and right Information probably the King would have rejected That the King might have a fit Testimony of the Person before he granted any such Mandate it pleased his Majesty to make this following Order Having taken into Our serious consideration how much it will conduce to the Glory of God Our own Honor and the welfare both of Our Church and the Universities that the most worthy and deserving Men be favored and preferred according to their Merit and being satisfied that the Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London are the most Competent Judges in such Cases We have thought fit and do hereby declare Our pleasure to be that neither of Our Principal Secretaries of State do at any time move Us on the behalf of any person whatsoever for any Preferment in the Church or any Favor or Dispensation in either of Our Universities without having first Communicated both the person and the thing by him desired unto the Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and Bishop of London or one of them now and for the time being and without having their or one of their Opinions and Attestations in the Case and if at any time We be moved in like manner by any other person whatsoever Our pleasure is and We do hereby declare that neither of Our said Principal Secretaries shall present any Warrant unto Us for Our Royal Signature in such a Case until the said Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and Bishop of London or one of them have been acquainted therewith and have given therein his Opinion and Attestation as aforesaid By this we find that the King resolved to have perpetuated this yet it was Revoked as also a later Mandate as appears by the following Mandate And that this Our Declaratión may stand as a lasting and inviolable Rule for the future Our further Will and Pleasure is that the same be Entered not only in both the sides of Our said Principal Secretary of State but also in the Signet Office there to remain upon Record Given c. the 27th of February 1680 / 1. §. 12. The Re-calling of a Mandate after the former I Insert this out of the Series because I may joyn the Revocation of another Order as followeth Whereas We did by Our Warrant under Our Signet Manual bearing Date at Windsor the 12th of August 1681. Signifie and Declare Our pleasure to be that neither of Our Principal Secretaries of State should at any time move Us on the behalf of any Favor or Dispensation in either of Our Universities without having first Communicated both the person and the thing by him desired unto the Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury for the time being John Earl of Radnor George Earl of Hallifax Lawrence Viscount Hyde the Lord Bishop of London for the time being and Edward Seymour Esq and without having the Opinion and Attestation of them or any Four of them in the Case and that if at any time we should be Moved in like manner by any other person whatsoever Our pleasure was and We did thereby Declare that neither of Our Principal Secretaries of State should present any Warrant unto Us for Our Royal Signature in such a Case until the said Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury c. had been acquainted therewith and had given their Opinion and Attestation as aforesaid and whereas We have thought fit for special Causes Us thereto moving to Revoke and determin Our said Warrant We do accordingly hereby Revoke and determin the same and all the Authority thereby Granted and Our pleasure also is that Our Order be Entred not only in both the Offices of Our said Secretaries but also in the Signet-Office Dated the 20th of September 1684. By this mandate it appears that it is in the Kings power to Revoke his own Constitutions at his pleasure §. 13. I might add to these the King 's dispensing with Statutes of Cathedral Churches about Leases annexing the Revenues of Prebends to a Deanry ordering the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury to Grant Dispensations for a Bishop to hold Rectories in Commendum of which I could produce many Instances but I keep my self to the business of the Universities In which I hope by a sufficient enumeration of particulars I have made it clear beyond all possibility of Dispute that the Kings of England have dispensed in all the Cases before recited with Statutes of Colleges yet it is as manifest that all the Members of the Universities and of particular Colleges upon their taking of Degrees or being Elected into Fellowships c. take an Oath to observe the Statutes of the University or particular College and yet by the power of the Kings Dispensation are no ways Involved in the Sin of Perjury I shall now proceed to give such Answers as I Judge requisite to those arguments I find couched in any of the defences made by the Fellows of St. Mary Magdalen College and begin with that of the obligation of their Oaths CHAP. VII The Answer to the Arguments used by the Vice-President and Fellows of St. Mary Magdalen College in defence of their proceedings SECT I. Answer to what is urged in their Justification from the Obligation of their Oaths to observe their Statutes §. 1. THe most plausible plea the Vice-President and Fellows used in Vindication of their Electing Dr. Hough and dis-obeying the Kings Mandate was that they were under the obligation of their Oath to observe the Statutes of their Founder in the Literal and Grammatical sense of them And the persons Nominated by the First and Second Mandate of the King were not Qualified according to those Statutes so that in obeying the Kings Mandates they should either be Perjured or forfeit their Rights in their Fellowships if they Elected or Admitted any person not Statutably Qualified and that they were under the like obligation neither to procure accept or make use of any dispensation from that Oath or any part of it by whomsoever procured or by what Authority soever granted To which in Aggravation and Improvement was urged See p. 6. here p. 75. where the King's Declaration is urged which I shall consider in its place the disagreeableness of being pressed to forswear themselves at a time when his Majesty had been Graciously pleased to Grant Liberty of Conscience Finding this Argument looked upon by the favourers of the Ejected Fellows as unanswerable I think my self obliged to clear the point not only by producing the Opinions of Casuists but likewise by the Authority of Bishop Sanderson who deserves the greater respect and credit for that he Adorned the Divinity chair in that University long before he did the Episcopal §. 