Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	king_n	legate_n	pope_n	9,788	5	7.0578	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A56225	The Vniversity of Oxfords plea refuted, or, A full answer to a late printed paper intituled, The priviledges of the University of Oxford in point of visitation together with the universities answer to the summons of the visitors ... / by William Prynne, Esq. ...	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.; Allestree, Richard, 1619-1681.; Fell, John, 1625-1686.; Langbaine, Gerard, 1609-1658.; Waring, Robert, 1614-1658.	1647 (1647)	Wing P4121; ESTC R5306	43,159	69

THE Vniversity of OXFORDS Plea refuted OR A full ANSWER to a late printed Paper Intituled The Priviledges of the Vniversity of Oxford in point of Visitation Together with the Vniversities Answer to the Summons of the Visitors Manifesting the Vanity and Falsity of this pretended Vniversity Priviledge and Plea to the Visitors Jurisdiction That the right of Visiting the Vniversity of Oxford is onely in the Kings Majestie and that it is exempt from all other Iurisdiction by its Foundation Prescription and severall Grants of Exemption And insufficiency of all the Allegations and Authorities produced to support it Published for the information of the Iudgements and satisfaction of the consciences of all ingenuous Members of that Vniversitie who onely out of Ignorance or Error not Obstinacy or Malignity have demurred to the Iurisdiction of the Visitors thereof though appointed authorized by Ordinance of Parliament and Commission under the Great Seal of England By William Prynne Esq one of the said Visitors Prov. 19. 20. Heare Counsell and receive Instruction that thou maist he wise in in thy latter end London Printed by T. B. for Michael Spark 1647. ROBERT DAVIES of ILannerch● Denbighshire● The Vniversity of OXFORDS Plea refuted THE ingenuous Answer of some of the Doctors and both the Proctors of my Mother-University of Oxford to the honourable standing Committee of Lords and Commons for its regulation on the 16. of this instant November before whom they were then personally convented for demurring to the jurisdiction of the Visitors appointed them by both houses of Parliament to this effect That they did in their former papers presented by the Proctors October 8. by way of petition onely represent their sense of their own priviledges and their Obligations as they conceived by divers oaths for the maintaining of them without circumscribing or limiting much lesse denying or contemning the authority of the Lords and Commons but purposely avoyding as still they did desire to avoyd all questions of so high and transcendent a nature it being possible that they might be in an errour and yet to be obliged in conscience not to do otherwise then they have done till they are convinced of that errour And therefore humbly d●sired convenient time to advise with councell more fully to inform themselves in a case so extraordinary and of so great concernment not onely to themselves but to the whole Vniversity in present and in future c. enduced me not onely then to move this honourable Committee that the University and they might be fully heard by their Counsel on a convenient day to alledge whatever they could both in maintainance of their respective Answers delivered in under their hands to some of the Visitors and then by them there acknowledged which was accordingly ordered in their favour But likewise to borrow some time from my other employments to examine and refute all those pretended University priviledges and false allegations to support them in a Letter lately printed at Oxford by the Universities approbation if I am not misinformed entituled The Priviledges of the Vniversity of OXFORD in point of Visitation c. which hath seduced many to dispute and disobey the Visitors power wherein the substance of all their Objections against the Visitors jurisdiction in point of law or conscience are comprised that so I might in a University way by strength of argument and evidence not by power and force inform the misguided judgments and satisfie the erronious consciences of all such members of this University liable to our visitation whose obstinacy or malignity shall not render them altogether incapable of better instruction and consequently of any hopes of commiseration or pardon for their contumacy I● is not my design in this summary Discourse to enter into any large debate of the Sovereign power of both houses of Parliament whose supream jurisdiction to visit punish reform all abuses and corruptions in the Kings own Court in the highest Courts of Justice the greatest Officers of State and in all Corporations and Societies of men whatsoever within this Realm I have largely vindicated in a other Treatises seeing the University it self and the parties convented do willingly wave this dangerous Dispute as fatall and destructive to them if positively insisted on but onely to demonstrate to them the vanity and falsity of this their pretended Priviledge they