Inhibition stay the Electors from making any choice but nominate the person to be Elected altho' by College Statutes the day of the Election and the Electors were appointed §. 8. The Bishop of Londons Testimony that the King hath dispensed with College Statutes Before I enter upon the particular Mandates I shall produce the Testimony of George Montague Bishop of London in his Letter a Copy of which the Honorable Sir Joseph Williamson afforded me out of the Paper-Office directed to Sir Edward Conway Principal Secretary of State as followeth Right Honorable THe Noble and Vertuous Lady the Lady Denbigh hath layed a Command upon me to deliver my knowledge whether the King hath at any time by his Letters dispensed with the Local Statutes of any College by a Non-obstante and upon a search it appears that his Majesty hath sent Letters of that nature to divers Colleges If this Information may promote her desires and give you satisfaction I shall be right glad and will ever remain London Decemb. 10th 1623. Your Honors Friend to Command and humble Servant Geo. London §. 9. A Mandate dispensing with Incapacities to receive Degrees I now proceed to give some Extracts of Mandates wherein the King dispenseth with College Statutes in one of which Dated December the 11th Anno 1624. the persons within named being some ways Incapacitated to take their respective Degrees were dispensed with as followeth Trusty and Well-beloved We Great you well In a Bundel Docketed Ecclesiastic Universities in the Paper-Office at Whitehall We are Graciously please of Our Royal Favor to Gabriel More Harrington Butler George Bursey and Michael Gilbert to advance them to such Degrees as they are capable of and well deserve by their Learning and diligent Studies tho' in some respects not qualified Therefore Our pleasure is that notwithstanding any Statute or other Ordinance to the contrary you forthwith Create Gabriel More a Dr. in Divinity and you also admit Harrington Butler and George Bursey to the Degree of Master of Arts and Michael Gibert Bachellor of Arts in such Form as is usual in like Case and these Letters shall be your Warrant In a Mandate for one William Morley to be a Schollar of the College of St. A Mandate for a Schollar of St. Mary Winton College without examination Mary of Winton College Oxon without Examination are these words and tho' we have a favorable Eye to your freedom that are the Electors yet in this Our so Extraordinary Recommendation We expect your Dutiful respects to this Our Princely Pleasure and Command so that this Our Will be not dis-appointed for any respet whatsoever Directed to Our Trusty and Well-belove Dr. Princock Warden of St. Mary Winton College in Our University of Oxford and Our Trusty and Well-beloved Dr. Love Warden of St. Mary Winton College near Winchester the under Warden School-Master of the College and two Posers of the Schollars for the Election In a Mandate Dated 3 o. Regni Caroli 1. A Mandate dispensing with the Incapacity by reason of the County For one Gregory Isham I find these words But because We understand that the Country where he was Born layeth some formal Incapacity upon him We are pleased hereby to Dispense therewith and do require that his Country may not be any Impediment to him in that Election Ibid. notwithstanding any Statute or Order to the contrary And these Our Letters shall be sufficient Warrant in that behalf §. 10. The acknowlegement from St. Johns College in Cambridge of the Kings power in dispensing with College Statutes March the 28th Bundel Eccles Universities 1630. c. 1633. In a Letter of the Master and Fellows of St. Johns College to the Earl of Holland the Chancellor about their choosing Dr. Digby according to his Majesties Letters Dr. Beale being then Master I find they allege that he was not capable by some Statutes having not performed some things the Statutes required They write thus Yet his Sacred Majesties Request would have been tye enough upon his most Dutiful and Obedient Servants to have endeavored the accomplishment of his Royal desire had we been enabled thereunto by Dispensation with those opposite Statutes which otherwise we stand obliged by Oath to observe Which plainly shews that if a Dispensation had been obtained or inserted in the Mandate the King had been obeyed I find that the Master and Fellows of Christ College in Cambridge In the Paper Office Ecclesiastica Academica without date being desirous to Capacitate one Norton then but Senior Sophister for a Fellowship sent him with Letters Testimonial to Oxford whereupon he obtained his Bachellors Degree and so was Elected Fellow A Senior Sophister may take Bachellor of Arts Degree by dispensation The Relation saith that the Arch-Bishop hearing of it expressed some displeasure and said he would call him to an Account for his taking the Oath for Bachellor having not full time and being not dispensed with