2. Definition of an Oath In this matter we may consider what an Oath is which is generally defined to be the Invocation of God to be (a) Mart. Bonacina Tom. 2. Disp 4. q. 1. puncto 2 fol. 214. witness of the plighting of our Faith that we will do or suffer to be done such or such a matter by Bonacina
pronounced against him That whereas he had denyed the Authority of the Court and in Contempt of the Sentence of Suspension given against him by the Lords Commissioners at Whitehall taken his Commons and Battled in the College as a Fellow of the College notwithstanding his said Suspension the Court proceeded to deprive him of his Fellowship and Ordered his Name to be struck out of the Buttry-Book The Sentence pronounced against him I find in the Register tho' not in this place in the words following By His Majesties Commissioners c. WHereas in our Visitation of the said College it appeareth unto us that Henry Fairfax Doctor in Divinity one of the Fellows of the said College has been guilty of Dis-obedience to His Majesties Commands and obstinately contemned his Royal Authority and doth still persist in the same we have thought fit upon mature consideration thereof to Declare Pronounce and Decree that the said Dr Henry Fairfax be Expelled and Deprived of his said Fellowship and accordingly we do hereby deprive him and Expel him from the same Given under our Seal the 25th day of October 1687. Then the Lords issued the following Order By His Majesties Commissioners c. WHereas we have thought fit to Deprive and Expell Dr. Henry Fairfax from his Fellowship in the said College you and either of you are hereby required to cause our said Sentence and Decree a Copy whereof is hereto annexed to be affixed on the Gate of the said College to the end that due notice may be taken of the same and of the due Execution hereof you are to certifie us Given under our Seal the 25th of October 1687. To Thomas Atterbury and Robert Eddows Or either of them He then gave in his Protestation against their Proceedings which the Court over-ruled and ordered him to depart and quit his Lodgings in the College in Fourteen Days Then the Doctor prevailed with much a do saith the Oxford Relation to Read the following Protestation and left it in Court which was as followeth I Henry Fairfax Fellow of St. Mary Magdalen College Dr. Fairfax's Protestation do under my former Answer heretofore made and to the Intent it may appear that I have not consented nor agreed to any thing done against me to my prejudice I protest that this Sentence given here against me is Lex nulla and so far forth as it shall appear to be aliqua I do say it is iniqua injusta and that therefore I do from it as iniqua injusta appeal to our Sovereign Lord the King in his Courts of Justice as the Laws Statutes and Ordinances of this Realm will permit in that behalf Henry Fairfax §. 14. The under Porter deprived Then the Lords askt Robert Gardiner the Under Porter if he would submit to the Bishop of Oxon as President of the College which he refusing to do the Lords deprived him of his Office and adjourned the Court till the next Morning Mr. John Gilman's Paper I find thus That the Statutes of the College This Paper is mis-placed and should have been October 22d Afternoon to which I am positively Sworn are the only Rule of my Actions and Obedience in this and all other Cases of the like Nature and I conceive the Bishop of Oxon has not those Statutable Qualifications which are required therefore I cannot Assist at the Admission of the Bishop of Oxon. The submission of Dr. Thomas Smith was as followeth Dr. Tho. Smiths submission which he gave in when the Fellows gave in theirs I have put here by it self because I would not mix it with the other given in in Writing also MY LORDS I Own from my Heart and acknowledge the Kings Supremacy I do now and will always pay all Dutiful Just and Humble Obedience to His Majesties Authority as becomes a Priest of the Catholic and Apostolic Church of England Establish'd by Law. I make no exception to the Legality of your Lordships Commission nor to the exercise of it in this present Visitation I am ready and willing to obey in licitis honestis the President whom the King has pleased to Constitute President when ever he shall come and preside in the College Thomas Smith D. D. The Paper given in by Mr. Craddock was as followeth ABout Six Years since This Paper was given in October 22d Afternoon when I was made Fellow by the Kings Permission I took an Oath that I would not be dispensed with from my Local Statutes by which Statutes and Oaths it does not belong to me to Admit any Man President besides I conceive Dr. Hough cannot be Legally dispossessed of the Presidentship of Magdalen College till he has Appealed to Westminster or an Higher Court and till then I shall not cease my obedience to him Willi. Craddock I shall now insert the Lords Commissioners Answer to my Lord Presidents last Letter and then proceed in the Narrative §. 