peremptorily assert and principally rely on as their lawfull Inheritance and Birth-right which they are obliged by oath and duty to maintain That the right of visiting the Vniversity of Oxford is onely in the Kings Majesty and that it is exempt from all other jurisdiction both by foundation prescription and severall grants of exemption This their claim and assertion I shall irrefragably falsifie and refute by Histories and Records which cleerly evidence First That the University of Oxford was anciently of right for many ages under the jurisdiction if not visitation of the Bishop of Lincoln as he was their Diocesan Secondly that it was anciently of right and so continued till this Parliament under the visitation jurisdiction of the Archbishops of Canterbury as Metropolitanes who have frequently visited this University and Cambridge too as being within their Province and have been acknowledged and adjudged by King Richard the second King Henry the fourth and an whole Parliament in his reign and by King Charles himself upon solemn debate to be lawfull Visitors of it de jure And that these three Kings and the Parliament of 13. H. 4. have by their Charters and Votes absolutely disclaimed the King's sole right of visiting the Universities and alwayes resolved the contrary when the Universities for their own ends have set it on foot and laid claim unto it no King of England before Henry the eight ever visiting either of the Universities for ought appears by any authentick Records Thirdly That the Pope by his Legat hath visited both Universities without resistance or any Plea put in to his jurisdiction no longer since then Q. Maries reign and that the Universities are subject to their Chancellours jurisdiction and visitation too by their own conffessions Fourthly That most particular Colledges and Hals in both Universities as Colledges Hals and Members of the University● have their particular Visitors appointed by the founders to whose visitation and jurisdiction they are subject and not to the King's alone Fiftly That their pretended grants of exemption were procured onely from Popes not from the Kings of England that our Kings themselves one Parliament have damned them as derogatory to the King's Prerogative even in times of Popery and the Vniversity it self disclaimed and renounced them both before the King and in full Convocation as a grievance not a priviledge obtained against their wils and without their privity to their prejudice When I have made good these positions the whole University and their Delegates if not stupendiously obstinate must necessarily retract this their Plea as false and nugatory and disclaim their imaginary Priviledge For the first

on the Rolls of that yeer In the twelft yeer of King CHARLES William Laud Archbishop of Canterbury intending to visit both Universities by his Metropolitical Right the Universities revived this Plea against his jurisdictiō which had rested in peace without any controversie from K. Henry the 4th his resolution Anno 1612. till that very yeer 1635. The Universities alleaged that the King onely was and ought to be their sole Visitor and that they were exempt from all Archiepiscopal and Episcopal visitation by foundation prescription papall Buls royall Charters and expresse Statutes the Vice-Chancellour and Heads of the University of Cambridge on the 24. of December 1635. presented this ensuing Paper to the Archbishop against his Metropoliticall power to visit them comprizing in it whatever the University of Oxford hath alleaged or can colorably object against their present visitation the Originall whereof I have in my custody endorsed with the Archbishop's own hand A Summary Brief or Extract of the REASONS wherefore the University of CAMBRIDGE is exempt both from Archiepiscopal and Episcopal Jurisdiction and VISITATION IT being laid for a ground that the Chancellour of the University as Ordinarius hath and of ancient time had ordinary jurisdiction within the Vniversity as may appear as well by the Letters patents of King Richard the second under the great Seal of England of a grant to the Chancellour to make a significavit into the Chancery of his excommunications as Bishops used to do whereupon the Writ of De excommunicato capiendo was to issue as also by a multitude of presidents of the exercise of spirituall Censures and Jurisdictions amongst which it doth appear that in the time of King Edward the first the Chancellour of the Vniversity did excommunicate the Builiffs of Cambridge for infringing the Priviledges of the Vniversity and in the time of King Henry the eighth Iohn Edmunds then Master of Peter-house and Vice-Chancellour of the University did excommunicate Dr Cliffe Chancellour to the Bishop of Ely for excommunicating a priviledged man and the matter comming before Cardinal Woolsey the Popes Legate it was ordered for the University and Doctor Cliffe submitted to the said Vice Chancellour and was absolved by him publikely in the Vniversity In the first place The Vniversity of Cambridge is Studium