alledged that he should have been proceeded against by Libel and have had a Copy of his Charge and used such expressions as gave just offence to the Court so that tho' the Sentence of Suspension was pronounced See p. 35. here for his Contempt in not obeying His Majesties Letters Mandatory for Electing and Admitting Mr. Anthony Farmer President of that College yet if it had not been because of his disagreeable deportment to the Court it is probable he had at that time no more Incurred the Censure of the Court than the rest of the Fellows who concurred in the said Election As to the affixing the Sentence on the College Gates See chap. 1. sect 2. p. 43. that was not a material circumstance nor whether Mr. Anthony Farmer was then or after laid by or whether he was unfitting by reason of his Immorality or otherwise It is necessary for every Court to Assert it's Jurisdiction and much more ought the Lords Commissioners to do it being they have such Ample powers from the King so that whatever Contempt was offered to their Lordships was to the King himself and that Dr. Fairfax persisted to the last in denying the Authority of the Lords Commissioners and disobeying the Kings Mandate for Admitting the Bishop of Oxford President or submitting to him as such appears by his last Answer to the Question proposed October the 25th whether he owned their Lordships Jurisdiction To which he replyed See here p. 84. 85. Under Correction he did not And being asked whether he would submit to the Bishop of Oxon as President His Answer was he would not nor could not because he was not his Legal President Whoever considers this obstinacy persisted in to the last cannot think the Lords Commissioners could do less than they did Had this been done in another Kings Reign perhaps it might have been Interpreted a Questioning the very Supremacy it self which how fatal it was to John Fisher Bishop of Rochester and Sir Thomas Moor is worthy to be considered both as a demonstration of our Kings Clemency and that the Doctor hath not so much reason to complain of the hard usage However the Doctor thought himself obliged to the observation of the Statutes and to submit to the President only he and the rest of the Fellows had chosen yet he ought to have considered what Baldus in his Comment upon the Code 3. Tit. 14 n. 7. saith * Qui sunt in aliquo Collegio ratione professionis vel negotiationis Jurisdictionem ejus qui praeest Collegio recusare non possunt non minus tamen sunt sub praeside vel alio Superiore That those that are in any College by reason of their Profession or Negotiation there ought not to refuse the Jurisdiction of him that presides in it yet they are no less subject to the President or another Superior which Superior or rather Supreme I take the King to be Besides if the Doctor and the rest of the Fellows would have considered that in relation to College Statutes however it may be disputed in other matters the King hath the same power as the Emperors had and that is to be found in the Digests thus * Quodcunque igitur Imperator per Epistolam subscriptionem Statuit vel cognoscens decrevit vel de plano Interlocutus est vel Edicto praecepit Legem esse Statuit Dig. lib. 1. Tit. 4. n. 1. Therefore whatever the Emperor appoints by Epistle and Subscription or knowing doth Decree or plainly doth express or Commands by Edict is to be esteemed a Law. Which is Literally true in all the Kings power of dispensing with or Suspending College Statutes for since it is clear by many Instances before insisted upon that the Kings of England have power to alter abrogate and annihilate Statutes of Colleges much more must they have the power to Dispense with or Suspend them ☞ Therefore when any person refuseth to submit to the Kings Authority in this particular he is deservedly punishable by Suspension or Deprivation Neither ought Fellows of Colleges assume to themselves a power of Judging of the Reasons why the King Grants Mandates in favor of any particular person or to deny their obedience to the person so recommended by Mandatory Letters because they have heard or can prove some Immortalities against him for if that liberty of opposing the Kings Mandate upon any such grounds were once allowed the Kings power must be solely precarious and every Mandate of the Kings would be lyable to disputes and debates and the Kings Sovereignty and Authority would dwindle to an Impotent wish that he might obtain his desire instead of being positively obeyed which would be such a condition of the Monarchy as would render it contemptible and whoever endeavors to lower the Dignity of the Crown in such a manner deserves just Chastisement for it which was but the bare Suspension of the Doctor from his Fellowship at first but by his perfisting in his undutifulness to the highest Degree of denying the Kings Authority he was justly punished by Expulsion and after with Incapacitating §. 