the defendant shewed no cause Thomas Hales plaintant Thomas Stanebridge defendant Anno 2. Eliz. fol. 244. The defendant exhibited his Bill into the Chancery for certaine Lands and afterwards sued the plaintant in the Common Pleas for the same Lands before the matter was determined in the Chancery therefore an Injunction was awarded against the said Body to stay his proceedings in the common Pleas Robert Bill and Thomas Gifford plaintants Iohn Body defendant Anno 2. Eliz. fol. 263. The undersheriffe of Middlesex brought into this Court the body of the plaintant by commandment of the Lord Keeper in execution upon a Writ of extent of 300 l. together with the said Writ at the suite of Sir Edmund Maliverer Knight and by order of Court he was taken from the Sheriffe of Middlesex and delivered in execution to the warden of the Fleet for the 300 l. and because the defendants shewed no good cause to the contrary upon a day given them therefore it was ordered that upon Recognizance by the plaintant and good sureties to stand to the order of the Court or else to yeeld his body prisoner to the Fleet in execution and there to remaine untill the defendant be satisfied he the plaintant shall have liberty to goe at large and that the defendant shall not sue for any manner of Execution by force of the said execution Robert Rosse plaintant Christopher Lassels and Alice defendants Anno 3. Eliz. fol. 90. The plaintant had Judgement in the Kings Bench against the defendant upon a Bond of 200 l. and another Judgement for 300 l upon an action of debt of arrerages of account in the Kings Bench and ordered they may proceed with execution upon the Bond of 200 l. and also to take execution of 100 l. parcell of the 300 l. provided alwayes and it is ordered the plaintant shall not in any wise proceed nor take execution of the 200 l. residue of the 300 l recovered upon the accompt without speciall license of the Court Iohn Brooke and Katherine his wife plaintants Thomas Apprice defendant Anno 3. Eliz. fol. 233. The plaintant sheweth by his Bill that the personage of Thekelye was holden by force whereby the plaintant could not be inducted whereupon a Writ of de vilaica removenda was awarded out of this Court and thereby the plaintant put in possession by the Sheriffe neverthelesse the defendant keepeth the possession of the said house appertaining to the personage and for that the plaintant is bound to pay his first fruits to the Queenes Majesty therefore an Injunction is granted against him Thomas Boult Clerk plaintant Sir George Blunt Miles and Alice defendants An. 3. Eliz. fol. 262. The plaintant made Title to the lands by a Lease paroll made by the defendant unto him whereupon he did sow the ground with Corne and the defendant entred upon him therefore the plaintant had an Injunction for the Corne Thomas Harrison plaintant Richard Chomeley Miles and Alice defendants An. 3. Eliz. for three hundred pound It is decreed the desendant and his Heires shall from time to time yearly pay to the plaintant and his heires Lords of the Mannor of Knebworth the rent of 3 s. 4 d. for the peece of ground called the Hawâ—e together with the arrerages thereof since the 6. of Ed. the 6 And shall from henceforth doe suite and service to the Court of the plaintant and his Heirs owners of the said Mannor and the plaintant and his Heires shall have and receive the fines and amercyaments presentable in the Court of the Mannor for any trespasse or lack of service done by the Tenants of the said Hawte Richard Litton plaintant Iohn Couper defendant An. 6. Eliz fol. 145. It is Ordered a Subpoena be awarded against the defendant to be examined upon interrogatories whether before his Answer he had knowledge that the plaintant was marryed and would take no advantage of the same marriage in his Answer then the matter to proceed without Bill of revivor Christian Fairefield plaintant Robert Greenfield defendant An. 6. Eliz. fol. 150. The question of the case drawn was whether the advowson in question did passe by the livery made in the view of the Church without deed or not the Church being full of an incumbent and resolved by the Lord chiefe Justice of the Kings Bench and Justice Manwood to whom the same was referred that the Advowson could not passe by that livery Pannell plaintant Hodgson alias Hodson defendant Anno 18. and 19. Eliz. A Subpoena Ducens tecum was awarded against the defendant to bring in certaine deeds and to shew cause why the same should not be delivered to the plaintant the defendant by his councell shewed that the Morgage was upon condition for payment of 40 l. at a day and before the day the Morgager sold the same over to the plaintant and delivered the Estate by livery and seizin whereby the condition was extinct and yet the defendant offered to give for the same 100 l. It is ordered that the evidences be delivered to the Usher of the Court but not to the plaintant without speciall order Wilford plaintant Denny defendant Anno 18. and 19. Eliz. The plaintant exhibited his Bill to be releived for a promise supposed to be made by the Lady Lutterell for a Lease of certaine lands and for stopping certaine wayes the defendant had a Commission to take her answer and demmurred for that the plaintant may have his remedy by Law which cause seemes insufficient and not to be