Kings Ecclesiasticall Courts here within the Land 111 What is a Prohibition and how many sorts are thereof 113 Of Admirall causes and in what sort they are hindered 115 Of Actions of Trouer and how far Fictions in Law are to be admitted and how far not 116. c. Wherein last Wils and Testaments are impeached 121 Of the care that Princes of this Realme haue had for the due payment of Tythes vnto the Church and the preseruing of the cognisance thereof vnto the Ecclesiasticall Courts of this Land both before the conquest and since 124 c. That the Statutes of the xxvii and xxxii of H. the viii and the 2. of Edward the vi c. 13. intended for the true paiment of Tythe and the preseruation of the triall therof vnto the Ecclesiasticall Courts are now turned to the hinderance of them both 128. c. That customes of payment of tythes are triable onely at the Ecclesiasticall courts 131. c. That the lymits and bounds of Parishes are of the Ecclesiasticall cognisance onely 135 That the clause of treble Damages in the 13. chapter 2. Edw. 6. is to be sued in the Ecclesiasticall courts only 137. That the naming of law or Statute in a statut doth not make it to be of the Temporall cognisance if the matter therof be Ecclesiasticall 139. c. How it comes to passe that when tythes were neuer clogged with custome prescription or composition vnder the Law they are clogged with the same vnder the Gospel and the causes thereof 142 Tythes anon after the dissolution of the Iewes policie were entertained by the Christians as a naturall prouision for the Ministers of the Gospell and leased out by God vnto the Iewes for the time of their policie only 142 That Charles Martell Father of King Pippin was the first that euer toke tythes from the Church and assigned them ouer to Lay men in fee and vpon what occasion 145 That to the imitation of this fact of Martell other Princes did the like euery one in his Kingdome 145 That this fact of Martel being done about the yeare 606. stood vnreuersed vntill the Lateran councell vnder Alexander Anno 1189. and that the reformation was then but in part 146 That Ecclesiasticall Iudges admit pleas in discharge of tithes and the maner of tything contrarie to the conceit that is had of them 149 Of Priuiledges and how they came in 150 That by reason of the frequence of priuiledges Statutes of Mortmaine came in 150 Of the beginning of cloistered monks in the west Church of Christendome and that the author thereof was one Benedict a Roman about the yeare 606. 153 That from Benedict and his order flowed all the rest of the orders of Religious men 153. c. That the admiration that these Religious men did breed of themselues in the head of Princes and Popes did procure appropriations of parsonages and immunities from Tiths 153 That the ouer conceit that men had of praier aboue preaching in the church was an adiuuant cause therunto 154 Whether Appropriations came first from Princes or Popes it is questionable 155 Exemptions from tythes brought in by Pope Paschall in fauour towards all sorts of Religious men 158 The same restrained by Pope Adrian and limited to the Cystertians Hospitallers Templers and the Knights of Saint Iohn of Ierusalem onely sauing to the other the Tythes of grounds laboured with their owne hands onely 159 That Innocent the third in the third Lateran Councell 1120. restrained those foure orders from immunitie of Tythes for such grounds as they should acquire after that councel which Henry the fourth imitating prouided by two Statutes of this Land against their immunitie 159 That if this reuocation of Immunitie by Innocent the third these two Acts of Henry the fourth were wel weighed they would ouerturne many of the priuiledges chalenged by the Statut of 31. H. 8. c. 13. for exemption of Monasterie Lands from Tithes 160 That Reall compositions for Tythes are the deuise of Ecclesiasticall Lawyers and are to be tried by the Ecclesiasticall Courts 160 That the curiositie of Schoolemen in their distinctions vpon Tythes haue helped forward Appropriations and Exemptions from Tythes 161 The opinion examined as concerning the quotitie of tithes whether it be Morall Ceremoniall or Iudiciall 161. c. That a Bishop being Lord of a Manor and prime founder of a Benefice could not in the first erection thereof by his owne capacitie retaine any Tythes in his hand and passe the same after in lay-fee to his tenants and so giue cause to his tenants of prescription against the parson 165 That Bishops indowments in the beginning stood not in Tythes but in finable Lands 167 That the turning of Bishops indowments into tenthes or tythes for impropriat parsonages is vnsutable to the first institution and very dangerous 168 That it had bin a worthy worke in the first reformers of Religion if they had returned to euery parish their owne parsonage and the dislike that God may seeme to haue conceiued of that 169 That tythes are a Parochian right and how Parishes in the Christian world came first to be instituted 171 That tythes of Minerals are due 174 That tythes of Turues be due 178 That the cognisance of barren heath and wast grounds belongeth to the Ecclesiasticall courts and what euery of them are 180 That the boughes of great trees are tythable and so also are the bodies but in the case of the Statute only 185 In what cases diffamatorie words belong to the Ecclesiastical and in what to the common law 191 That the suit of bastardie aswell in the principall as in the incident belongs vnto the Ecclesiasticall Law 199 The meanes to relieue the Ecclesiasticall courts 209 The right interpretation of Lawes and Statuts 209 Wherein the three Statutes for tythes may be supplied 212 What things may bee ordered by the Ciuile Law yet not prouided for by the common Law and others of like nature to those that are expressed 215 Of the necessitie of retaining the