9. The seventh Objection It is Seventhly Objected by some of Magdalen College that no Commission can be granted under the Great Seal to Visitors to place and dis-place Members of Colleges whose places are Free-holds ad Libitum or discretion These are the words of the Oxford Relation pag. 21. But they must proceed according to Legal discretion that is by the Laws and Statutes of the Land and Local Statutes of the College And places concerned consigned rather for the Headship and Fellowships of Colleges are Temporal Possessions and cannot be Impeached by Summary Proceedings For this they Allege the Case of Dr. Thomas Coveney President of the same College who was deprived in Queen Elizabeths time by the Bishop of Winton the Local Visitor thereof Established by Royal Authority and he Appealed to the Queen But by the Advice of all the Judges it was held that the Queen by her Authority as Supreme Visitor could not medle in it but he must bring his Action in Westminster Hall because Deprivation was a cause merely Temporal The King they own has a great Authority Spiritual as well as Tmeporal but no Commissioners can be Authorized by the Crown to proceed in any Commission under the Great Seal or otherwise but according to Law in Spiritual Causes by the Canon Law in Temporal by other Laws and Statutes of the Land. And wherein the Proceedings in some Commissions are directed to be Summarie de plano sine strepitu forma Figura Judicii those words are to be applyed to shorten the Forms of Process and not for matter of Judgment For Magna Charta provides for our Spiritual as well as Temporal Liberties §. 10. Answer to it by parts To Answer this Objection distinctly we must consider the several parts of it for it is an huddle of several matters jumbled something confusedly to set off the matter
more plausibly In the first place it is urged that no Commission can be granted under the Broad Seal to Visitors to place and dis-place Members of Colleges but so as they must proceed according to Legal discretion viz. by the Laws and Statutes of the Land and Local Statutes of the Colleges By this Allegation they would Insinuate that the Lords Visitors did not proceed according to such Laws and Statutes nor could proceed summarily as in the latter part of the Objection they Insinuate To this I reply The Kings Prerogative a part of the Law of the land See chap. 4. §. 1. 2. here that the Kings Prerogative in such Cases is to be taken and accepted as a Fundamental of the Laws of the Land and I hope I have sufficiently cleared the continued use of the Kings of Englands exercising this power in granting Commissions to Visit the Universities and particular Colleges c. Amongst the Patents 26 E. 3. There is a Commission directed to several Commissioners to Visit St. Mary Magdalen College in Rippon which by the Foundation of that College was under the Visitation of the Arch-Bishop of York and to enquire of the several mis-carriages of the respective Members and whether they consumed or wasted any of the Lands or Goods of that College and to return the same to the King who would take care therein So in the Parliament Rolls (a) Rot. Parl. 40 E. 3. n. 12. the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge complained in Parliament of the Fryers Mendicants of both the said Universities how Injurious they were to the Ancient Immunities of the Universities and how faulty and offensive they were to them and it was declared and resolved in Parliament that the King had sole power to redress those Controversies at his Will and Pleasure In the Plea (a) Placit 15 E. 2. n. 10. Rolls 15 Ed. 2. It is declared that the King hath an absolute power to punish contempts and the offences against him as Supreme Ordinary without proceeding in the Common and usual Course of Judicial proceedings ☞ Conformable to this King Henry the 8th granted his Commission for the Visitation of Monasteries and dis-placing several Monks and other Regulars for their mis-carriages as the Inquisitive Reader may find in Dr. Burnets History of the Reformation and that by his Sovereign and Supreme Authority without Act of Parliament So King Edward (b) Rot. Pat. 3 E. 6. 1 part the 6th Commissioned Cranmer Ridley and others to proceed de plano in a summary way against Bonner by the Examination of Witnesses against him and so to Imprison Suspend or Deprive him as they saw cause in pursuance of which Commission they Deprived him of his Bishopric So Queen Mary (c) Rot. Pat. 1 Mariae part 7. granted Commission to the then Bishop of Winchester and others to Impower them to proceed in a summary way to the Deprivation of the then Arch-Bishop of York and other Bishops So Queen Elizabeth (d) Pat. 24 June 1 Regni granted Commission to the Earls of Derby and Northumberland and others to Visit all the Clergy in the North to place and displace them as they saw cause §. 