allowed of and the rather for that the defendants having a Commission to take their answers in the Coâ—ntry did demurre therefore a Subpoena is awarded against them to make a better answer Stukly plaintant the Lady Lutterell Aliis defendants An. 18. and 19. Eliz. Stephen Smith made oath that he was present when one Iohn Maddock made these persons hereafter named privy to a Writ of execution upon a decree made for the plaintant viz. Iohn Ward Iohn Priddoâ—k Henry Pinly Lawrence Banks Iohn Kiddermaster and William Tuttle And the said Maddocks left the same Writ with one Thomas Smith from whom the defendant confesseth the receipt of the said Writ which said parties have not performed the said decree therefore an attachment is awarded against them Leake plaintant Marrow defendant An. 18. and 19. Eliz. The Bill is against the defendants as Executors to their Father who in his life time being Gardian in Soccage to the plaintant in right of the plaintants mother whom he married for and concerning profits by him taken of the lands of the plaintant during his minority for fines of Leases Woodsales and wilfull decay of houses and doth aâ—er assets sufficient to become to their hands the defendants demurre because not privy nor chargeable by Law but ordered to answer Burgh plaintant Wentworth defendant Anno 18. and 19 Eliz. Thomas Stapleâ—on made oath that he delivered
the said defendant into this court on Thursday next to the end the said Warden may be also charged with the said defendant by this court till he have satisfied or taken order for the payment of the debt due to her Majesty and that then he shall keep him in his custody untill hee answer unto the plaintant this said debt of 133 l. 6 s. 8 d. Ward plaintant Crouch defendant Anno 20. Eliz. Thomas Boulton made oath that the defend was served with a Billet in Paper to appear 15. Trinitat and no Bill in Court against her at the plaintiffes suite therefore the plaintiffe is adjudged to pay the defendant 33 s. 4 d. sustained in sending up the said Boulton who hath made oath that she is so impotent that she is not able to travell up hither thereupon personally Gredlow plaintant Prestwich defendant Anno 20. Eliz. The plaintant is adjudged to pay to the defendant 40 s. costs for want of a Bill for that the defendant made oath the plaintiffe shewed him a Subpoena wherein his name was written but would not deliver him the same for that there were others to serve with the same Writ Symont plaintiffe Pinsonby defendant Anno 20. Eliz. Iohn Clegge was served with a Subpoena by the name of Robert Clegge and Iohn Warberton made oath that he served a Subpoena upon Robert Clegge and an Attachment was served upon Iohn Clegge and ordered that he should be discharged thereof and might exhibite his Bill into this court against the said Iohn Warberton and call him in by processe to answer his perjury Robert Clegge plaintant Thomas Warberton defendant An. 20. Eliz. A Motion for an Attachment against the defendant for breach of a decree and injunction and ordered by the Lord Chancellor Bromley that for that time he stayed the granting of the Attachment and vouchsafed to write his Letters requiring him to performe the same trusting he would have such regard thereunto as no Attachment shall after be required against him Story plaintant Dominus Pawlet defendants 21. and 22. Eliz. A Motion that where the plaintants had exhibited their Bill to be discharged of a legacy the defendant since his suit sued in the spirituall Court and therefore day to shew cause why an Injunction should not be granted Parrré uxor plaintants Tipelady uxor defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. William Smalwood made oath the defendant confessed he was served with a Subpoena at the plaintants suit who not appeared therefore an Attachment is awarded against the defendant to the Sheriffe of Essex Waters plaintaint and Berd defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. The defendant a Master of Art in Oxford pleaded his priviledge of the University under the Seale there and demanded judgement whether he should be driven to answer contrary to the priviledge and the priviledge was allowed and the Attachment discharged Cotton plaintant and Manering defendants Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. A decree is made for the defendant to enjoy certaine Lands as well Coppyhold as Customary Bamborow plaintant Alexander defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. The defendant made oath that he was served with a Subpoena at the plaintants suit to appeare in this Court and that he hath lost by casualty the Subpoena and upon his appearance there was no Bill in Court against him at the said plaintants suite therefore the plaintant is adjudged to pay the defendant 40 s. costs for want of a Bill Domina Edith Metham plaintant Michaell Fayerbanck defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. For that it appeared as well by the plaintants Bill as that Osney one of the defendants hath made oath that the lands in the Bill is not worth 40 s. per annum therefore dismissed generally and not without costs Townly uxor plaintants Osney uxor Parsons defendants An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The defendant made oath that the plaintant and defendant are both dwelling