practise of the Ciuile and Ecclesiasticall law within this Land 224. c. FINIS A VIEW OF THE Ciuile and Ecclesiasticall Law also wherein it is straighted and wherein it may be relieued BEFORE I shew how necessarie it is for his Maiestie and the Realme to maintaine the Ciuile and Ecclesiasticall Law as they are now practised among vs in this Realme I will set down as it were in a briefe what the Ciuile and the Ecclesiasticall Lawes are then will I shew how farre forth they are here in vse and practise among vs thirdly wherein we are abridged and put beside the vse and possession thereof by the Common Lawe euen contrarie to the old practise thereof and the true sence and meaning of the Lawes of this Realme and the Statutes in this behalfe prouided and lastly wherein we might be relieued and admitted to the practise of many things in the Ciuile Law without preiudice to the Common Lawe and
who was péerelesse among all Quéenes that euer went before her and vnmatchable as I verily doe beleeue by any that euer shall succéed her as their magnanimitie whereby they subdued not only their domesticall enemies but vanquished euen their forraine foes were their designements neuer so daungerous not shewing any token of discouragement either in the treasonable attempts of the one or in the malitious complotiments of the other What an excellent work of hers was that that then when all her neighbour Kingdomes round about her were drunke with the cup of the fornication of the whore of Babilon shee alone came out of Babilon and so continued constantly to the end mauger the threats of the red fierie Dragon and the floods of water he cast out of his mouth after her How excellent did she shew her selfe in those two vertues which doe chiefly preserue Princes States that is Mercie and Iudgement the Records of her time do shew so that I may spare to remember any by name which happily would be not well taken And yet truth it is that mens gouernment is more agréeable to Nature than womens is whom God in the beginning put in subiection vnder man and who for the most part are by Nature weake in bodie and thereby vnable to put in execution the great affaires of a Kingdom and vnsetled in iudgement and so hardly can determine that which is right and settle themselues thereupon yet by the numeration of certaine ill gouerning Quéens to conclude a generalitie against all gouernment of women is but an ill kind of arguing for euen by the like reason a man might conclude against Kings of which sort although there hath bin many good whom God hath vsed as instruments to worke great good vnto people in euery kingdom yet more of them haue bin euill as the Stories of euery country will shew and to abridge God of his power that he cannot as well gouerne by a woman as by a man when it is his good pleasure so to doe were great iniurie to God and a great discredit to all woman kind but to returne thither where I left In succession of Kings a question hath béene where the King hath had sons both before hee came to the Kingdome and after which of them is to succéed he that was borne before the Kingdom as hauing the prerogatiue of his birth-right or he that was dorne after as being brought into the world vnder a greater planet than the other neither hath there wanted reason or example for each side to found themselues Herodot lib. 4. Iustin lib. 11. Plutarchus in vita Artoxerxis on for Xerxes the son of Darius King of Persia being the eldest birth after his father was inthronised in the Kingdom carried away the Empire thereof from his brother Artemines or Artebarsones borne before his father came to the royall possession thereof so Arseces the son of another Darius borne in the time of his fathers Empire carried away the garland from his brother Cyrus borne before the Empire so Lewes Duke of Millan borne after his father was Guiâ—â—ard l. 1. Histor â—lonâ—us Decad. 2. lib. 6. Mich. Ritius lib. 2. de regib Hâ—â—gar Sigeb in â—roni Duke was preferred to the Dukedome before his brother Galliasius borne before the Dukedome But these examples notwithstanding and the opinion of sundry Doctors to the contrarie common vse of succession in these latter daies hath gone to the contrarie and that not without good reason for that it is not meet that any that haue right to any succession by the progatiue of their birthright such as all elder brethren haue should be despoiled therof except there be some euident cause of incapacitie to the contrarie Beside sundry contentions haue risen in kingdomes betweene the issue of the eldest sonne of the king dying before his father and the second brother suruiuing the father who should Raigne after the Father the Nephew challenging the same vnto him by the title of his fathers birthright and so by the way of representation for the eldest son euen the father yet liuing beares the person of the father how much ff de liberis posthumis l in suis then rather his father being dead Whereupon the Law cals as well the sonne Filiusfamilias as the father Paterfamilias for that the son euen during the fathers life is as it were Lord of his fathers state the other claiming as eldest son to his father at the time of his death vpon which title in old Pausanias lib. 3. Historiaris time there grew controuersie betwéene Areus the son of Acrotatus eldest son to Cleomines King of Lacedemon and Cleomines second son to Cleomines and vncle to the said Areus but after debate thereof the Senate gaue their sentence for Areus right against Cleomines beside Eunomus Plutarch in vita Licurg King of Lacedemon hauing two sons Polydectes and Lycurgus Polydectes dying without children Lycurgus succéeded in the kingdom but after that he vnderstood Polydectes widow had a child he yeelded the Crowne to him wherein he dealt far more religiously then either did king Iohn who vpon like pretence