11. Inferences from the foregoing Records By all which Authorities See chap. 4.5 6 and 7. here the Opinion of Parliaments the Antiquities of Presidents and frequent Instances in later days which I have abundantly produced in the foregoing Chapters I hope I have convincingly cleared that the King in all Ages by his Prerogative hath Regulated and Reformed Universities and Colleges punished their offences placed and dis-placed their Members without anything of the Ceremony of Westminster Hall and have been advised by their Judges and Learned Council that it was their Prerogative to proceed by their Commissioners Delegated by them in a summary way to the Suspension and Deprivation of the Bishops and Clergy nor can it be denyed but the Bishops of England have great Free-holds Temporalities and Honorable Baronages to lose by such Deprivations and such were more considerable in the Eye and esteem of the Law than the Exhibitions Headships or Fellowships of any College ☞ Hence it may be noted The Kings of England exercising the power of supension and deprivation by Commissioners upon Bishops Abbots Priors c. may well do it on Members of Colleges that since our Kings have exercised such a power over Monasteries Colleges purely Religious Arch-Bishops and Bishops they may much more exercise the like over Universities and Colleges since whatever power they or their Founders had or have it was never given them by any Statute or any part of the Common Law it being the Kings sole Prerogative to Constitute Coporations or Bodies Politic sole or Aggregate Ecclesiastical or Civil under several and distinct qualifications conditions and trusts and the Universities and Colleges derive their Existence from the Royal bounty of the Prince who made them Corporations Constituted them by the direction of their respective Founders Bodies with Heads and Members to be Governed by such Rules and Statutes as the Founder by the Kings Licence should appoint But it was never certainly Intended that the King by such Grant or Licence should Delegate such Authority to Founders Visitors or the Members of Colleges See chap. 4. sect 1. here whereby to injure his Prerogative or determin the Supremacy which the Law of the Land had Annexed to his Imperial Crown as at large I have cleared before That the King is Supreme Head and Visitor in all Ecclesiastical and Civil causes See cap. 4. here hath been fully proved and that from the King all Judges Ecclesiastical and Temporal derive their Authority And sure a Delegation of power from the King can be no Bar or Estople to the King to exert his Prerogative that he thereby can be concluded from Delegating power to others to correct and reform misdemeanors and offences in Communities created by him or his Ancestors or to supervise the Actions and Management of his Judges Ecclesiastical Local Visitors or persons Commissioned by him As to Dr. Thomas Coveneys Case I shall consider it when I come to Treat of Appeals §. 12. Whether Colleges be of Temporal or Spiritual nature ☞ Concerning the Temporal Estates of the Fellows and the profits of the Fellowships being Free-holds that alters not the Case of the Kings power of Visiting for altho' it is disputed by Learned Authors whether Colleges be of a Lay or Spiritual nature yet it is most clear that they have undergone Visitations the reason of which is because they are the Nurseries of Learning and Piety Qualifications of great Moment to the well-being of Government and consequently require the Princes special care since upon the purity or impurity of these Fountains much good or bad must be derived to the Sovereign and Subject And altho' in the Universities some Studies relate not at all to Divinity as Civil Law Physic c. yet the Body of the Students
in Queen Maries time for Religion and Abolished most of the Statutes made by Cardinal Pool and restored those of King Edward the Sixth To omit other things in the Visitation Earl of Arundel Chancellor quits his Office. besides that the Earl of Arundel did quit the Chancellorship these following Heads of Colleges or principal Members were removed and some of them Imprisoned §. 