15. The Answer to the Lord Presidents Letter of the 23d of October Oxon the 25th October 1687. MY LORD IN Obedience to your Lordship of the 23d Instant and the Kings Letters Mandatory we have this day Installed the Lord Bishop of Oxon's Proxy by placeing him in the Presidents Seat in the Chappel and some while after Dr. Hough having left the College and the Keys being deny'd us we caused the Doors of the Lodgings to be broken up and gave his Proxy Possession thereof My Lord we proceeded to examin the Fellows concerning their submission to the Lord Bishop of Oxon now their President their Answers were Unanimous in scriptis that they would all submit but Dr. Fairfax whom for that and denying the Jurisdiction of the Court and Contempt of his former Sentence of Suspension we have Deprived and Ejected and one Robert Gardiner a Porter all the rest of the College we left this Night in good temper and the Bishops Servants in quiet Possession We have likewise looked into the Constitutions Orders and Statutes of the College and cannot find any of the Society to have offended therein or in mis-applying their Revenues They having given us as we conceive a clear Answer to the Accusation against them for Imbezling such a part of it as was pretended to be set a side for Pilgrims and poor Travellors which we will bring up and transmit to your Lordship * * Here may be noted how tender the Lords Commissioners were and willing to have won them to obedience And this we must say my Lord that generally they have behaved themselves with great regard and deference to His Majesties Command saving in that particular whereof we gave your Lordship an account in our last and even for that they have expressed a very hearty sorrow and submission and we do humbly conceive that the Bishop of Oxon when he comes in Person to the College which he promises suddenly to do so soon as his health will give him leave will be best able to find out those faults of
Lord Chancellor Lord President Earl of Huntingdon the Bishops of Duresm Rochester and Chester the Lord Chief Justice Wright and Baron Jenner Mr. Sollicitor General Sir Robert Baldock Sir Thomas Pinfold and Dr. Hedges gave their Answer upon the Paper given them the 28th of the last Month concerning the Fellows lately Expelled out of St. Mary Magdalen College the Lords enter upon debate of the matter and put off the further consideration thereof till Saturday the 10th Instant at Four in the Afternoon At a Court the 10th of December 1687. The last mentioned Lords being present The Lords re-assume the Debate concerning the Fellows lately Expelled out of St. Mary Magdalen College and agree upon the following Order §. 8. At a Council held in the Council Chamber at Whitehall the 10th of December 1687. Present Lord Chancellor Lord President Earl of Huntingdon Lord Bishop of Duresme Lord Bishop of Rochester Lord Bishop of Chester Lord Chief Just Wright Baron Jenner By His Majesties Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes and for the Visitation of the Vniversities and of all and every Cathedral and Collegiate Churches Colleges Grammar-Schools Hospitals and other the like Incorporations or Foundations and Societies WHereas we thought fit by our Order of the 22d The Sentence of Incapacitating Day of June last to declare and decree that the pretended Election of Mr. John Hough now Dr. John Hough to the Presidentship of St. Mary Magdalen College in the University of Oxon was void and therefore did amove the said Mr. Hough from the place of President of the said College And whereas the Fellows of the same were likewise Convened before us for their disobedience to and Contempt of His Majesties Authority by making the said pretended Election and it now appearing unto us that the said Dr. John Hough Dr. Charles Aldworth Dr. Henry Fairfax Dr. Alexander Pudsey Dr. John Smith Dr. Thomas Bayley Dr. Thomas Stafford Mr. Robert Almond Mr. Mainwaring Hammond Mr. John Rogers Mr. Richard Strickland Mr. Henry Dobson Mr. James Bayley Mr. John Davys Mr. Francis Bagshaw Mr. James Fayrer Mr. Joseph Harwar Mr. Thomas Bateman Mr. George Hunt Mr. William Cradock Mr. John Gilman Mr. George Fulham Mr. Charles Penniston Mr. Robert Hyde Mr. Edward Yerbury Mr. Henry Holden and Mr. Stephen Weelks lately Fellows of the said College do persist in their disobedience and contempt we have thought fit upon mature consideration of the matter to Declare Decree and Pronounce and we do accordingly Declare Decree and Pronounce that the said Dr. John Hough Dr. Charles Aldworth c. as before recited and every of them shall be and from henceforth they are hereby declared and adjudged Incapable of Receiving or being Admitted to any Ecclesiastical Dignity Benefice or Promotion and that such and every of them who are not as yet in Holy Orders shall be and are hereby declared and adjudged uncapable of Receiving and being Admitted into the same And all Arch-Bishops Bishops and other Ecclesiastical Officers and Ministers within the Realm of England are hereby required to take notice of this our Sentence Order and Decree and to yield Obedience thereunto Given under our Seal the 10th Day of December 1687. The Lords agreed to send a Duplicate of the foregoing Order under their Seals to every Arch-Bishop and Bishop which accordingly was done Thus I have drawn to a Conclusion the whole Proceedings concerning this College as to the Declaring Void the Election of Dr. Hough and the Suspending of Dr. Aldworth and Dr. Fairfax by the Lords Commissioners at Whitehall and the Expelling the forenamed Fellows by the Lords Visitors at Oxford together with this Finall Decree of Incapacitating them by the Lords Commissioners at Whitehall in Conjunction with the Lords Visitors at Oxford I shall now proceed to give an Historical Account of the Nature of the Societies or Incorporations called Colleges and Universities Secondly Some Visitations of the Universities of Oxford or particular Colleges by Legatine Metropolitical Episcopal or Local Visitors or by the Immediate Authority of the Kings of England from Age to Age. Thirdly Several Instances of the Kings of Englands Dispensations with the Statutes of Universities or particular Colleges Fourthly I shall Answer the Objections CHAP. III. Of the Nature and Constitution of the Societies of the Liberal Arts such as Colleges and Universities are SECT I. Concerning Incorporations in General and the Privileges granted to the Vniversities of Oxford and Cambridge by our Kings or the Popes §. 