not only put by Arthur Plantaginet his eldest brothers son from the succession of the kingdom but also most vnnaturally tooke away his life from him or king Richard the third who most barbarously to come vnto the kingdom did not only sley his two innocent Nephewes but also defamed his owne mother in publishing to the world that the late king his brother was a bastard Our Stories Bartel l. si viâ—ae matre C. de bonis maternis primogeniti filii noÌ„ excludâ— secuÌ„dogenituÌ„ in regno doe not obscurely note that controuersie of like matter had like to growne betwéene Richard the second and Iohn of Gaunt his vncle and that hee had procured the counsell of sundry great learned men to this purpose but that he found the hearts of sundry Noblemen of the Land and specially the citizens of London to bee against him whereupon hee desisted from his purpose and acknowledged his Nephewes right Yet notwithstanding when as Charles the second Vicerius in vita Henricâ— 7. King of Cicill departed his life and left behind him a Nephew of Charles his cloâ—st son surnamed Martellus and his younger son Robert and the matter came in question which of them should succéede Clement the fifth gaue sentence for Robert the younger son of Charles deceased against the son of Martellus being Nephew to his Grandfather and so caused the said Robert to be proclamed king of both Caecils Clem. pastoralis de re iudicata which was done rather vpon displeasure that Pope Clement conceiued against the Emperour Frederick than that there was iust cause so to doe And yet Glanuill an old reuerent Lawyer of this Land and Lord chiefe Iustice vnder Henry the second séemeth to make this questionable here Glanuil l. 7. c. 3. in England who should bee preferred the Vncle or the
the triall of such businesse as belongeth to one Court to pul it to another Court specially when as the Court from whence it is drawne is more fit for it both in respect of the fulnesse of knowledge that that Court hath to deale in such businesse and also of the competencie of skill that is in the Iudges and professors of those Courts correspondent to these causes more than is in the Iudges and professors of the other Courts for the deciding and determining of these matters For albeit otherwise they are very wise and sufficient men in the vnderstanding of their owne profession yet haue they small skil or knowledge in matters pertaining to the Ciuile profession for that there is nothing written in their bookes of these matters more than is to be gathered out of a few Statutes of former time whose drist was not to open any doore vnto them to enter vpon the admirall profession but to preserue the Kings Iurisdiction from the Admirall incrochment as may by the said Statutes appeare wheras contrarily the Ciuile law hath sundry titles included in the bodie thereof concerning these kind of causes whereupon the interpreters of the Law haue largely commented others haue made seuerall Tractats thereof So that by all likelihood these men are more fit and better furnished to deale in this businesse than any men of any other profession as hauing beside the strength of their owne wit other mens helps and labors to rely vpon Besides this businesse many times concerns not only our owne countrimen but also strangers who are parties to the suit who are borne and doe liue in countries ordered by the Ciuile Law wherby they may be presumed they haue more skill and better liking of that Law than they can be thought to haue of our Lawes and our procéedings and therefore it were no indifferencie to call them from the trial of that Law which they in some part know and is the Law of their country as it is almost to all Christendem beside to the tryall of a Law which they know in no part is méere forraine vnto them specially when the Princes of this Land haue aunciently allowed the Ciuile Law to bee a Common Law in these cases as well to their owne subiects as it is to strangers Further the auocating away of causes in this sort from one Iurisdiction to another specially when the cause hath long depended in the Court from whence it is called insomuch as now it is ready to sentence or rather is past sentence and stands at execution cannot be but great iniurie to the subiect after so much labour lost and money spent in waste to begin his suite a new againe which is like to Sysiphus punishment who when he hath with all his might forced his stone vp to the top of the hill and so is as himselfe hopes at an end of his labour yet the stone rowles downe againe on him and so his second labour his strength being spent with the toile of the first is more grieuous than the former was which being semblably true in a poore Clyent who hath his cause in hearing there can bee no equitie in this fiction whereby a cause so néere ended should againe bee put vpon the Anuill as though it were still rough worke and new to bee begun And surely as there is no equitie in it so there is no possibilitie such a fiction should be maintained by Law for that it hath no ground of reason to rest his féete on For if this be graunted that such a fiction by Law may be made then one of these absurdities must needs follow either that a ship may ariue in a place where no water is to carrie it or if that it ariue according to the fiction either the people their houses their wealth shall be all ouerwhelmed in the water as the world was in Noahs Floud and Deucalions Deluge and so no bodie there shall be left aliue to make any bargaine or contract with the Mariners and shipmen that arriue there or that the people that dwell there shall walke vpon the water as people doe on land which Peter himselfe was not able to doe but had suncke if Christ had not reacht his hand vnto him and therefore far lesse possible for any other man to do So that it may be wel said these things standing as