3. The Heads of Colleges and others Expelled of Christ-Church As Dr. Richard Marshal Dean of Christ-Church for denying to own the Authority of the Visitors was not only Expelled but sent Prisoner to London Also Dr. William Tresham Canon of the same for denying the Oath of Supremacy was Expelled as also Dr. Richard Smith Canon there Of Merton College Dr. Thomas Raynolds Warden of Merton College was by the Queen then at Hampton Court deprived of his Wardenship 4 o. September and three Days after the Sentence was declared by three of the Commissioners and after a short time he Died in Prison Thomas Coveney President of Magdalen College was Expelled Of St. Mary Magdalen College for that he was not entred into Orders and Dr. William Cheadsey President of Corpus Christi College was Expelled from that and his Canonship of Christ Church and Robert Banks who had been Ejected in Queen Maries Reign because he was Married was substituted in his place Also Dr. William Wright Of Baliol College Master or President of Baliol College was Expelled and Dr. Babington substituted in his place Mr. John Smith Provost of Oriel College was Ejected Of Oriel College tho' he had liberty to live in the House after but in the next Year he lost the Lady Margarets Lectureship Of Queens College and Mr. Hugh Hodgson Provost of Queens College two Years after either relinquished the place Of Trinity College or was Expelled Mr. Thomas Slythurst President of Trinity College was Expelled and Mr. Yeldard placed in his room Mr. Alexander Belsyre Master of St. Johns College and Canon of Christ-Church was also Expelled Fol. 283. a. St. Johns College and Mr. William Ely lately put in his place a little while after was Expelled so a few Years after Mr. William Marshal Principal of St. Albans Hall was forced to surrender and so Mr. William Alan Principal of St. Mary Hall as also George Ethridge Regius Greek Professor and James Dugdale Master of University College two Years after was Expelled by the Visitors and Thomas Key put in his place Besides these Heads of Colleges in New College Fol. 283. b. two Doctors and three Bachellors of Civil Law one Doctor of Physic one Bachellor of Divinity and fourteen Fellows were Expelled some removing to Religious Houses beyond the Sea and Mr. John Munden returning being discovered to Secretary Walsingham was Executed at Tyburn In St. Johns College seven Fellows were Expelled besides several others Imprisoned at Wisbich and many others not named Those that have a mind to see the Names of Great numbers of the rest Expelled from other Colleges Reg. G. G. fol. .26 Reg. I. fol. 198. 199. Reg. Coll. Magd. fol. 29. and suffering Death for returning into England may consult the Register I shall now give a short account of what Dr. Parker advised from Cambridge concerning the Visitation there §. 4. Paper Office Ecclesiastica 1550. to 1559. I find Two Letters from Dr. Mathew Parker afterwards Arch-Bishop to Sir William Cecyl then Secretary and Chancellor of the University of Cambridge Dated 1 o. March and Endorsed on the back Dr. Parker 1 o. Martii 1559. Among other Expressions he hath these words The Colleges needed a Visitation that Queen Mary immediately upon her quyet gave out Authority to the Chancellor Bishop Gardiner he forthwith sent his Chaplain Watson with Instruction to every College and as then I could gather to report to him in what State every College stood and further peradventure upon cause to have the Masters and others assured de coram sistendo Interim bene gerendo till further Order By this and some other Letters I find to and from Sir William Cecyl who was the great Minister of State in Queen Elizabeths time I observe that what was done in Oxford by the Visitors was likewise pursued in Cambridge and that the Masters Governors and Fellows had a very hard time in the Reigns of King Edward the Sixth Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth Conformableness to the Religion of the Prince being the Touch-stone and the prime Capacitating Qualification that secured Honors and Places in the Universities The other Letter is Dated March the 30th and Ticketed 30 Martii 1559. Dr. Parker to Mr. Secretary Which I shall Transcribe at length that the Reader may take notice of his way of Writing and the Dialect of that Age. Pleaseth yt your Honorables goodnes upon th' occasion of sending up to your Honor for the matter which Mr. Vice-Chancellor Wryteth of I thought it good to signifie to you that the matter which ye have Delegated to us is in hand with as good Expedition as we can make by reason of th' absence of some who were meet to be Commoned with Though some dout is made whether your Authority of Chancellorship extendeth to College Statutes for any beyond Lymitation conteyned in them so may they dout of your Delegatum Though Bishop Gardyner wold not so be restreyned in his doyings whether upon warrant of the Quenys Letters of Commission the Copy * * This I cannot find tho' I have searched diligently whereof I sent to you or by Authorytie of his Office I leave that to your Prudence to Expond Our Statutes and Charters Prescribe here to Officers that they must in Plees proceed summariè de plano since strepitu Judiciali that Scholars may be soner restored to their Bokes