1. All sorts of Societies and Corporations are Founded by the King. BEfore I Treat of the Royal Foundation or the particular Charters or Bulls granted to the University of Oxford I think it convenient as a Preliminary to give the Ingenuous Reader a short abridgment of what our Common Lawyers have delivered how the Incorporations of this Kingdom are all Constituted by the Kings of England Priviledged from the Crown and are at the sole Will and Pleasure of the Sovereign who may at his pleasure for mis-user non-user or abuser dissolve them according to Common-Law First of the Subject matter of such Incorporations A Corporation is the same according to (a) Lib. 2. fol. 5. 6. Coke 10 Rep. 29. The Ancient and Modern use of the word University Bracton which the Civilians Style Collegium or University Si Rex concesserit says he alicui Vniversitati sicut Civibus Burgensibus so that in his time an Incorporation by the Name of Citizens and Burgesses was called an University in the same Sense that Communitas was Styled signifying any Society that was under some special Denomination so Bodinns saith by the word Collegium no particular Society is determined but under that Name Corporations of several natures are contained and whether Lay or Ecclesiastical is specified by the ends for which they are Constituted but now the word is generally restrained to the Academies of the Liberal Arts. ☞ All Natural persons (a) Coke 10. Rep. fol. 14. Of the Constituting parts of a Corporation as such are capable of holding or taking this Right of a Politic Capacity and as all the natural persons are an Essential part constituting the Body Politic (b) 21 E. 4. fol. 22. so all the operations and exercise of the Rights are only performed by the Natural persons Therefore when the Question is of non-user or abuser of Franchises by a Corporation it must of necessity be intended for some Act (c) Atturny Generals Argument for Quo Warranto against London fol. 2. or negligence of the Natural persons or those Officers imployed by them For whatever Franchises any persons enjoy they do it as Usu-fructuaries §. 2. How all Colleges and Corporations are made such by the Sovereign It is to be considered that such Societies ought to be Constituted by none but the Sovereign otherwise the Government would be in danger if Liberty were granted for persons to enter into Combinations For however specious they might at first make the end of their
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
Bishop of Oxford President § 6. pag. 50. Observations upon it pag. 51. CHAP. II. THe proceedings of the Lords Commissioners in the Local Visitation of St. Mary Magdalen College in Oxford pag. 52. SECT I. The Transactions from the Citation sent October 17th 1687. to the 19th of the same Month. pag. 52. Citation of Mr. John Hough the Fellows Schollars and other Members of St. Mary Magdalen College § 1. pag. 53. The proceedings of the Lords Commissioners Friday Morning October the 21st § 2. p. 54. The Bishop of Chesters Speech pag. 55. Proceedings Friday Afternoon pag. 62. Proceedings Saturday Morning Octob. 22d § 3. Ibid. Proceedings Saturday Afternoon pag. 63. The Lords Commissioners Letter to my Lord President October 22d § 4. pag. 63. The Account sent of the Lords Commissioners procedings till the Evening of October 22d with some supplemental Additions from the Bishop of Chesters Notes and Dr. Thomas Smiths Diary § 4. pag. 65. to 71. The Vice-Chancellor of Oxfords Programma which was published by the Vice-Chancellor without any complaint of the Lords Commissioners as by mistake is expressed § 5. pag. 71. My Lord Presidents Answer to the Lords Visitors Letter of the 22d of October § 6. pag. 72. Dr. Staffords paper in defence of Dr. Houghs Election c. § 7. pag. 74. The Bishop of Oxfords Proxy § 8. pag. 76. The Kings Mandate to the Lords Visitors to Admit the Bishop of Oxford or in his absence by his Proxy if the Fellows refuse to Admit him § 9. pag. 77. 78. Dr. Thomas Smith's Answer about Admitting the Bishop of Oxford § 10. pag. 79. The Admission of the Bishop of Oxford by his Proxy pag. 80. Other proceedings on Tuesday Morning § 11. p. 81. Submission of the Fellows to the Bishop of Oxon conditional § 12. pag. 81. Sentence against Dr. Henry Fairfax and his protestation against the proceedings of the Lords Commissioners § 13. pag. 84. 85. Papers from Mr. John Gilman Dr. Thomas Smith and Mr. William Craddock § 14. pag. 86. 87. The Answer of the Lords Commissioners to the Lord Presidents Letter of the 23d of Octo. § 15. pag. 87. The Account the Fellows gave in concerning their Hospitality and Charities § 16. pag. 90. 91. Dr. Thomas Smiths paper upon the same account § 17. pag. 92. Proceedings Thursday Morning Octo. 27. § 18. pag. 94. The Lord Presidents Answer to the Lords Commissioners Letter of the 25th Octo. § 19. pag. 94. 95. Proceedings Friday Morning Octo. 28. § 20. pag. 96. A paper of the Fellows Justifying their Election § 21. pag. 96. 97. The Fellows refusing to submit to what was required § 22. pag. 95. Dr. Bayleys explication of his Submission § 23. pag. 98. Mr. George Fulhams Answer to the Question about submission and the Sentence of Expulsion against him § 24. pag. 100. SECT II. The Second Visitation by Adjournment of St. Mary Magdalen College by the Lords Commissioners pag. 101. The Kings Mandate for Mr. William Joyner and Mr. Job Allibon § 1. pag. 102. The Lord Bishop of Chesters Speech § 2. pag. 103. to 112. The form of the Petition and Submission required of the Fellows and Mr. Thompsons Answer § 3. pag. 112. 