they do no such fiction can hold and that no action can be framed vpon it for as there is no Obligation of impossible things so there is no Action of things that neither Nature nor Reason will afford to be done neither is it to the purpose that the maintainers of these fictions doe say that in this case the place where the contract is made is not considerable which I take to be far otherwise for that when that themselues will conuey a Marine cause from the Sea vnto the Land they will lay it to be done in some speciall place of a Countie bee the place neuer so vnproper for such an action for that the foundation of these actions is the place where they were done as namely that they were done in the bodie of such a Countie or such a Countie and not vpon the maine sea or beneath the lowest bridge that is vpon any great riuer next the sea And therefore in two emulous Iurisdictions when they are so deuided as that one is assigned the sea the other the land the place of the action can in no sort be suppressed and another supplyed in the roome thereof Quod enim vna via prohibatur alia via non est permittendum quod prohibitum est directo prohibetur etiam per obliquum for if this were graunted then matter enough would be offered to one Iurisdiction to deuour vp the other and the Law would be easily eluded which to restraine either of these Iurisdictions to their owne place and to prouide that one in his greatnesse doe not swell vp against the other hath set either of them their bounds and lymits which they shall not passe which as it is the good prouision of the Law so ought either Iurisdiction in all obedience to submit it selfe therunto for that the diminishing of either of them is a wrong to the Prince from whom they are deriued who is no lesse Lord of the Sea than he is King of the Land and therefore in no sort such libertie must bee allowed to the one directly or indirectly as that it should bee a spoyle vnto the other which would easily come to passe if when as the law alloweth not any man to sue a Marine by the ordinarie course of the lawes of this land yet a man will follow it by an extraordinarie But where there is an vniformitie of Iurisdiction as that it is all by sea or all by land there may a thing be fained to be done in one place that was done in another place without any mans preiudice for that in this case the place is not
Court then needed not this complaint that now is but euery Iurisdiction should peaceably hold his owne right such as the Prince Law or Custome hath afforded vnto it THOMAS RIDLEY The contents of this Booke THE Diuision of the whole booke into foure parts pag. 1. What right or Law is ingenerall 1. What is the Law publicke and what the Law priuat 1. 2. What is the Law of Nature 2. What is the Law of Nations 2. What the Law Ciuile 2. That there be foure Tomes of the Ciuile Law The Digest the Code the Authentick and the Feuds 3. The Institutes are an Epitome of the Digest 3. What is the Digest and why it is so called and why the same are called the Pandects 3. What are the Institutes and why they are so called 4. The Pandects or Digest are diuided into seuen parts and they againe into fiftie Bookes 4. That the first part thereof conteineth foure Bookes and what is the sum thereof 4. That the second part hath eight books and what is the contents thereof 5. That the third part stretcheth it selfe into eight bookes and what they contein 6. That the fourth part containeth eight bookes and the contents thereof 7. That the fift part comprehendeth nine bookes and the matter thereof 9. That the sixt is spent in seuen bookes and the subiect thereof 11. That the seuenth part is diuided into six books and the matter thereof 15. The second Volume of the Ciuile Law is the Code which is distributed into twelue bookes 27 Why the Code is so called 28 The Argument of the first booke of the Code 30. 31. 32 The 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. booke of the Code containe like Titles as were handled in some one or other book of the Digest except onely a few as De Edendo de Indicta viduitate de Caducis Tollendis and some other small number beside 33 The Contents of the tenth booke of the Code 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. The Argument of the eleuenth booke of the Code 38. vsque ad pag. 41. The matter of the twelfth booke of the Code 41. The Authenticks are the third Volume of the Ciuile Law and why they are so called 45. That the Authenticks are diuided into 9. collations 45. What is the sum of the first Collation 46. What is the matter of the second collation 47. What of the third 48. What of the fourth 49. What of the fifth 50. What of the sixt 52. What of the seuenth 54. What of the eighth 55. What of the ninth 56. That the feuds are the fourth and last volume of the Ciuile Law 61. What a Feud is why it is so called and who were the first authors thereof 61. 62. How many kind of Feuds ther be viz. Temporal or perpetuall 62. 63. What is a Temporall Feud 63. What a perpetuall Feud 63. Perpetuall Feuds are gotten either by inuestiture or by Succession 63 What is Inuestiture 64 What is Succession 64 Of perpetual Feuds some are Regal some other not regal 65 What are Regall feuds 65 That of Regall Feuds some are Ecclesiasticall some Seculer and what either of them are 65 What be not Regall Feuds 65 Beside of Feuds some are Liege some other not Liege and what either of them are 65 What be vassals or liegemen and how many sorts there bee thereof 65 What be Valuasores Maiores and what Minores 65 By how many waies a Feud is lost 65 What is the Canon Law and that there are two principall parts thereof the Decrees and the Decretals 66 What be the Decrees and whereof they are collected and who was the author thereof 66 That there be two parts of the Decrees the Distinctions and the causes 66 What the Distinctions doe containe and what the causes 67 What be the Decretals and whence they are gathered 67 That there be three volumes of the Decretals the one called the Decretals of Gregory the ninth the other the sixt the other the Clementines who be the authors thereof when they were first set out 68 That each of them is diuided into fiue bookes 68 What the first booke of the Decretals comprehendeth 68. 