within the jurisdiction of the Marches of Wales and for that it appeareth by the Bill that the Money complained for is under 10 l. therefore the cause is dismissed Eastcourt plaintant Tanner defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. Debt upon a single Bill satisfied and the Bill not delivered was sued and execution gotten and yet retained in Chancery notwithstanding a motion to be dismissed because after Judgement and Execution for it was said the Judgement and execution may stand and this suite for that he formerly paid Owen plaintant Ioanes defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. The defendant maketh oath that one Rock served him with a Subpoena in the name of the plaintant and at his suit as he affirmed but would not deliver neither Writ Labell nor noat of the day of appearance but told him it was to appeare the first day of this Terme and now no Bill in Court therefore costs is granted against the plaintant Parsons plaintant Hilford defend An. 21. and 22. Eliz. An order for a Commission to set out meet wayes and Cawsages moved in presence of Mr. Egerton of Counsell with the defend Custos of all Soules Colledge in Oxford plaintant Everall aliis defendants Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. Upon an oath made for impotency of Ienkin the defend in a former suit by the said Goose by the name of William ap William they procured a dedimus potestatem to take the answer of Ienkin to Iohn Floyd and William Goose himselfe whereas the party was under 50 yeares of age and not impotent hereupon the plaintant exhibits an English Bill of perjury into this Court against the said Goose for perjury and Ienkin for the procuring of it whereupon they being served with a Subpoena to answer the perjury they get a stay of the proceedings from the counsell of the Marches where upon motion Sir Thomas Bromley Lord Chancellor marvelled at such their stay and writ his Letters to the said Counsell and granted a new Subpoena against the defendants to answer the perjury Ioane uxor Griffith plaintant Richard ap Ienkin and William Goose defendants Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. The Bill was to be releived against a Judgement indirectly gotten by Ralfe Cavendâ—sh in the name of Thomas Cavendish his brother by default in an account of waste and because it so appeared an injunction is granted Galley plaintant Ralfe Cavendish and Thomas Cavendish defendants Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. The Suite was to be releived upon a lease made to the defendant in trust to the use of the plaintant and because it so appeared it was ordered that the plaintant should injoy the lands against the defendant and all claiming under him that had notice of the trust and if the lease were sold to such as had no notice of the trust then the defendant shall pay to the plaintant so much mony as the lease was worth Rooke plaintant Staples defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. A Bill to be
till the Lord should recover it for the forfeiture by the common Law in the case of Mr. Litton Mich. 41. and 42. Eliz. Justice Clench and the Masters Tenure by Tenant Right as it is usuall towards the borders of Scotland shall not pay any uncertaine fine or incombe at the change of the Lord by alienation but by death which is the Act of God for otherwise the Lord might weary the Tenant by frequent alienations but it may be fine uncertaine upon the alienation of the Tenant as well upon death as discent for that it is the Act of the Tenant and in his power Sir Thomas Egerton Mich. 1599. Case Mannor de thwaites les Iustices accord the same holdeth in Copyholders for the custome must be reasonable A Copyholder in Fee surrendreth to the use of one and to his Heires upon condition of redemption writeth downe his debts and willeth part of his Copyhold to be sold for payment of his debts after his death one of the creditors payeth the money at the day to the morgage who neverthelesse inrolleth the surrender afterward this other creditor complaineth against him and the Heir in Chancery and had a decree that the Copyhold should be sold for the payment of debts and the remainder of it if any were should discend to the Heire 41. Eliz. For although the devise of the Copyhold be void yet to take it from the surrendree who held it onely for money to be paid and to pay him and the other creditors therewith hath good warrant in equity and the Heire hath no wrong for that it was gone from him by the surrender lawfully Termino Trinitatis 40. Eliz. the Lord Keeper Sir Thomas Egerton pronounced openly that he for avoyding perjuries and other abuses would not give help to a Lease claimed by paroll onely One Cutting brought an action upon Assumpsit for one hundred pound against the Executors of a Testator that promised the money in marriage with his daughter and recovered at the common Law which judgement was reversed in the Chequer Chamber but Cutting sought help in Chancery where it was proved that the Executors had Assets for Funeralls Debts and Legacies with a good overplus to satisfie the complainant and therefore after hearing and report thereof by Doctor Stanhope and Mr. Lambert it was decreed for the complainant but the Executor exhibited his Bill for remedy upon which Justice Owen thought he was