generale and Communitas Clericorum and it is f one of the royall Prerogatives of the Kings of England that where they are founders of Monasteries Colleges or other Religious places such Religious places so founded are eo ipso exempt from Episcopall and Archiepiscopall Iurisdiction and are onely to be visited by persons delegated by the King's Majesty by Commission under the great Seal of England That the University is of the royall foundation of the King's Progenitors or Predecessors it appears not onely by authentick Historians but also by a Petition exhibited by the Chancellour and Schollers of the University 5. R. 2. to the King in Parliament concerning the Townsmen of Cambridge burning their Charters and other Writings and Muniments c. And the reason of the Petition is given Cum dicta Vniversitas Cantebrigiae sit ex ordinatione fundatione illustrium Progenitorum vestrorum propter honorem Dei Sanctae Ecclesiae which Petition was accepted and a Decree thereupon made in Parliament against the Townsmen 2. The Popes of Rome untill 26. H. 8. did usurp upon the Imperial Crown of the Realm and did assume to themselves a superiority and supremacy in all matters of Ecclesiastical government and in very g ancient times there were Grants Rescripts or Buls to free the Vniversity from the jurisdiction of the Bishop of the Diocesse and of the Archbishop Pope Iohn the two and twentieth in the eleveneh yeer of the reign of King Edward the second and at his request doth confirm to this Vniversity which he called Studium generale all manner of Priviledges and Indulgences before that time granted to it by any of his Predecessors or any Kings of this Realm The Prior of Barnwell also Anno Dom. 1430. as delegate to Pope Martin the fift by vertue of that power committed to him confirmeth the jurisdiction and exemption of the Vniversity by an authentick instrument under the seal of the said Pryor and his Covent called Processus Barnwellensis the Original whereof is still in Archivis Academia Pope Eugenius Anno Dom. 1433. being 12. H. 6. reciting the Buls of Pope Honorius Sergius primus the which were n seven hundred yeers before that time for the freeing of the Vniversity from the jurisdiction of the Bishop and Archbishop and reciting the processe of Barnwell doth confirm the same and supplies all defects as appeares by the Original in Parchment in Archivis Vniversitatis 3. There is a o constant custome and prescription for the freeing of the Vniversity from the jurisdiction of the Bishop and Archbishop And a Prescription and Custome will prevail in this case as well upon the canon Law as it will upon the municipal and fundamental Lawes of the Kingdom and the rather because the canon Law had his force in this Realm by usage and custom And to prove that this Custome and Prescription was ancient in the time of Henry the sixt it appears by the foresaid instrument under the seal of the Prior of Barnwell termed Processus Barnwellensis that the Masters Doctors and Schollers of the University for the preserving of their immunities and exemptions from the Bishop and Archbishop their Charters and Buls from the Popes being lost or burnt did addresse themselves by Petition to Pope Martin the fift who did make a Commission Delegate to the Prior of Barnwell and Iohn Deeping and to either of them to enquire c. The Prior takes upon him the execution of the Commission the University in the Regent house make a Proctor under the common Seal There are seven Witnesses examined who speak for the time of their memory some of them for sixty yeers that by all that time the Chancellour of the Vniversity had exercised Ecclesiastical jurisdiction within the University and names Richard Scroop and eleven other Chancellours of the Vniversity and p that no Archbishop or Bishop did interpose and doth instance Doctor Fordham Bishop of Ely comming to Cambridge with an intention to visit the University when he understood of the Priviledge of the Vniversity he did supersede Sithence that Processe being above two hundred yeers ago there have been fourteen Archbishops of Canterbury and sixteen Bishops of Ely and none of them have visited the Vniversity of Cambridge notwithstanding they have visited their Diocesse and Province 4. Not insisting on sundry p ancient Charters of former Kings King Edward the second An. 11. of his reign writes to Pope Iohn the two and twentieth for confirming the ancient Priviledges which the Vniversity then used with augmentation of new the which is in the Tower of London and was under the great Seal of England And 22. Maii