69. 70. What the second 71. 72 What the third 73 What the fourth 74 What the fift 75. 76. 77 That the things the Ciuile Law is conuersant in here in this Realme are either ordinarie or extraordinarie 78 Of the ordinarie some are Ciuile some other are criminal 79 Ordinarie Ciuile matters are all Marine matters pertaining to the ship it selfe or any part thereof and all contracts betweene partie and partie concerning things done vpon or beyond the sea 79 Of shipwracks which notwithstanding are so of the cognition of the Ciuile Law within this Realme as that they are granted by the Kings Commission to the Lord Admirall and other which haue like Iurisdiction 83 The maner of proceeding in Ciuile Marine matters 84 Of Piracie and what it is which also is held by the Regall Commission and the maner of proceeding therein 85 Of extraordinarie matters belonging to the Ciuile law within this Land by the benefit of the Prince 86 Negotiation betweene Prince and Prince and the treatie thereof 86 Martiall causes in an Armie Ciuile or criminall and the ordering of them both 87 The bearing of Armes and the ranging of euery one into his roome of honor and the diuersitie of them and how they are to be come by 89 Of the diuersitie of colours in bearing Armes and which is the chiefest of them 91. 92 Of Emperours and Kings and the great Epithites they haue in the Ciuile Law 92 Of Precedencie and Protoclisie in great persons next after the Emperour and King 93 Of Knights and Doctors of Law and their precedencie 95 Of Esquires and Gentlemen 95. 96 Of great personages how they succeed each other in inheritance and other places of honour 97 Of womens gouernment and the defence thereof 98 Certaine questions in Succession betweene a brother borne before his fathers Kingdom and a brother after who shall succeed 100 Questions between the Kings second son liuing at his fathers death and the eldest brothers son his father dying before the Kings death who shall succeed 101 Of the Tytles of the Canon law in vse or out of vse among vs. 102 Some out of vse by reason of the palpable Idolatrie they conteined 103 Some other out of vse because they were contrarie to the laws of the land 103 Of Bishops Chauncelors their Office and Antiquitie 104 Of those Tytles that are absolute in vse among vs recited by Doctor Cousen in his Apologie for Ecclesiasticall proceeding 109 How the exercise of the Ciuile and Canon Law is impeached within this Realme and by how many waies 109 What is a Premunire 109 That Ecclesiasticall Iudges executing the Kings Ecclesiastical Law cannot be within the compasse of a Premunire as Prem is vnderstood by the statut of R. 2 and H. 4. 110 That the word Elswhere in the said statuts cannot be vnderstood of the
the rest of the matters that belong to the triall of the Ecclesiasticall Courts some are acknowledged to be absolutely in vse some other are challenged to be but in a certein measure in vse In absolute vse are those which neuer had any opposition against them which almost are those alone which belong to the Bishops degrée or order for all things which come within the compasse of the Ecclesiasticall Law are either belonging to the Bishops degrée or his Iurisdiction To his degrée or order belong the ordering of Ministers and Deacons the confirmation of Children the dedication of Churches and Churchyards and such like none of which haue béen challenged at any time to belong to any other Law The second sort is of them that belong to the Bishops iurisdiction which is partly voluntarie partly litigious Voluntarie is when those with whom the dealing is stand not against it but litigious it is when it is oppugned by the one part or the other Of this latter sort many things in sundry ages haue bin cald in question but yet rescued and recouered againe by the wise graue Iudges themselues who haue found the challenge of them to be vniust But what doth belong to either of them in priuat or what causes do appertaine to the whole Iurisdiction in generall because they haue bin alreadie particulerly set downe by that famous man of worthy memory Doctor Cosin in his learned Apologie for certaine Cos in in his Apologie part 1. c. 2. procéedings in Ecclesiasticall Courts I will not make a new catalogue of them but send the Reader for the knowledge thereof vnto his Booke but yet in my passage will I note which of them haue bin most chiefly oppugned and as occasion shall fall out speak to them And thus much as concerning those parts of the Ecclesiasticall Law which are here in vse with vs Now it followeth to shew whereby the exercise of that Iurisdiction which is granted to be of the Ciuile and Ecclesiasticall cognizance is defeated impeached by the Common Law of this Land which is the third part of this Diuision The impeachment therefore is by one of these meanes by Praemunire by Prohibition by Iniunction by Supersedeas by Indicauit or Quare impedit but because the fower last are nothing so frequent nor so harmfull as the others and that this Booke would grow into a huge volume if I should prosecute them all I will only treat of the two first and put ouer the rest vnto some better opportunitie A Praemunire therefore is a writ awarded out of the kings Bench against one who hath procured out any Bull or like processe of the Pope from Rome or elsewhere for any Ecclesiasticall place or preferment within this Realme or doth sue in any forteine Ecclesiasticall Court to defeat or impeach any Iudgement giuen in the Kings Court whereby the bodie of the offender is to be imprysoned during the Kings pleasure his goods forfeyted and his lands seized into the Kings hand so long as the offender liueth This writ was much in vse during the time the Bishop of Romes aucthoritie was in credit in this land and very necessary it was it should be so for being then two like principal authorities acknowledged within this Land the Spirituall in the Pope and the Temporall in the King the Spirituall 25. Edw. 2. 