not to be heard till he had satisfied the decree and then also but onely upon new matter not thus resting the Executor exhibits a second Bill which was referred to Master Lambert but he excused himselfe that he was not to judge in his own cause and recommended it to the censure of the Lord Keeper who ordered the Executor to performe the first decree Micha 40. Eliz. 1598. Trinity 41. Eliz. The Lord Egerton pronounced openly that he would give none aide in Chancery â—or the maintenance of any perpetuities nor of any Lease for hundredâ— or thousands of yeares made of lands holden in Capite because the latter be grounded upon fraud and the former be fights against God A. was bound in a Statute to B. And one C. lendeth 100 l. to A. with which A. bought lands and assured the same to C. for his hundred pound A faileth in payment B. extended that land C. was denyed help in Chancery although the land was bought with his mony for B. hath priority of right in Law without Covyn Crompton 63. a. A. delivereth twenty pound to B. to the use of C. a woman to be delivered her the day of her marriage before her marriage A countermandeth it and calleth home the money C. shall not be ayded in Chancery because there is no consideration why she should have it Dyer 49. A Term or devised his Terme and whole Lease to B. Provisoe that if B. dye living C. Then the Terme shall wholly remaine to C. B. selleth the Terme and dyeth living C. And by the opinion of the Justices C. shall have no remedy Dyer 74. The Vice Countesse Mountague claimed the Wardship of the body of the Heire of a Tenant of hers which was esloyned from her 〈◊〉 she suspecting some of the Heires friends exhibited her Bill in Chancery and it seemed they should not answer to charge themselves criminally especially in this Case where so great a punishment as abjuration may follow c. Cromer and Peniston married two Sisters joyntly possessed of a Lease for yeares the wife of Cromer dyed Peniston claimed the whole by Survivor Cromer exhibited a Bill suggesting that Peniston had in her life time severed the joyneture by some act â—ecretly The Lord Keeper over-ruled that the defendant should not answer Mich. 39. and 40. Eliz. As concerning confidence secretly knit to Estates it hath manifold considerations first if my Feoffee upon confidence doe infeoffe another bona fide that knoweth not of the confidence I am without remedy Fitz Harbert sub 19 But if the second Feoffee have notice of the use he shall be compelled here to performe it 5. E. 4.7 So if my Feoffee dye and the land discend to his Heire I have no remedy against him 8. E. 4.6 All the Justices and this confidence extendeth not onely to the taking of the profits but also that the Feoffees shall doe acts for the good of the Feoffor and if the Feoffor require him to make an estate to any other he oâ—ght to doe it but thereof he ought to have request in writing for he is not to doe it upon a bare message or upon desire by word onely 37. H. 6.35.36 And if the Feoffor will have him make an Estate to I. for life the remainder in Fee to B. though I will not take the Estate yet B. shall compell him to make Estate to him in the life of I. ibid. 36. Finch So if the Feoffee be disseised the Feoffor shall compell him to sue an Assize 2 E. 4.7 Neverthelesse those Feoffees might grant necessary Offices as Stewardships Bailyweeks c. though they may not grant Annuities to learned men to defend the Land 8. H. 7.12 They may also as it seemeth give Fees to Councell and shall have allowance thereof so far as they are from being maintainors If I give money to one to purchase Lands therewith to him and his Heirs and to permit me to take the profits thereof during my life and he with-holdeth the profits he shall be compelled by Subpoena Crompton Fol. 48. b. If Cesti que use be attainted of Felony the Lord shall not be ayded by Subpoena to have his escheat and if the Heir be barred by the corruption of his bloud then the Feoffee as it seemeth shall retaine the Land to his own use 5. E. 4.7 Feoffments of use Brooke 34. When the use is to the Feoffee and his Heirs without any other intent there Cesti que use
made by the Feoffees of them for founding a Chauntry and this in the 20. of H. 6. and held no superstitious use nor by the Lord Chancellor if it had been absolutely given ad divina Celebranda and for saying of Obites for most part of the Churches of England are so founded if it be granted to a Priest contra if it be granted to a particular Priest ad divina Celebranda and saying Obites c. The Case was that those Lands were after given to found a Chappell of Ease by the Feoffees and then new come in upon the first grant would have had it a concealement and got a Pattent thereof and Commissioners upon the Statute 39. Eliz. took it from the Pattentee And note that the Commissioners make the decree the Lord Chancellor heareth the exceptions against the said decree and decreed the possession according to the Commissioners decree leaving the Pattentee to exhibite his Bill against the parishioners and to shew what cause he could for reversing thereof 18. Iunii 1. Iacob George Littleton of the Inner Temple lent money upon bonds taken in other mens names and had not any in his own name among the rest he purchased five markes per annum in two other mens names with this