113. Dr. Aldworths Reply and Justification of himself § 4. pag. 114. The Decree of the Lords Commissioners of Expulsion of the Fellows that would not submit § 5. pag. 116. The protestation of the Expelled Fellows § 6. pa. 117. Mandates for other Fellows Ibid and pag. 118. The proceedings of the Lords Commissioners at Whitehall after the return of the Lords Visitors from Oxford § 7. pag. 118. 119. The Sentence of Incapacitating the Expelled Fellows § 8. pag. 120. 121. The Method the Author intends to proceed in pag. 122. CHAP. III. OF the Nature and Constitution of the Societies of the Liberal Arts such as Colleges and Vniversities are pag. 123. SECT I. Concerning Incorporations in General and the Privileges granted to the Vniversities of Oxford and Cambridge by our Kings or by the Popes pag. 123. How all sorts of Societies and Corporations are Founded by the King. § 1. pag. 123. How all Colleges and Corporations are made such by the King. § 2. p. 124. Things requisite to a Corporation § 3. pag. 125. The end for which Corporations are constituted § 4. pag. 126. The power of conferring Degrees in Universities conferred on Subjects by the Sovereign § 5. pag. 127. 128. SECT II. From whom the Vniversity of Oxford hath had 〈◊〉 it's Privileges pag. 129. The Kings of England sole Donors of privileges during the Saxons time § 1. pag. 129. Privileges granted by Kings after the Conquest § 2. pag. 130. The Pope confirms them pag. 131. King Henry 3d. grants privileges during his pleasure § 3. pag. 132. Privileges granted by King Edw. 1st pag. 133. And King Edw. 2d pag. 134. And King Edw. 3d. Ibid. And King Rich. 2d § 4. pag. 135. Inferences from the before recited Charters pag. 136. And from those of King Hen. 4th and King Hen. the 5th and King Hen. 6th § 5. pag. 137. The Method of Founding a College § 6. pag. 137. 138. The confirmation of Pope Sixtus the 4th § 7. pa. 138. The Charters of King Henry the 8th and his power over the Universities § 8. pag. 140. Wrong Printed § 9. King Hen. 8th retaining the Statutes of the University § 10. pag. 141. Falsly § 11. The King seizeth all the privileges § 11. pag. 142. CHAP. IV. COncerning the Visiting of the Vniversities and particularly of that of Oxford pag. 144. SECT I. Concerning the Kings Supremacy and Power in Ecclesiastical Causes and Visitations pag. 144. What power the Kings of England used before the Conquest § 1. pag. 144. In what particulars some of our Kings exercised a power in Ecclesiastical matters § 2. pag. 145. Of Investiture of Bishops § 3. pag. 148. Concerning the Admitting the Popes Legats here Ibid. and 149. Disputes betwixt the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and the Popes Legats § 4. pag. 150. How the Popes Legats exercised greater power in latter times § 5. pag. 151. The Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Created Legatus Natus § 6. pag. 152. When the Style of Legatus a Latere began to be used here § 7. pag. 153. How the Legats power was allowed by the King in Visitations c. Ibid. and pag. 154. Concerning Arch-Bishops and Bishops Visitations § 8. pag. 155. How the King promoted Bishops c. § 9. pag. 155. How far the Canons were allowed here § 10. pag. 155. 156. Secular Courts Judged here what was to be held of Ecclesiastical Cognizance § 11. pag. 156. The Application of this Discourse to the matter of Visitation c. § 12. pag. 157. In what particulars our Kings claimed not Ecclesiastical Administration § 13. pag. 157. 158. How the Pope obtained greater power § 14. pag. 158. The Kings Supremacy asserted by King Henry the 8th § 15.
commendando ipse vero Episcopus dictus Winton seu ipsius Vicarius aut Custos Spiritualitatis ejusdem cui dictam praesentationem fieri continget personam sic Electam absque morae dispendio sine processu judiciario absque impugnatione Electionis five Nominationis praedictae dicti Collegii praeficiat extrajudicialiter in Praesidentem Si autem Dominus Episcopus Winton aliusve ex praedictis personis ad quem dicti Praesidentis praesentationem spectare volumus ut praefertur per quinque dies a tempore Praesentationis praedictae sibi factae continue numerandos noluerit personam in forma praedicta Electam praeficere in Praesidentem ex tunc Electus hujusmodi eo ipso praesentis nostri Statuti vigore in Praesidentem dicti nostri Collegii sit praefectus pro vero legitimo perpetuo Praesidente inibi habeatur Praesidentem vero hujusmodi quemcunque Statim post praefectionem suam si hujusmodi praefectio tunc fiat primo coram illo qui ipsum praefecerit in Praesidentem subsequenter in praesentia omnium sociorum ipsius Collegii praesentium antequam quoquo modo administrat tactis inspectis per ipsum Sacrosanctis Evangeliis subscriptum praestare volumus juramentum Juramentum admittendorum in veros Socios EGo N. Juro ad haec Sancta Dei Evangelia per me Corporaliter tacta The Oath of a President or Fellow quod omnia Statuta Ordinationes hujus Collegii edita edenda per Reverendum in Christo Patrem Gulielmum Waynfleet Fundatorem praedictum ac omnia singula in eisdem Contenta quatenus personam meam concernunt vel concernere poterint secundum planum literalem Gramaticalem sensum intellectum inviolabiliter tenebo etiam observabo quantum in me fuerit teneri faciam ab aliis etiam observari c. Item quod non impetrabo Dispensationem aliquam contra juramenta mea praedicta vel aliquam particulam eorundem nec contra Ordinationes Statuta de quibus praemittitur aut ipsorum aliqua nec dispensationem hujusmodi per alium vel alios publice vel occulte impetrari vel fieri procurabo directe vel indirecte si forsan aliquam dispensationem hujusmodi impetrari aut gratis concedi aut acquiri contigerit cujuscunque fuerit Authoritatis seu si generaliter seu specialiter aut alias sub quacunque verborum forma concessa sit ipsa non utar nec eidem consentiam quovismodo sicut Deus me adjuvet haec Sancta Dei Evangelia Carolus Aldworth Vice-Praeses Johannes Smith S. T. P. Mainwaringus Hammond S. T. B. Henricus Dobson Artium Decanus Jacobus Fayrer Art. Mag. §. 