Yet here be Wytts which being thereto admitted w'd entangle matters extremis Juris apicibus that Controversies might be Infynyte and perpetual never to have an end but according to our old Ancyent Customys we shall procede to hearyng with cutting of all such superfluous and perplex Solemnyties of their Cavillations and so refer the matter to your understanding to be resolutely determyned as the last Clause of your Letter pretendeth to wil us And yff I shall perceyve any like Incydent to be signified to your Honorable wisdom I shall be bold in secretys to Wright it Less things borne bi parcyalyties might prevayle under your Authorytie not rightly instructed and to avoid som Stomake that ellys might be taken Without dout Sir th' Universitie is wonderfully decayed and if your Visitation entendyd be too stoutly Executed in some like sorts as hath been practised that wil I fear so much rustle the State thereof that it will be hardly recovered in Years and yet Authorytie must bridel willfull and stubborn Natures and hie time it is here I trust the prudence of the Visitors for good wil toward you wil diligently note how ye receyved the Universities after others
for comparison of the sequel wel hoped for at your hands Except that be loked to in time the Quenys Majestie shal not have half suffycient Mynisters for hir yeres which I pray God may be many to uphold Christes Fayth in her Realms Youth here is of some Inclination if they had but three or four good Hedys Resident to lean unto to comfort them against som fower talkers in their stoutness but time must be expected and Godys furderance craved Sir I pray you pardon my boldnes and not to be offendyd though I wright thus homly and in English Letters while paraventure I might busye my head to wright Latinius somewhat to avoyd offending of your exact and exquysite gift in your Latin Tonge I might chance to wright obscurius not significancius and so the longer to deteyn your perusing these smal Causes to hynder your others much more weighty which I beseche Almighty God to prosper From Corpus Christi Collage in Camboige the 30th Day of March. Your onfeyned and bownd Bedesman M. P. § 4 I have Transcribed this according to the spelling of this noted Prelate Antiquitates Britannicae c. who hath shewn his Learning in Antiquities and his Zeal for the protestant Religion in his Books Yet I doubt not but this Age will think his way of expressing himself in English not very Polite I shall not Comment upon his Letter which tho' in somethings obscure yet is plain enough to be understood as to what was his General intent and design This Visitation of Cambridge in the first Year of Queen Elizabeth was by Commission under the Great Seal to Sir William Cecyl then Chancellor of the University of Cambridge and to others as Mr. Pryn in his Oxford Plea refuted pag. 34. hath given a short account of ☞ In the Queens Letters before the said Visitation to Sir William Cecyl are these expressions Because the chief Order and Government of Our University of Cambridge appertaineth to you being the Chancellor of the same c. We thought meet to will you in Our Name to give signification that We mean very shortly with your Advice to Visit the same by some discreet and Meet persons So that here we find whatever power the Chancellor hath it is in subordination to the Sovereign and tho' they may take the advice of their Subjects in places of Government under them yet the power of Visiting still proceeds and is derived from them as all along I hope I have proved §. 5. An account of the Visitation of Merton College in Oxford Anno 1562. Wood Antiq. Oxon. lib. 1. fol. 284. b. 4 o. Eliz. There happened a Sedition in Merton College In January Dr. James Gervace the Custos or Warden having voluntarily quit his place the Fellows gave in the Names of five to the Arch-Bishop their Visitor whereof two or three had never been of their Society whereas Anciently according to their Statutes they had used to name only three bred in the College whereof one was to be put into the place of him that was Dead or Resigned The Arch-Bishop resented this and rejected all those named by the Fellows and before the end of March Nominated John Man sometime Fellow of New College to be the Warden who came to Oxford the 30th of March accompanyed with Dr. Babington the Vice-Chancellor Dr. White Warden of New College but the Fellows refused to Admit him so that on the 2d of April he came accompanyed with the Vice-Chancellor and Henry Norris of Witham and Anthony Foster of Cumnor and with much difficulty the Gate was opened Mr. Willi. Hawle the Senior Fellow and others opposing upon this the Arch-Bishop upon the 26th of May following Cited them all to appear in their Church to be Visited by himself or his Vicar General and by the said Vicar General of the Arch-Bishop Man was Confirmed and Hawle was Ejected out of his Fellowship By this it appears what power the Local Visitor had to Nominate and settle the Head of the College at his pleasure even contrary to the Ancient Statutes of the Society The observation upon it how much more may we conceive that the King hath power by his Mandate to Nominate and appoint the Head of any College as Sovereign and Supreme Visitor The Commission for Visitation continued still and in it great changes were made till all were reduced to a Conformity to the Queens Laws and pleasures several Statutes were revoked others amended or explained all which great changes were by vertue of the Queens Commission §. 