trust that he might injoy it during his life and after it should be to the erecting of a Schoole in the Towne where the said George was born and buryed as the Feoffees declared in their answer and in his life time after the purchase he repealed his intent of converting the same to the use of the Schoole to divers others but by his will he gave certaine Acres of Land to I. C. and I. H. and then devised all the rest of his lands to his Brothers Sonne who sues Ceux que trust for converting unto him the five marke land which Justice Warberton presently decreed for him saying his will was his Declaration But in his words there was but a meaning onely exprest me contradicente for if I. C. make a Feoffement to the Use over according to Articles annexed he cannot alter the same by a later will contra if it be to the use of his Will 19 Iunii 1. Iacobi Cutting Cleark of the Outlawries bought lands of Bedwell whereof he was seized as Tenant by curtesie promising the Heire should assure at full age and by morgage assured other lands for performance thereof Cutting before full age dyeth without issue his Heire not known for some claimeth as Hâ—ire on the Fathers side some as Heire on the Mothers side others as assignees by devise and another as Executor sued a Statute for performance of Covenants Bedwell being willing to assure brought all into the Chancery that he might incurre no prejudice till he should know to whom he should assure and ordered that he should assure to two of the six Clarks they to reassure to the Heire when he should be found 10. Octob. 1. Iacobi Nota that the Lord Chancellor Egerton in the Case of Pigot that if a power be reserved to make Leases by a Covenant without transmutation of possession the Chancery shall not help because the first is void in Law if upon transmutation of possession and the power be not precisely followed that doubtfull and rather most strong against help for then the Estate workes and the power gone and upon Wills no help causa patet antea fol. 1. and difference inter will and testament testament requires Executors will of lands 11. Octob. 1. Iacobi Young purchased lands in the name of one Mason to the use of him and his Heires dying without declaring any setled determination of this trust or confidence Dethicke a kinsman procures Mason to convey the lands to him and he conveyes it over to infants Mericke a nearer kinsman sues in Chancery as next Heire if the benefit of the trust appear to appertain to Mericke notwithstanding the conveyance to infants being decreed for them they shall hold by the decree during the minority And a proviso for the infants to assure at full age per Cook Attorney veniendo de Westm and there appearing no certain disposing thereof it was ordered that Mason should repay the money he had for making the conveyance to Dethicke and Merick to have the lands ordered for him 11. Octob. 1. Iacobi Those who are curious to have the defendants to amend their answers ordered first by the Lord Chancellor to put in sureties in Court for proof of the contents of their Bills according to the Statute 15. H. 6. or Iuramentum Calumniae were better perchance 13. Novemb. 1. Iacobi Commission to examine witnesses went out to Sir Aâ—exander Brett and others who made certificate against Sir Alexander of partiall proceedings Philipps Serjeant moved at the Rolls for a Commission to others to examine in whom the misdemeanor was in Sir Alexander or in the certifyers fuit negatum for such collaterall certificates are not required of the Commissioners but let them certifie the matters committed to their charge and if there be misdemeanor let the party wronged thereby make affidavit thereof and then take out his Attachment 13. Novemb. 1. Iacobi A release was offered to be deposed that it had been seene by some at the Barre it being affirmed that by casuall meanes it was lost but the Lord Chancellor said the oath should be that he saw it sealed and delivered and not that he saw it after it was a deed For in Munson the Justice his Case a Deed was brought into the Chancery and a Vidimus upon it being but a counterfeit copy and after the fraud discovered and the true Deed produced therefore none allowance to be given of a Deed without producing the Deed or proving the execution thereof and here appeareth what want we have of Notaries and their Deputies 16. Novemb. 1. Iacobi The Deane and Chapter of Bristoll made sundry Leases misreciting the name of their Corporation and an intricate Case of sundry such Leases made of one thing to divers men wherein the Lord Chancellor said that it was fit to help such Leases in Chancery being for reasonable time and upon good consideration contra of long Leases without consideration of fine or good rent and that Judges might have done well at the first to have expounded the Law so with averment that they were the same parties and so was the old law till now of late especially where the mistaking rose on their part who had the keeping of the evidences the which the Leases could not see but must take a Lease by the Colledge Clark in a writ where you may have a new no harme to abate it for a misnomer and yet in that case sometimes in old times an Averment of Comer per lieu nosme â— auter where they were sued by others and not named so by themselves 23. Novemb. 1. Iacobi Haule had a Dutchy Lease gotten upon untrue surmises and the King