first fixed did by an expresse Charter and Decree absolutely disclaim and adjudge it for the Archbishops against the University of Oxford upon a solemn reference of the whole businesse to him That when the Vniversity of Oxford renewed it again King Henry the fourth to whose determination the Vniversity and Archbishop submitted the descision thereof adjudged it for the Archbishops against the Vniversity and disclaimed this pretended Prerogative of his sole visiting she Vniversities which determination of his was ratified by the Lords and Commons in Parliament as a binding Decree against the Vniversity and their Successors That the Archbishops of Canterbury enjoyed the Privilege of visiting the Vniversities without dispute till 12. Caroli who upon full hearing of both Vniversities and the Archbishop before himself and his Councell by his Letters Patents under the great Seal confirmed the descisions of Richard the second and Henry the fourth and the Archbishops Metropolitical right of visiting the Vniversities notwithstanding all Pleas Buls and Charters alledged for their exemprion and likewise disavowed his own pretended right of sole visiting the Vniversities as Vniversities That the Popes Buls now insisted on for exempting the Vniversities from Episcopal and Archiepiscopal jurisdiction and visitation have been renounced by the Vniversities themselves and declared null and void by these three Kings and the Parliament of 13. H. 4. and no bar at all to the Archbishops right then much lesse to the Parliaments now That no Kings of England ever visited the Vniversities till King Henry the eighth and that neither his visitation of the Vniversity by his Commissioners if reall nor K. Edward the sixt by his nor the Statutes of 26. H. 8. c. 1. 25 H. 8. c. 19 31. nor 1 2 Phil. Mary c. 8. nor 1 Eliz. c. 1. did deprive the Archbishops of Canterbury of this jurisdiction nor yet the Bishop of the Diocesse whose jurisdiction continued till the twelft yeer of King Charles as this clause in his Letters Patens Declaramus quod Vniversitates praedictae per Episcopos Archidiaconos IN POSTERVM NON VISITENTVR intimates which fully makes good my second and fift position too in every particuler branch I shall be briefe in proof of my third That Cardinal Poole Archbishop of Canterbury in the third and fourth yeer of Queen Maries Reigne as Popes Legat visited both Vniversities is thus related by Matthew Parker his immediate successor Antiqu. Eccles. Brit. p. 422. Reginaldus Polus in LEGATIONE ADMINISTRANDA quia ●um in vivis vix aliqui Evangelici quas flammis extingueret noti essent in mortuos saevire decrevit Ac primum Cantuariensem Diocaesim VISITAVIT deinde CANTEBRIGIENSEM ET OXONIENSEM ACADEMIAS Johanni Christophersono Cicestrensi Cutberto Scoto Cestrensi Episcopis necnon Colo maximè Ormaneto quem omnit us rebus praefecit LVSTRANDAS ad Pontificiam ●mussim atque normam reducendas commisit Hi c●●m in collegi●s omnia perturbassent novisque duris legibus multorum juvenum praeclar●s indoles a studiis prorsus alienassent ne quid crudelitatis omitterent mort●orum sepulchra violarunt c. The whole form and proceedings of their visitation of the Vniversity and Colledges of Cambridge is at large recorded by Master Fox in his Acts and Monuments Edit. 1640. Vol. 3. p. 762 to 780. where those who please may read them at their leisure both the Vniversities submitting to his Visitors visitation of them not onely as Archbishop but Popes Legat too cui Papa commisii visitationem reformationem Studiorum generalium as he expressed in his Processe This Cardinal altered the old and made new Statutes for the Vniversities rejecting those made by King Edward the sixt his authority which Statutes of his are yet remaining among the Records of both Vniversities That the Chancellours of both Universities have anciently and at this day claimed a power of jurisdiction and visitation too in some cases over them is confessed and argued by the University of Cambridge in the Summary Brief of their Reasons forecited p. 29 32. they alledging this as one principall reason why they should be exempt from all Episcopall and Archiepiscopall jurisdiction and visitation too in some cases and the University of Oxford as is apparent by the words of the Commission of Queen Elizabeth 23. Aprilis 19 Eliz. made the se●● same Plea and suggestion against Archbishop Grinda●s jurisdiction in receiving an Appeal from William Wilson Rector elect of Lincoln-colledge in Oxford against the Bishop of Lincoln and his Visitors who refused to admit him Rector of chat Colledge That the Chancell●ur of the Vniversity of OXFORD time out of mind had been in quiet possession of this Priviledge among others Quod Doctores Magistri Scholares omnes singuli dictae Academiae ab omni jurisdictione Dominio vel potestate quorumcunque Archiepiscoporum etiam Legatorum natorum necnon Episcoporum aliorum Ordinariorum judicum quorumcunque quoad omnes Contractiones vel quasi initos infra praedictam Vniversitatem quoad OMNIA CRIMINA vel quasi PVNITIONEM corundem exceptis prae-exceptis mahemia felonia Assisis placitis de libero tenemento quoad OMNES ACTVS SCHOLASTICOS quamdi● degerint in e●dem Vniversitate sunt exempti totalitèr liberati praedicto CANCELLARIO SUBJECTI Et quod CANCELLARIUS praedictae Vniversitatis OMNEM ET OMNIMODAM JURISDICTIONEM ECCLESIASTICAM ET SPIRITUALEM IN PRADICTOS SCHOLARES ET ALIAS PERSONAS EXERCERE LIBERE ET LICITE POSSIT ET VALEAT The reality of which pretended exemption priviledges and infringment