4. Out of the Register At a Court held c. June the 13th 1687. The Vice-President and Deputies of St Mary Magdalen College in Oxford attend with their Answer which was Read and they being withdrawn the Lords Commissioners thought fit to put of the further consideration of that matter till the 22d Instant at Ten in the Morning at which time they were required to appear At a Court held c. the 22d day of June 1687. The Vice-President and the Fellows of St. Mary Magdalen College attend and are asked whether they had any thing else to offer by way of Answer Upon which they gave in a Paper containing an account of several misdemeanors committed by Mr. Anthony Farmer which being Read the Lords Ordered Mr. Farmer should have a Coppy of the said Paper and appointed to hear him upon it at the next meeting requiring some of the Fellows of the said College to attend at the same time and as to the business of the said College their Lordships made this following Order By His Majesties Commissioners c. VVHereas it appears unto Us The Lords Commissioners pronounce the Election of Mr. Hough void that Mr. John Hough Batchellor in Divinity has been unduly Elected President of St. Mary Magdalen College in the University of Oxford We have thought fit upon mature consideration thereof That the said Election be declared void and that the said Mr. John Hough be amoved from the said Presidentship And accordingly We do hereby declare pronounce and decree That the said Election is void and do amove the said Mr. John Hough from the place of President of the said College Given under our Seal the 22d of June 1687. §. 5. The Sentence of Suspension against Dr. Charles Aldworth and Dr. Henry Fairfax At the same Court these two following Orders were made By His Majesties Commissioners c. VVHereas Charles Aldworth Doctor of Laws Vice-President of St. Mary Magdalen College in the University of Oxford and the Deputies of the Fellows of the same have been convened before Us for their Contempt in not obeying His Majesties Letters Mandatory for Electing and Admitting Mr. Anthony Farmer President of that College And the said Dr. Aldworth and Deputies having been heard thereupon We have thought fit to declare pronounce and decree That the said Dr. Charles Aldworth shall for the said Contempt be suspended from being Vice-President of the said College and also that Henry Fairfax Doctor of Divinity one of the Fellows of the said College shall for the said Contempt be suspended from his Fellowship and accordingly We do hereby Suspend the said Dr. Charles Aldworth from being Vice-President of the said College and the said Dr. Henry Fairfax from his Fellowship in the said College Given under our Seal the 22d day of June 1687. By His Majesties Commissioners c. WHereas We have thought fit to declare The Order of the Lords Commissioners for the publication of the former decrees pronounce and decree that the Election made by you of Mr. John Hough Batchellor in Divinity to be President of St. Mary Magdalen College in the University of Oxford is void and to amove the said Mr. John Hough from the place of President of the said College And whereas we have thought fit to Suspend Dr. Charles Aldworth from being Vice-President of the same and D. Henry Fairfax from his Fellowship in the said College We do hereby enjoyn and require you to cause our Orders vacating the said Election and suspending the said Dr. Aldworth and Dr. Fairfax Copies of which Order under our Seal are hereunto annexed to be affixed on the Gates of the said College The Fellows Answer was not Read till the 5th of August to the end that due notice may be taken of the same And you are to Certifie Us under your Hands and Seals of the due Execution of what is hereby required Given under our Seal the 22d day of June 1687. Superscribed To the Fellows of St. Mary Magdalen College in the Vniversity of Oxford The Fellows studying all the ways they could to evade and refuse Obedience to the Kings Mandates or the Lords Commissioners Orders did it colourably in this particular as will appear in this following Letter §. 6. Mr. Atterbury's Letter concerning his reception
College SIR YOu will receive herewith His Majesties Mandate to Admit me President of the College of St. Mary Magdalen in Oxon together with a Letter of my Lord Sunderland pursuant to His Majesties Command I am indisposed as I have been for some time and not in a condition as yet to Travel and therefore my request to you is that upon Receipt of the King's Pleasure you would do me the favor to Admit me by Proxy that is either the next Senior Fellow under your self resident or either of my Chaplains Mr. William Wickins or Mr. Thomas Collins whom I depute in my stead which is as valid in Law as if I were present my self and is the most usual customary Practice And by so doing you will oblige SIR Your very Loving Friend and Brother Samuel Oxon. Dr. Pudsey being the Senior Fellow returned this following Answer MY LORD I Have perused your Lordships Letter Dr. Pudseys Answer and in obedience to His Majesty have Read His Letter Mandatory and my Lord Sunderlands Letter pursuant to the same business in the Chappel before the Society this Morning I askt the Fellows how they would proceed in this matter of concernment and what Answer I was to return to my Lord of Sunderland's by the Messenger They replyed unanimously that the place of the Presidentship was full and that they could not Admit any other into the place This my Lord is the matter of Fact and so I remain Your Lordships most humble Servant Alex. Pudsey Magd. Coll. Aug. the 28th 1687. I shall now pass to what I find succeed §. 