bestowed the land upon the Earl of Devon for his service done in Ireland This Lease the Earl sought to avoid by the law Haule prayes to have the matter examined in Chancery and to have the suit stayed by Injunction which was denyed for that the Lease was granted by fraud and the Fee simple to the Earl in possession and not in reversion nota that the Lord Chancellor said that where lands are granted in reversion if the Grantee will avoid the lease for a rent paid but not at the day in that case he will releeve but not where the Lease is granted upon a false suggestion for that were to relieve fraud in the Chancery it was further objected that this grant was made to the Earl upon consideration of service done and the Lord Chancellor said that the service done to the Realme was as valuable as if the Earl had given 500 l. for the Land but the Earl offered to give the Leassee 1000 l. recompence in honour 23. Ian. 1. Iacobi In a Case moved by Mr. Chamberlaine where the Lord Chancellor had referred the matter to be tryed at the common Law touching remainders upon a Lease whether good in law or no and the Judges had given Judgement upon the case in another point in the Kings Bench so as the Lord Chancellor remained still uncertaine of that point called the Judges into the Exchequer Chamber 1. Iacobi For as much as the plaintant hath served processe upon the defendant to appear in this court return 15. Micha and exhibited no sufficient Bill against him and further for meere examination sued out a Writ of Attachment against the defendant before the returne of the subpoena it is ordered that the plaintant shall pay unto the defendant 10 s. costs and also that Hugh Tildesley who made the processe against the defendant without a sufficient Bill shall pay unto the defendant other 10 s. for his costs William Garneston plaintant Thomas Bradwell defendant Anno 5. Hen. 6. Philip and Mary fol. 11. For as much as a Commission to examine witnesses in perpetuam rei memoriam issued out of this Court and the witnesses examined by vertue thereof have remained in court by the space of a year It is ordered that publication shall be granted Richard Gravenor and Iohn Gravenor plaintants Bryan Brearton defendant An. 5. and 6. Phil. and M. fol. 12. Episcopu Cicestrens publication of witnesses in perpetuam rei memoriam An. 5. and 6. Phil. and Mar. fol. 30. Willington plaintant Agar defendant publication of witnesses remaining since 33. H. 8. fol. 42. Anno 5 and 6. Phil. and Mary An Injunction is granted against the defendants to deliver to the plaintant certaine Plate contained in their Petition or else to appeare and shew cause in crur. anim prox Anno 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 13. David Geoffry and Iohn Geoffry plaintants and Thomas Davis defendant A decree is made for the plaintant as by the Record thereof signed with the Lord Chancellors hand plainly appeareth and the said Record is delivered to Iohn Millisent Attorney for the plaintant to be inrolled the Deane and Chapter of Lincolne plaintant Bevore and Alice defendants Anno 5. and 6. Phil. and Mary fol. 15. Glanffell plaintant Strickley defendant a decree is made for the defendant for dismission of the cause as by the Record thereof signed with the Lord Chancellors hand and the same put to the inrolment Anno 5. and 6. Phil. and Mary fol. 22. Iames Iervis hath made oath for the delivery of a subpoena to the defendant whereby he hath knowledge that witnesses are to be examined in perpetuall memory so that he may if he will examine the same witnesses in this court therefore the examinors in this court may proceed to the examination of the said witnesses accordingly Hatcham plaintiffe Winchcombe defendant 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 19. Porter plaintant Baker defendant the examinor may proceed to examination of witnesses in perpetuall memory if the plaintant have served a Subpoena upon the defendant to give him notice to examine likewise An. 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 32. Forasmuch as the plaint hath taken oath in this court that there are sundry witnesses contained in a Schedule exhibited in this court which he desireth to have examined â—n perpetuall memory so impotent and sick that they are not able to travell up to be examined in court without danger of their lives therefore a Commission is awarded to Sir Humfrey Bâ—adburne Knight to examine the same witnesses in perpetuall memory Bagshawe plaintant defendant An 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 22. Robins plaintant Foster defendant a Commission is granted to examine witnesses in the Countrey being impotent in perpetuall memory Anno 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 26. The plaintant is adjudged to pay to the defendant costs three pound for that he was served to appear before the Lord Mayor of London to testifie in a matter depending before the said Lord Mayor between the plaintant and one Iohn Gresham and others without any precept directed from the Lord Mayor unto the said defendant to appeare Rowe and Alice plaintants Thomas Guybone defendant Anno 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 24. Iohn Manlye hath taken oath the deposition of witnesses examined