27. Edw. 3. ca. 1. 38 Edw. 3. ca. 1. 2. 7. Rich. 2. ca. 12. 13. Rich. 2. ca. 2. 2. H. 4. cap. 3. grew on so fast on the temporal that it was to be feared had not these statutes bin prouided to restraine the Popes interprises the spirituall Iurisdiction had deuoured vp the temporall as the temporall now on the contrary side hath almost swallowed vp the spiritual But since the forreine authoritie in Spirituall matters is abolished and eyther Iurisdiction is agnised to be setled wholy and only in the Prince of this land sundry wise mens opinion is there can lye no Praemunire by those Statutes at this day against any man exercising any subordinat Iurisdiction vnder the King whether the same be in the kings name or in his name who hath the same immediatly from the King for that now all Iurisdiction whether it be Temporall or Ecclesiasticall is the Kings and such Ecclesiasticall Lawes as now are in force are called the Kings Ecclesiasticall Lawes and the Kings Ecclesiasticall Courts For that the King cannot haue in himselfe a contrarietie of Iurisdiction fighting one against the other as it was in the case betwéene himselfe and the Pope although he may haue diuersitie of Iurisdiction within himselfe which for order sake and for auoyding of confusion in gouernment he may restraine to certeine seuerall kinds of causes and inflict punishment vpon those that shall go beyond the bounds or limits that are prescribed them but to take them as enemies or vnderminers of his state he can not for the question here is not who is head of the cause or Iurisdiction in controuersie but who is to hold plea thereof or exercise the Iurisdiction vnder that head the Ecclesiasticall or temporall Iudge Neyther is that to moue any man that the Statutes made in former time against such Prouisors which vexed the King and people of this land with such vniust suits doe not onely prouide against such processe as came from Rome but against all others that came elsewhere being like conditioned as they for that it was not the meaning of those Statutes or any of them thereby to taxe the Bishops Courts or any Consistory within this land for that none of them euer vsed such malepert sawsinesse against the King as to call the Iudgements of his Courts into question although they went far in strayning vpon those things and causes which were held to be of the Kings Temporall cognisance as may appeare by the Kings Prohibition thereon framed And beside the Archbishops Bishops and other Prelats of this Land in the greatest heat of all this businesse being then present in the Parliament whith the rest of the Nobilitie disauowed the Popes insolencie toward the King in this behalfe and assured him they would ought to stand with his Maiestie against the Pope in these and all other cases touching his Crowne and Regalitie as they were bound by their allegeance so that they being not guilty of these enterprises against the King but in as great a measure troubled in theyr owne Iurisdiction by the Pope as the King himselfe was in the right of his Crowne as may apppeare out of the course of the said Statutes The word Elsewhere can in no right sence be vnderstood of them or their Consistories although some of late time thinking all is good seruice to the Realme that is done for the aduancement of the Common Law and depressing of the Ciuill Law haue so interpreted it but wythout ground or warrant of the Statutes themselues who whollie make prouision against forreine authoritie and speak no word of domesticall proceedings But
the same word Elsewhere is to be ment and conceiued of the places of remoue the Popes vsed in those dayes being somtimes at Rome in Italy sometimes at Auignion in France semetimes in other places as by the date of the Bulls and other processe of that age may be séene which seuerall remoues of his gaue occasion to the Parliament of inserting the word Elsewhere in the bodie of those Statutes that thereby the Statutes prouiding against Processe dated at Rome they might not bée eluded by like Processe dated at Auignion or any other place of the Popes aboade and so the penaltie thereof towardes the offender might become voyd and be frustrated Neyther did the Lawes of this Land at any time whiles the Popes authoritie was in his greatest pride wythin this Realme euer impute Praemunire to any Spirituall Subiect dealing in anie Temporall matter by any ordinarie power wythin the land but restrained them by Prohibition only as it is plaine by the Kings Prohibition wherein are the greatest matters that euer the Clergie attempted by ordinarie and domesticall authoritie and yet are refuted only by Prohibition But when as certeine busie-headed fellowes were not content to presse vpon the kings Regall iurisdiction at home but would séek for meanes for preferment by forrein authoritie to controul the Iudgements giuen in the kings Courts by processe from the Pope then were Premunires decréed both to punish those audacious enterprises of those factious Subiects and also to check the Popes insolencie that he should not venter hereafter to enterprise such designements against the King and his people But now since the feare thereof is past by reason all entercourse is taken away betwéene the Kings good Subiects and the Court of Rome it is not to be thought the meaning of