5. My Lord Presidents Letter to the Bishop of Oxford Bath September the 9th 1687. MY LORD THe King Commands me to send your Lordship the three Inclosed Copies that you may be the better informed in the Case of Magdalen College the consideration whereof he has Committed to you the Dean of Christ-Church and Mr. Walker The first is a Copy of a Letter to me after the Delivery of the King's Mandate which His Majesty having perused sent for all the Fellows on Sunday last to attend him at Christ-Church College and Commanded them to Admit your Lordship President of that College without any further delay or pretence Instead of Compliance they Signed a Paper and sent it to me containing a Direct refusal but upon second thoughts became more sensible of their Duty and subscribed another Paper in terms very submissive Copies of both which you will herewith receive Their meaning in the last Paper I am told is this That if His Majesty shall think fit by his own Authority to Constitute you their President they will very readily acknowledg and obey you desiring only to be excused from Electing you which they allege without breach of their Oaths they cannot do His Majesty thought it necessary that your Lordship and the two Gentlemen above named should be made acquainted with these Circumstances for the direction in the advice you shall offer to His Majesty upon this occasion I am further Commanded to tell you that His Majesty intends to be at Windsor on Saturday Sennight and would have you attend him there on the Munday or Tuesday following if your health will give you leave September the 4th 1687. I am MY LORD Your Lordships most humble Servant Sunderland P. This was agreed on and done by the Fellows after His Majesty had spoken to them These following Papers are the Copies mentioned in the foresaid Letter §. 6. The Copy of one of the Papers mentioned in the preceding Letter At a Meeting of the Fellows of St. Mary Magdalen College in the University of Oxon in the Chappel of the said College the 4th day of September in the Year of our Lord God 1687. Between the hours of Four and Five in the Afternoon of the same day in obedience to His Majesties Command JOhn Smith Doctor of Divinity saith that he is as ready to obey His Majesty in all things that lie in his power as any other of His Majesties Subjects whatsoever but he apprehends it to be contrary to the Founders Statutes and his Oath to Elect the Right Reverend Father in God Samuel Lord Bishop of Oxford President of St. Mary Magdalen College in Oxon and therefore it does not lie in his Power All these following agree with Dr. Smiths Answer above Written Dr. Stafford Mr. Hammond Mr. Rogers Mr. Strickland Mr. Bayley Mr. Davys Mr. Bagshaw Mr. Fayrer Mr. Hunt. Mr. Craddock Mr. Penniston Mr. Hyde Mr. Yerbury Mr. Holt. Mr. Thornton Mr. Holden Mr. Wilks Mr. Henry Dobson Master of Arts saith that he is ready to obey his Majesty to the utmost of his power in the Election of the Bishop of Oxon. Mr. Robert Charnock Master of Arts and Fellow of the said College saith that he is ready to obey His Majesties Order in the Electing the Bishop of Oxon President of Magdalen College Alex. Pudsey Doctor in Divinity and Fellow of Magdalen College in Oxford saith that the doth agree with the rest of the Society In the Presence of John Greneway Pub. Notary I have omitted what passed betwixt His Majesty and the Fellows of St. Mary Magdalen College while the King was at Oxford since there was nothing done by the Fellows which tended to a submission to the Kings Authority but rather to a Justifying of their undutifulness in their Personal Address to him which as it was so contrary to expectation at a time when the King Honored their University with his Presence and was the only disobligation he had met withall in his whole Royal Progress It cannot be wondred that he resented it as he did that a number of Fellows of a single College should persist so in their disobedience in not Admitting the Bishop of their Diocess to be their President an Honor they never had since their Foundation if we may be allowed to call it an Honor to have a person of that Character their Supreme Governor Since therefore they were not required to Elect him but only Admit him by vertue of the Kings Mandate the King having by that superseded the former for Mr. Farmer no Man can think it strange that the King resolved to Chastise them for their contempt in a method Justifiable by Canon Civil and Statute Law both to vindicate his own Royal Authority as likewise to deter others from following such pernicious Examples CHAP. II. The Proceedings of the Lords Commissioners in the Local Visitation of St. Mary Magdalen College in Oxford SECT I. The Transactions from the Citation sent October the 17th 1687. To the Nineteenth of the same Month. §. 1. Citation of St. Mary Magdalen College October 17th 1687. HIs Majesty being so greatly provoked by the disobedience to the second Mandate and now finding it necessary to Assert his own Power resolved upon sending down certain Local Visitors according to which I find it thus Registred Memorandum Out of the Register There being a new Commission with the Addition of Thomas Bishop of
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
Magdalen College in Oxon runs thus Dispensing with any Statutes or Constitutions to the contrary in St. Mary Magdalen College it self Any Statute Constitution or Order to the contrary notwithstanding with which We are pleas'd to Dispense at this time Dated July the 19th 1679. §. 