on the behalfe of the plaintant and remaining in this Court are to be given in evidence at a Court Baron holden at Potton in the County of Bedford on Mâ—nday next therefore publication is granted William Manlye Clerke plaintant Thomas Simcote defendant Anno 5. and 6. Phil. and Mary fol. 24. An injunction is awarded against the defendant to stay his proceedings in the Sheriffes Court of London or elsewhere upon debt of 100 l. not to proceed to triall judgement or to execution if judgement be given Iohn Ayland plaintiffe Francis Bacon defendant Anno 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 29. Forasmuch as the plaintant served processe upon the defendent by the name of Magaret Hastings and at that instant was marryed to William Brown and also for want of a Bill therefore the said William Brown and Margaret are adjudged to pay to the defendant 20 s. costs Margaret Hastings plaintant Nicholas Iugges defendant Anno 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 30. Forasmuch as the Sheriffe of Denâ—igb hath returned a Languidus in prison therefore a Commission is awarded to Richard Griffeths and others to take the answer of the defendant Iohn ap Thomas plaintant Engharard Hoell widow defendant An. 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 33. Forasmuch as the defendant was in possession of the lands at the time of the Bill exhibited and the plaintant hath sithence entered therefore an injunction is granted to the defendant against the plaintiffe to avoid the possession William Hawkes and Ieâ—nit his wife plaintants Iohn Champion and others defendants An. 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 35. It
a Subpoena to the defendants wife being in the defendants house who hath not appeared therefore an Attachment is awarded Barlow plaintant Baker defendant Anno 18. and 19. Eliz. It is decreed by Assent that the defendant being Lord of the Mannor of Alderswasley shall have for a fine of a Coppyholder upon a Surrender one whole yeares value as the same is reasonable worth according to the usuall rates of Lands in that Countrey Blackwall and Alice Tenants of the Mannor of Alderswasley plaintants Low defendant An. 18. and 19. Eliz. The defendant confesseth by her answer the having of a Tablet or Pomander in Gold demanded by the plaintant and as to the 20 l. likewise demanded by the plaintant by him left with the said dâ—fendant as a token at such time as he was a suter for marriage to the defendant she confesseth the same was left with her against her will and she delivered the same over unto one Sydole her brother who was a dealer with her on the plaintants behalfe to the end hee should deliver the same over to the plaintant It is ordered the Tablet be forthwith delivered by the defendant to the plaintant which was done presently in Court and as to the 20 l. the plaintant shall call in the said Sidole by processe Young plaintant Burrell and Elizabeth uxor ejus defendants Anno 18 and 19. Eliz. The plaintant by his Bill sheweth that the Copy of the Court â—oll whereby the defendants pretend title was indirectly entered by the Stewards Clarke of the mannor the defendants demurre for that the plaintants shall not be received by surmise to object against or impeach the said Court Rols and alleadgeth further the Copy was found by the homage to be true which causes seem to this Court very insufficient It is therefore ordered if cause be not shewed before Wednesday for maintenance of the demurrer then a Subpoena is awarded against the defendants to make answer Holden and Holden plaintants Cleark and Alice defendants Anno 18. and 19. Eliz. The plaintaint hath exhibited his Bill of Revivor against two where the first Bill was against three and the personage in question is named by another name then in the former Bill therefore ordered if cause be not shewed by a day the defendant shall be discharged Heines plaintant William Day Deane of Windsor and Hatchines defendants An. 18. and 19. Eliz. William Lowgher appeared and answered but Rob. Lowgher claimed the priviledge of the university of Oxf. but because the said Doct. Lowgher was joyned with William Lowgher in the bill who was not subject to the same Jurisdiction therefore ordered processe to be awarded against him to shew other cause why he should not answer White plaintant Rob. Lowgher Doctor of Divinity and Will Lowgher defend An. 18. 19. Eliz. The defendant is adjudged to pay to the plaintants 40 s. costs for suing out processe of contempt against him being discharged by her Majesties generall pardon Iones and Parris plaintant Iones defend An. 18. and 19. Eliz. There is more presidents of the like case Walter Ieames made oath that he hanged a Subpoena on the door of one Stacy Barry widdow and that the defendant used to resort thither as he heard reported before that time who hath not appeared therefore an attachment was awarded Ieames plaintant Morgan defendant An. 18. and 19. Eliz. The plaintant exhibited his Bill against the defendant by practise of purpose to examine witnesses and did examine witnesses accordingly whereas the cause chiefely concerned one Thomas Staunton and Will Bayes and therefore ordered that the depositions should be suppressed and that the said Staunton and Bayles shall exhibite a Bill into this Court against all such as