6. Secretary Cecyls Letter about Non-conformists in Cambridge threatning a Visitation Before I proceed to any other Visitations I shall give a short account of the great States-man Sir William Cecyls proceeding Wood Antiq. Oxon. lib. 1.286 upon a disorder in St. Johns College in Cambridge wherein we may note by what Steps he being Chancellor thought fit to proceed by the subordinate Governors with a sufficient Menace that if that would not be effectual he would obtain the Queens Authority for a Visitation ☞ December the 13th 1565. Bundel Ecclesiastica 1560. ad 1569. In the Paper Office. Secretary Cecyl Writes to Dr. Stoke Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge concerning some of the Younger Fellows that in St. Johns College Chappelleft off the use of the Surplice That the Vice-Chancellor Confer with the President and if they can do it by their Ordinary Authority then to proceed if not then he Writes a Letter to the Bishop of Ely Visitor in Ordinary to rectifie it then follows If there shall no good come of those two means then I am determined to resort to the Authority of our Sovereign Lady the Queens Majesty In whose power by Prerogative the Government of all manner of Subjects doth belong to reduce them by sharpness to the Obedience of her Laws and Commandment This was the Judgment of the Great States-man who may be presumed to have well understood the Law and the Prerogative in that Case In his Letter to the Bishop of Ely he Writes that he had privately imparted the matter to her Majesty for his discharge by whom he hath been straightly charged to see Reformation and with speed and severity which he hath promised her Majesty to do altho' he will first seek it by ordinary means If otherwise it should fall out he would for his discharge refer the whole to the Queens Supreme Authority Here note the Authority of the Prince whereupon must needs follow Cause of Repentance to the Authors of that Garboyle By which it is manifest that whatever Ordinary power was lodged in the Bishop of Ely as Dioecesan Visitor or the Chancellor and other Magistrates of the University yet the Queen Jure Regio supersedes all and takes Cognizance of the whole matter by her Commissioners as occasion might require §. 7. Disturbance about Election of a President in Corpus Christi College ☞ In the Year 1568. Wood Antiq. Oxon. lib. 1. fol. 290. a. The
generally are bred up to Divinity and the hours of Devotion Lectures in Divinity Disputations c. are mostly about Spiritual matters in Ordine ad Spiritualia and Grammar Schools being for Education Vertue and Learning are called Spiritual much more Colleges which are Founded ad Studendum Orandum and if there were none of these considerations yet it is well known that Colleges are to an Eleemosinary end and it is clear in the sense of the Law where persons are lay there may be a Spiritual end 11 H. 4.47 of which matter the curious may find more in * Keebles Reports 2d part page 166. c. Dr. Patricks Case As to the Statute of Magna Charta The Kings Prerogative is not against Magna Charta altho' it grants and confirms many Liberties and Immunities to the people yet it does not deprive the King of his Prerogative who hath the power to Create Courts at Law and give them Jurisdiction as also to Establish Courts by Commission for Regulating deceits oppressions frauds and other matters as seems best to his Royal Will which is no encroachment on our Liberties Temporal or Spiritual as is objected §. 