4. A Statute of the Founder dispensed with concerning the Lady Margarets Preachers An Example of a statute of a Founder Abrogated by the King appears in this following directed to the Chancellor of Cambridge Whereas the Lady Margaret late Countess of Richmond and Derby in her Foundation for a Preacher in the University of Cambridge did oblige him to Preach at Twelve or Thirteen several Towns in several Counties and accordingly did allow him what was in those days a Competent salary and sufficient for the discharge of the Expence of his Journey We understanding that the salary for the said Preacher is now very small and inconsiderable Therefore being disposed to free the said Expensive Duty have thought fit and accordingly do hereby Dispense with all those that shall be her Preachers for the future for their not Preaching at the places provided they do all other Exercises in the University unto which by the said Foundation or Custom they are obliged and Our pleasure is The Kings pleasure that the Oath be altered that you alter the Oath which the said Preachers at their Entrance were to take according to these premises and to cause these Letters of Dispensation to be Registred c. Dated October the 30th 1679. In another Mandate Directed to the Chancellor of Cambridge I find as followeth Trusty Concerning conferring Honorary Degrees c. Whereas We have been given to understand that several Disputes have heretofore risen in that Our University about Conferring Honorary Degrees without time or exercise upon Baronets and Knights who were Members of Our said University We have thought fit in order to the settling of that matter for the time to come hereby to signifie to you that we are Graciously pleased to allow it c. with a Clause that the Letters be Registred Dated October the 30th 1679. §. 5. Dispensation with Statutes that oblige to enter into Deacons Orders after being two Years Master of Arts. There being a Statute in Queens College Cambridge Another of the like nature That every Fellow after being two Years Master of Arts must Enter into Deacons Orders or else quit his Fellowship Mr. Charles Palmer is Dispensed with Dated November the 18th 1679. In another Mandate I find that John Cudworth B. A. is allowed to Travel for seven Years whereas by the Statutes of Christs College in Cambridge he is obliged to Enter into Holy Orders before that time is Expired which he cannot do now in regard of his being under the Age required in such Cases We do Dispense with his not Entring into Holy Orders till after his return Dated December the 31st 1679. Mr. John Lytcote is Dispensed with Another for Mr. Lytcote now Sir John Lytcote for not entering into Holy Orders for Four Years and yet enjoy his Fellowship any Statute c. notwithstanding Dated January the 13th 1679. But upon the 20th of December 1680. after reciting the foresaid Mandate it saith the King for particular reasons revokes it The cause was for that John Lytcote now Sir John Secretary to the Earl of Castlemain and now Resident at Rome upon his Travels having Discovered some of Oates his Pranks and brought several of St. Omers Youths for Witnesses the late King was Induced to withdraw his Dispensation whereby he might be either bound to quit his Fellowship or to enter into Orders so that it was presumed he would either declare himself a R. Catholic or quit his Fellowship §. 6. The re-inforcing of a Mandate not presently obeyed This next is an Instance of a Mandate endeavored to be eluded which was re-inforced by a subsequent Mandate directed to the Master and Fellows of Trinity College in Cambridge March the 12th 1680. Trusty c. Whereas We were Graciously pleased by Our Letters Mandatory bearing Date the 8th of November last to require you to Admit John Couper Bachellor of Arts of that our College into the first Fellowship that should become void after the Date thereof and upon some difficulty made Our Right Trusty c. Cousin c. Robert Earl of Sunderland then Our Principal Secretary of State did the 29th of November following by Our particular Direction signifie Our pleasure in behalf of the said John Couper that you should Immediately choose him a Fellow according to the Intent of Our said Letter notwithstanding which We are Informed that you have not yet chosen him Whereas the Most Reverend Father in God William Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury hath Certified that he is acquainted with the State of this Case and humbly conceives that he doth deserve some relief from Our Favor and Goodness We have thought fit hereby to require you to Admit him the said John Couper into the first Fellowship that is or shall become void pursuant to Our said Letter whereby We expect your ready Complyance as having been induced to it upon particular considerations any Statute or Statutes of that Our College as to the time of Election or as to the Degree of Master of Arts which he hath taken or ought to take or any other Statute Custom or Constitution to the contrary notwithstanding §. 7. The Mandate for removing the Duke of Monmouth from being Chancellor of Cambridge and appointing the Duke of Albemarle Chancellor There is another power in the Crown which because it is conteined in the following Mandate I shall Transcribe at length as I find it directed to the Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge to be Communicated to the Senate ☞ Trusty c. We Greet you Well Whereas the Undutiful Behavior of Our Natural Son James Duke of Monmouth hath given Us great Cause to Remove him from Our Service and any further Attendance on Our Person whereby he is rendered uncapable of discharging any longer the Office of Chancellor of that University either to Our satisfaction or profit and whereas We are given to understand that by the Ancient Statutes thereof the Chancellor was chosen to his Office but for Three Years and by a late Statute of Queen Elizabeth The King reserves to himself the power of Interpreting Statutes of the University but for Two Years only and whereas We have ever reserved to Our Self the power of Interpreting the Statutes referring to the Election of your Chancellor We think fit to Declare the Chancellors place void and the Senate thereof to be in full Liberty to proceed to a New Election and that you may not want a fit Person to remind Us from time to time of all things that may tend to the Encouragement of good Litterature The advantages to the University by the Kings Nominating a Chancellor and all things else that may maintain that Our University in the splendor and prosperity