good and mercifull Princes of this land is the cause of these Statutes being taken away the effect thereof shall remaine and that good and dutifull subiects stepping happily awry in the exercise of some part of their Iurisdiction but yet without preiudice of the Prince or his Regall power shall be punished with like rigor of Law as those which were molesters gréeuers and disquieters of the whole estate But yet notwithstanding the edge of those Premunires which were then framed remaine sharpe and vnblunted still against Priests Iesuits other like Runnagates which being not content with their owne natural Princes gouernment séek to bring in againe that and like forrein authoritie which those Statutes made prouision against but these things I leaue to the reuerend Iudges of the land and others that are skilfull in that profession onely wishing that some which haue most insight into these matters would adde some light vnto them that men might not stumble at them and fall into the daunger of them vnawares but now to Prohibitions A Prohibition is a commaundement sent out of some of the Kings higher Courts of Records where Prohibitions haue bin vsed to be graunted in the Kings name sealed with the seale of that Court and subscribed with the Teste of the chiefe Iudge or Iustice of the Court from whence the said Prohibition doth come at the suggestion of the Plaintife pretending himselfe to be grieued by some Ecclesiasticall or marine Iudge in not admittance of some matter or doing some other thing against his right in his or their iudiciall procéedings commaunding the said Ecclesiasticall or marine Iudge to proceed no further in that cause if they haue sent out any censure Ecclesiasticall or Marine against the plaintife they recall it and loose him from the same vnder paine of the Kings high indignation vpon pretence that the same cause doth not belong to the Ecclesiasticall or Marine Iudge but is of the temporall cognisance and doth appertaine to the Crowne and dignitie Prohibitions some are Prohibitions of Law some other are Prohibitions of fact Prohibitions of Law are those which are set downe by any Law or Statute of this Land whereby Ecclesiasticall Courts are interdicted to deale in the matters therein contained such as are all those things which are expressed in the kings Prohibition as are also those which are mencioned by the second of Edward the sixt where Iudges Ecclesiasticall C. 13. 2. Edw. 6. are forbid to hold plea of any matter contrarie to the effect intent or meaning of the statute of W. 2. Capite 3. The statute of Articuli Cleri Circumspecte agatis Sylua Cedua the treaties De Regia Prohibitione the Statute Anno 1. Edwardi 3. Capite 10. or oght else wherein the Kings Court ought to haue Iurisdiction Prohibitions of fact are such which haue no precise word or letter of Law or Statute for them as haue the other but are raised vp by argument out of the wit of the Deuiser These for the most part are méere quirks and subtilties of law and therfore ought to haue no more fauour in any wise honourable or well ordered Consistorie than the equity of the cause it selfe doth deserue for such manner of shifts for the most part bréed nought else but matter of vexation and haue no other commendable end in them though they pretend the right of the Kings Court as those other Prohibitions of the law doe but the Kings right is not to be supposed by imagination but is to be made plaine by demonstration and so both the Statute of the 18. of Edward the third Capite 5. is where it is prouided no Prohibition shall goe out but where the King hath the cognisance and of right ought to haue and also by the forenamed Statute of Edward the sixt which forbids that any Prohibition shall bee graunted out but vpon sight of the libell and other warie circumstances in the said Statute expressed by which it is to bee intended the meaning of the Lawgiuers was not that euery idle suggestion of euery Attorney should bréed a Prohibition but such onely should bee graunted as the Iudge in his wisdome should thinke worthy of that fauour and of right and equitie did deserue it although as I must déeds confesse the Statute is defectiue in this behalfe for to exact any such precise examination of him in these cases as it is also in other points and is almost the generall imperfection of all statutes that are made vpon Ecclesiasticall causes but I feare me as emulation betwéene the two lawes in the beginning brought in these multitudes of Prohibitions either against or beside law so the gaine they bring vnto the Temporall Courts maintaineth them which also makes the Iudges they cesse not costs and damages in cases of of Consultation although the statute precisely requires their assent and and assignement therin because they would not feare other men from suing out of Prohibitions and pursuing of the same The Prohibitions of the law as haue beene before shewed are neither many nor much repined at because they containe a necessarie distinction betwéene Iurisdiction and Iurisdiction and imply the kings right and subiectes benefit but the