of them by Wilson's Appeal the Queen referred to the examination and determination of the Bishops of London and Rochester Christopher Wray chief Baron of the Exchequer Sir William Cordell Master of the Rols Thomas Wilson Doctor of Law one of the Masters of Request● Iohn Gibbons Doctor of Law and one of the Masters of the Chancery and Iohn Griffeth Doctor of Law or any seven six five four three or two of them but what they did or determined therein is uncertain If then the Popes Legats and the Chancellours of both Universities have exercised and time out of minde enjoyed such jurisdiction over the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge their pretence of being subject onely to the King's visitation and jurisdiction must necessarily be disclaimed being directly contrary to their own expresse claims in relation to their Chancellours My fourth position That the particular Colledges Hals and Members of the Vniversity have their particular Visitors appointed by their founders and private Statutes to whose visitation and jurisdiction they are subject not to the King's alone is such a known truth that I need not prove it having given some touches upon it * already in Lincoln-colledge and Brasennose The rather because the author of the Priviledges of the University of Oxford p. 6. makes this Argument against the Visitors present jurisdiction We have yet a

Parliament in the 13. yeer of Queen Elizabeth rot. 36. the title whereof is onely mentioned in the printed Acts therefore the Parliament being the true Founders of it have best right to visit it by the common Law by us their Commissioners as this Objection proves Sixtly this plea That the Vniversity is of the King's foundation only as the Objector grants is but the Vniversities own device who anciently did and yet do shelter themselves under the title of it against their lawfull Visitors and are very ill advised to fly to this false shelter now since three Kings and one Parliament have severall times driven them from it as the premises evidence Seventhly admit the antecedent true that the King and his Predecessors were sole Founders of the Vniversity yet the sequell is unfound Ergo they only are the Visitors of it and none others seeing I have proved that others have of right visited and had jurisdiction in and over it as a Vniversity from time to time besides our Kings and that of right by our Kings and Parliaments resolutions notwithstanding this pretext of being sole Founders Eightly the King and his progenitors by their Charters are as much Founders of every Corporation every Company of Merchants and other Tradesmen in London and other Cities as of the Vniversities will it therefore follow Ergo none must visit or regulate them but the King and the houses of Parliament the Committees for Trades Complaints Grievances Clothiers Weavers c. may not regulate nor reform them much lesse the Lord Major and Court of Aldermen as they have usually done Ninthly the Book of 6 H. 7 14. is no resolution but a private opinion It only speaks of the Kings free Chappels without cure which he or his Chancellours shall visit not the Bishop but by Commission not of Vniversities or Colledges the thing in question nor yet of Monasteries Churches and Chappels with cure of souls which the Archbishop and Bishop of the Diocesse shall visit though built founded and endowed by the King himself as this very Law-book 6 H. 7 14. grants whence most ancient Abbies founded by our Kings were exempted from archiepiscopal and Episcopal visitation and jurisdiction by special Charters confirmed in * Parliament and Popes Buls the King's meer foundation and Charters alone being no legall exemption from their power by the common or Canon Law As for the Statute of 2 H. 5 c. 1. it speaks only of Hospitals of the King's foundation that the Ordinaries shall visit them by his Commission not of Colledges or Vniversities without the words and intention of the act Tenthly this and other Law-books onely say that the Bishop shall not visit Hospitals and Free-Chappels of the King's foundation but no Book avers the Houses of Parliament may not visit them nor their Delegates and to argue the Bishop of the Diocesse may not visit the King's Free-Chappels or Hospitals Ergo the Parliament may not do it is no better Logick then The Ordinary cannot visit nor reform the greatest Officers of State the Cours of Justice at Westminster the Kings own Court nor any civil abuses and publike grievances Ergo the Houses of Parliament cannot do it Yea all our Books agree that the Bishop by Commission under the great Seal may lawfully visit the Kings Freechappels Foundations and the stat of 2. H. ● c. 1. enacts as much But we have such a Commission to visit the University therefore we may lawfully do it These answers I suppose have sufficiently shaken the sandy foundation of the Universities Exemption the Kings Foundation of it whereon they most rely Yea but the Objector learnedly replys p. 3. Here you may please to consider that the Foundation of the Vniversity