13. The eighth objection concerning liberty of Appeals This leads me to the Eighth Objection made by the favorers of the Ejected Fellows viz. That it is contrary to the Laws of the Land that any person should be deprived of his Fellowship by the Lords Visitors without having liberty to Appeal to the King in his Courts of Justice See pa. 70. here as Dr. Hough words it in his Protestation against the Illegality and Inustice of the Lords Visitors Sentence against him See here pa. 116. and Dr. Fairfax in his Protestation in the same words with the Addition as the Laws Statutes and Ordinances of this Realm will permit in that behalf whose Case differed from Dr. Houghs in that particular that Dr. Fairfax had long enjoyed his Fellowship and was Ejected for his dis-obedience to the Kings Mandate whereas it was disputable whether Dr. Hough was lawfully Elected President But in one particular they alleged that their Cases were alike in that they might have remedy against all such dis-possession of Headship's or Fellowship's in the Kings Courts where relief in all Cases of Property and Free-hold ought to be had ☞ In Crroboration of this Dr. Coveneys Case urged they bring the Instance of Dr. Coveney as in the last Objection is urged that he being deprived by the Local Visitor and Appealing to the Queen by the advice of all the Judges it was held that the Queen by her Authority as Supreme Visitor could not medle in it but he must bring his Action at Westminster Hall because deprivation was a cause merely Temporal §. 14. The Answer In Answer to this First It is apparent in matter of Fact by what I have before from Records made clear that Heads of Colleges Chap. 5. sect 1. §. 10. sect 2. per totum sect 3. §. 3. Fellows c. have been Expelled and deprived by Commissioners for Visitation as appears in the places quoted in the Margent Secondly Coke Instit 4. fol. 339.340 341. Stephen Gardiners Case It is owned that it is not only an usual practice of the Crown to grant Commissions ad revidendum the former proceedings before the proper Judges but likewise the Kings have often granted Commissions with a Clause of Appellatione remota which is a definitive conclusive Sentence from which no Appeals lies ☞ For clearing the point more fully we may consider that the Statute 25 H. 8. C. 19. grants an Appeal from any of the Arch-Bishops Courts to the King in Chancery Appeals according to the Statute 25 H. 8. c. 19. where the King may by Commission Delegate others to determin that Appeal according to the direction of that Act but where Sentence is given by Commissioners Delegated by the Prince and not in any Bishops Court as by Visitation pursuant to the Statute 1 Eliz. c. 2. there Appeals from such a Sentence is not within the Statute of 25 H. 8. c. 19. Yet the King may grant a new Commission to revise the former Sentence Likewise there may be an Appeal to the King in person from all Courts Erected by his Prerogative Appeals to the King in person as from the High Court of Chancery Coke 4. Instit fol. 340. and it is upon Record by Commission 14 Jac. 1. as the words are 14 Jac. 1. par 6. n. 25. that it appertaineth to our princely care and office only to be Judge over all our Judges the meaning whereof can be no other than that from the Judges Sentence and Decrees there may be an Appeal to the King in person 2 Andersons Reports fol. 163. So by the Commission granted by the King to the Commissioners to Visit St. Mary Magdalen College in Oxford the Commissioners were a Court then only for that purpose created by the King Goodmans Case 4. Instit 340. and from any Sentence or Decree pronounced by them the Fellows might Appeal to the King in person but could not Appeal to any Court in Westminster Hall so that the Appeal to the King in Chancery is in such cases as are particularly limited in the Statute of matters in sits in the Courts of Bishops Rolls Abridgment part 2. fol. 233. as Judge Rolls observes who likewise affirms that if a suit be by a Commission General of the King no Appeal can be to the King in Chancery by the words of the Statute for in such Appeals to the King it must be General as he is Supreme Head of all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction within the Realm and this must be by a Bill Signed by the King after which the King may grant a Commission to Delegates to hear it So that the case of Dr. Coveney is not rightly stated in the Allegation of those of Magdalen College The case of Dr. Coveney not rightly stated that because Dr. Coveney being deprived by the Bishop of Winchester Local Visitor and Appealing to the Queen it was adjudged that the Appeal did not lye because deprivation was merely Temporal and Tryable at Common Law Dyer's Reports fol. 209. for my Lord Dyer only shews that according to the Statutes of 24 and 25 H. 8. the Appeal was to be from a Sentence in the Arch-Bishops Court to the King in Chancery but Dr. Coveneys deprivation was not by any Sentence in the Arch-Bishops Court and consequently not within the Statutes to bring his Appeal to the Queen in Chancery Now the Artifice used by the favorers of the Fellows is The Artifice used by those of St. Mary Magdalen College in citing this case that they make Dr. Coveney to Appeal to the Queen without mentioning in Chancery and so it was not brought before the Queen as Supreme Visitor and so was not within the Statute either way since the deprivation was by the Local Visitor only and in that case his