matrimony or that I was borne after that my father and mother were lawfully married together in both which you sée there is a mariage confessed the question onely is of the priority or posteriority of the natiuitie of him that is charged withall whither it hapned before or after his parents marriage which as they hold is the other member of speciall bastardie and yet this prioritie or posterioritie of natiuitie by vertue of the Kings writ comes no lesse in inquirie to the Ordinary in the case of the generall bastardie than they make it to be trauersable in the speciall bastardie and therfore the writ to the Ordinary for generall bastardie is conceiued in this manner viz. Inquiratis Lib. Intrac fol. 35. vtrum praedictus A. pars rea genitus vel natus fuit ante matrimonium contractum inter talem patrem suum et talem Gâ—anuill Lib. 7. cap. 15. matrem suam vel post So that eyther they must consesse there is no such bastardy as they make shew there is diuerse from that that is tried before the Ecclesiastical Iudge or that themselues do confound the members that should diuide the same and make them one or the other as them list for both simply they cannot be vnlesse they be distinguished with other notes and differences than hitherto I find they are But to say the truth if these things be well weyghed and considered speciall Bastardy is nothing else but the definition of the generall and the generall againe is nothing but the definite of the speciall for whosoeuer is borne out or before lawfull Matrimonie he is a bastard and he againe is a bastard that is borne before or out of lawful matrimony so that these things to be a bastard and to be borne out of lawfull matrimony are conuertible one with the other so then as it were very hard to make a diuorce betwéene these things that are so néere in nature one to the other being conuertible termes one to the other so hard again it were in policie to disioyne these things in triall that are so neere in affinitie one to the other because they are the same in substance nature as the other are and therfore eodem iure censeri debent 1â— q. ca. 2. cognoâ—imus then nè continentiae causaruÌ„ diuidantur which is no lesse absurditie in Law than it is a grosnesse in other learning to deny a principle or generall Maxime of the profession And so far hitherto as concerning the reasons arguments that may be brought against this speciall Bastardy Now it resteth that I shew by ancient precedents both these sorts of Bastardy haue appertained to the Ecclesiastical Courts only and the first precedent is in the incident the other in the principall and the precedent is no lesse auntient than Henry the seconds time as that which hapned vnder Alexander the third about the yeare of our Lord 1160. the case is this A certaine man of Norwich Diocesse called R. H. had issue Ca. Lator. ext qui filij sunt legitimi I. H. who had a sonne called C. H. I. H. deceasing before R. H. his father C. H. succéeded in his Grandfathers in heritance his said Grandfather being dead but M. H. brother to the said Grandfather pretending the said I. H. was a Bastard draweth the said C. H. into the Temporall Court vpon the inheritance whereupon C. H. called the said M. H. into the Bishop of Norwich his Court for the triall of his natiuitie but the Bishop long protracting the cause C. H. appealed to the Pope who delegated the same cause to the Bishop of Excester and the Abbot of Hereforde with order That if the said M. H. should not within two Monethes prooue that which he obiected against C. H. that then they should Intimate the same to the seculer Iudge before whom the inheritance was in question that he should not stay any longer vpon the question of legitimation but procéed to Iudgement in the cause of the inheritance Which president though it be long before the Statute of Bastardie made by Henry the 6. and so no writ went from the temporall Court for the certificat therof yet it shewes that the Temporall Iudges in those daies did not procéed to iudgement in the principall cause before the incident were decided by the Ordinary that they counted bastardy then to be of the Ecclesiast cognisance and that it was lawful for him that was preteÌ„ded to be a bastard to appeal from his Ordinary if either the Ordinary detracted the determination therof or were suspected of parciality And thus far of the incident There is an other much like precedent to this in the same Kings dayes but that is in the principall for that the inheritance came not first in question but the legitimation it selfe and the case is as followeth A certain man called Raphe kept one Analine the wife of one Ca. Causam ext qui filij sunt legitimâ— Allin by whom he was supposed to haue begot one Agatha who also being married had a sonne called Richard Raphe going beyond the Sea left Richard and his Mother Agatha in possession of all his goods lands but newes being after brought that the said Raphe was dead beyond sea Frauncis the brother of the said Raphe spoyled the said Richard of the possession of all the goods lands he had of the said Raphe his grandfather for that he did pretend the said Agatha his niece Mother of the said Richard was not borne of lawfull Matrimonie so that neither shée her selfe nor her sonne ought to succéed the brother of the said Frauncis but that the inheritance thereof did belong vnto himselfe whereupon the said Richard being thus spoiled by Frauncis his great vncle obtained letters of restitution to the Bishop of London the B. of Worcester the B. of Excester vnder this forme That before they entred into the principall cause which was this whether the said Agatha were borne in lawfull Matrimonie or not they should restore the said Richard to his Grandfathers inheritance But the Bishop of Rome after vnderstanding by the said Delegats that the plea of inheritance within this Realme did not belong vnto the Church but vnto the King recald that part of his rescript which concerned the restitution of the said Richard to his inheritance gaue order to the foresaid Bishops to procéed in the cause of legitimation willing them to inquire whether the said Agatha were borne of the said Aneline in the life time of her husband Allin and when shée dwelt cohabited with him as with her husband or whether the said Raphe father of the said Agatha kept the said Aneline openly publikely while the said Allin yet liued And if they found it to be so then they should pronounce her the said Agatha to be a Bastard for that Aneline her Mother could not be counted to be a wife but a whore which defyling her husbands bed