being the Kings personal act his interest lies not within the reach of that Beaten evasion of a publike and politique Capacity I answer I understand not wel what he means by the Kings personal act Unless the act of the King in his natural Capacity as a Man not in his Politick as a King If so then it follows 1. That the King and his Progenitors as Kings in their publike and politick Capacities were not founders of the University but only in their natural as private men which subverts his own assertion and foundation 2. That this priviledg of a Founder is not annexed to the Kings publike and politick but natural and personal Capacity and so not descendible nor hereditary since personal actions acts and priviledges by the rules of the Law * die with the person If he mean by the Kings personal act that the King in person laid the very first Foundation stone of the University with his own hands or writ and sealed the Patent or Charter that first founded it himself and not by any Substitutes or Officers This wil b● hard for him to prove and the sequel wil be That the King only in his own Royal person must visit the Vniversity now but net by any Commissioners or Delegates and so all his other Foundations contrary to all former presidents Statutes and Law-books that he may visit them by Commissioners which the Un●versities Answer acknowledgeth and himself to● The next Ground of Exemption urged is pre-scription and Bulls of Popes both which being abandantly refuted in the premised positions and no plea at all against both Houses of Parliament or any power derived from them not mentioned nor included in nor yet confinable by these Bulls though they might hold good against any ordinary or inferior Jurisdiction if true I shall here therefore pretermi● without further Answer The 3d ground of Exemption alleaged it * grants of Exemption by Popes allowed and confirmed by Charters from several Kings both by themselves and in Parliaments to prove which there are quoted in the Margin some Popes Buls out of H●re the old book of Oxford Statutes and the Senior Proctors Book with this addition 25. H. 8. c. 21. All power of Visitation is given only to such as shall have immediate Authority by the Kings Commission under the great Seal of England in places formerly exempted as COLLEDGES c. All Letters Patents heretofore made by the Kings Progenitors in behalf of the Vniversities are confirm'd by act of Parliament 13. Eliz. 19. Eliz. part 13. in Dorso The Priviledges of the Vniversity are confirm'd in the very words of Boniface 8. acknowledged they had them by prescription the immediate subjection of the Vniversity to the Authority and Iurisdiction of the Prince and all their other Exemptions ratified and those acknowledged to be sworn to in the Oath taken by every Graduate These are all the evidences of moment produced to make good this ground I answer 1. That all these Popes Bulls of Exemption now insist●●●on were so farr from being allowed and confirmed by Charters from several Kings both by themselves and in Parliaments that King Richard the 2. and King Henry the 4. by both their Charters and in Parliament upon

be Visitors and what person or person shal be visited and what things inquired of in Visitations in sundry other Acts of Parliament as 31. E. 1. Rastal 304. 2 H. 5. c. 1. 25. H. 8. c. 21. 26. H. 8. c. 21. 26. H. 8. c. 1. 28. H. 8. c. 10. 31. H. 8. c. 13. 14. 2. E. 6. c. 1. 5. E. 6. c. 3. 1. 2. Phil. Mary c. 1. 8. 1. Eliz. c. 1. 2. 14. Eliz. c. 5. 3. I answer it is true That the ancient Priviledges Liberties and Franchises of the respective Vniversities of Oxford and Cambridge heretofore granted ratified and confirmed by the Queens Highness and her most noble Progenitors for the better increase of learning and further suppressing of Vice are confirmed by Act of Parliament An 13. Eliz. rot 36. which incorporates both Vniversities but it neither confirmed the Popes Bulls of exemption nor gave them any Immunity from Archiepiscopal or Episcopal Jurisdiction and Visitation it being no ancient Libertie Priviledg or Franchise ratified or confirmed to them by the Queen or any of her noble Progenitors nor yet once mentioned or intended in the Large Patent of Priviledges of King Henry the 8. bearing date the 10 of April in the 14 year of his R●ign made and granted to the Chancellor and Schollars of Oxford nor in Queen Elizabeths Patent to the Chancellor Masters and Schollars of the University of Cambridge bearing date the 26 of April in the 3 years of her Raign particularly confirmed by this Act. Therefore this Act makes nothing at all to purpose 4. The Objected Commission in 19 Eliz part 12. in dors● pretends no exemption of the Vniversity and Colledges from Archiepiscopoll and Episcopall Visitation and Jurisdiction simply the thing not then in question neither doth it acknowledg or confirm the Vniversities Priviledges and all other Exemptions in the very words of Boniface the 8. and acknowledg they had them by prescription c. as is untruly surmised But first it mentions divers priviledges then claimed by the Chancellor Doctors and Schollars of the Vniversity and some exemptions in causes wholly belonging to the Chancellors conusance and next it only complains of William Wilsons infringing these Priviledges and Exemptions contrary to his Oath in complaining to the Deane of the Arches of Canterbury and to Arch-Bishop Grindal against the Bishop of Lincoln and his Visitors of Lincoln Colledg in Oxford for refusing to admit him to the Rectorship thereof to which he falsly pretended he was really and lawfully elected and presented and for sending Inhabitions and Citations thence to the Bishop and his Visitors who were Members of the Vniversity to appear in the Arches and with taking the final Examination and Determination of this election unto themselves which of right belonged to the Chancellor and University Upon which bare suggestion and complaint the Queen granted a Commission to two Bishops and six others in a summary way without any noise or formal proceedings according to the truth and meer equity of the cause by the best and most effectual means they could De et super VERITATE PRAEMISSORVM et PRIVILEGIORVM et EXEMPTIONVM DICTAE VNIVERSITATIS ac in causa et causis praedictis c. procedere et fine debito omni appellatione et querela nuillitatis et supplicatione quacunque remotis terminare statutis Canonibus et consuetudinibus in contrarium editis litisve pendentibus in aliquo non obstante So as this Commission doth no ways confirm the priviledges nor ratifie the exemptions therein claimed by the Chancellor and Vniversity by Charter statutes and prescription for then it would have remitted this cause of Election from the Deane of the Arches and Arch Bishops Delegates to the Chancellor and Vniversity to whom by ancient Priviledg they alleaged it did belong but only refers the Examination of the truth of the Premises Priviledges Exemptions and Determination of this cause and controversy about this Election to certain Commissioners thus summarily to determine any Statutes Canons Customes or suits depending to the contrary notwithstanding and so rather doubts of and questions the truth of there alleaged Vniversity Priviledges and Exemptions then confirms them though procured by the Chancellors and Universities means and drawn up by their own directions But admit this Commission ratified and confirmed the Priviledges and Exemptions claimed in it by the Vniversity yet the substance of them is no more then this That * all personal contracts suits controversies and offences of Schollars and Priviledged persons arising within the precincts of the Vniversity except maihmes and fellonies are to be tried and determined in the Vniversity before the Chancellor only not before any Arch-Bishops Legates Bishops or Ordinary Judges out of the Vniversity Will it therefore follow Therefore the Vniversity cannot without multiplied perjury acknowledg any Visitor but the King and such as are immediately sent by him and is totally exempted not only from all Archiepiscopal and Episcopal but likewise from the Parliaments and their Delegates Visitation No doubtless the rather because King Charles himself and his Couns●● resolved that neither this Commission nor * any other Charter of Priviledges or Exemptions did free the Universities from the Arch-Bishop of Canterburies Metropolitical Visitation much less then from both Houses Delegates authorized by Ordinances and Commission for to visit it The 4th ground and argument urged for the Universities Exemption from our Visitation is this * That all visitations of the Vniversities except in Queen Maries Raign by Cardinal Pool as Popes Legat were held by the respective Princes authority and the persons visiting were immediatly sent by them only as their Representatives and who ever sate the King visited For which one Visitation by K. Henry the 8. another by King Edward the 6. a third by Queen Elizabeths Visitors Commissions are cited therefore the Universities are exempt from all other Visitors and those now appointed by both Houses but not immediatly by the King To this I answer First That no King of England before Henry the ● did either in Person or by Commission visit the Universities and his once meer Visitation of them by Commissioners if true since I find no such Commission extant after much inquiry was no exemption of them in point of Law from their former Visitors no more then of the particular Colledges which they likewise visited from the Visitors designed them by their Founders Secondly King Edward the 6. his Commission and Commissioners for their Visitation were made by the advice of the Lord Protector and others of his privy Councel He being then an infant but of 11. years of age not made nor nominated personally and immediately by himself as the Commissions themselves attest And for any Commission under the great Seal of Queen Eliz. for the Vniversities Visitation it is to me a meer non liquet which I cannot find upon search after it Thirdly King Charl● himself and his Counsel resolved upon f●l