they thinke to be parties to the fraudulent abusing of this Court Walford plaintant Walford defendant An. 19. Eliz. It is informed that the parties dwell in the County Palatine of Lancaster and the matter of the Bill is for a supposed trespasse in entring upon the defendants lands and consuming his grasse and hay upon the same which this Court doth not use to hold Plea of therefore ordered if it be true then the cause is dismissed and the plaintant to take his remedy in the County Palatine of Lancaster Hameâ—heson plaintant Tounstall Covell Rigmaden and Baldwin defendants An. 19. Eliz. The plaintants suit is to have an award made by Master Tilbey and Mr. Chambers Arbitrators indifferently chosen performed and both parties were bound each to other for the performance of the award and one part of the award was that if any question did grow between the parties the arbitrators should end it It is ordered a Subpoena to shew cause Launcellot Barker plaintant Peter Barker defend An. 19. Eliz. The plaintant exhibiteth a Bill of complaint against Luce and Maulde two of the defendants and after Commission Maulde marrieth Iohn Bourne the other defendant and the plaintant then exhibited a Bill of Revivor against the defendants which needeth not as it seemeth to this Court therefore ordered if there be no cause of revivor that Bourne and his wife who are called up by processe to answer the same Bill are licenced to depart without answer to the Bill of revivor and the plaintant to pay him such costs as this Court shall award Iackson and Vxor plaintants Luce Smith Iohn Bourne and Maulde his wife defendants An. 19. Eliz. The plaintant by his Bill pretends title to certaine lands and Freehold Lands which lands the defend claims to hold by Copy of court Roll to him and his heires of one Thomas Stedolph Esq. Lord of the mannor of Milcklam in the county of Surrey whereof the said lands are parcell and prayed in aide of the said Stedolph neverthelesse the plaintant served the said Arnold with processe to rejoyne without calling the said Stidolph thereunto which this Court thinkes not meet therefore ordered the plaintant shall no further proceed against the defendant before he have called the said Stidolph in by processe Lucas plaintant Arnold defendant Anno 19. Eliz. The said Holgate maketh oath he left an injunction in the house of the defendant and that the defendant Elizabeth White Thomas Crimore and Robert Watkins have disobeyed the same therefore an Attachment is awarded against them Holgate and Vxor ejus planitants Grantham defendant An. 19. Eliz. The defendant this day made his personall appearance upon a Commission of Rebellion for saving his bond made to the Commissioners in that behalfe Brown plaintant Derby defendant Anno 19. Eliz. Commonly it is used to take the Bonds in the name of the Lord Chancellor Lord Keeper of the Great Seale of England the Master of the Rols or to any two of the Masters of the Chancery all which are good and allowable by the practise of the Court of Chancery Upon affidavit made by the plaintant that since publication granted he had divers witnesses setting down their
defendant against him in bringing him up by Subpoena at the suite of one Anthony Hinck whereas the plaintant never knew any such maâ— and for divers other misdemeanors used by the defendant in this Court towards the plaintant the defendant demurred for that both parties dwell within the jurisdiction of the Marches of Wales where hee supposes the plaintant is to seek his remedy which kind of demurrer this court alloweth not for that misdemeanors committed in this court are most meet to be here examined Griffeth plaintant Penrine defendant Anno 22. Eliz. The plaintant sheweth by his Bill that his house and the defendants are joyning together and supported by one main wall standing partly upon the Freehold of either of the said parties and the plaintant having also an entry Garret and other necessary roomes standing upon the Kitchin of the defendant he the defend went about to pull down the said Wall and thereby to overthrow the said Garret the defendant made title to some of the upper rooms and hath pulled down part of the Wall an Injunction is awarded to stay the defendant to pull down any more of the Wall or any other part of the said house whereby the said upper Roomes may be overthrown or impaired untill the matter be heard Bush plaintant Field defendant An. 22. Eliz. A Commission to examine witnesses on both parts upon 14. dayes warning to be given to the defendant Lucy one of the defendants made oath that neithen he nor Varney had any warning but if any warning was given it was given to Smith the other defendant who is little interessed in the cause but made a party as the defendants councell supposeth to take away his testimony from the other defendants Therefore ordered a Commission be awarded whereof the said Lucy shall have the carriage directed to the former Commissioners and 14. dayes warning shall be given to the plaintant and he to examine if he will Hollingworth plaintant Lucy Varney and Smith defendants Anno 22. Eliz. Humphrey Loyde made oath that he saw one Lewis leave a Subpoena in the Hall of the defendant and that the defendant was at home the same time who hath not appeared therefore an Attachment is awarded against the defendâ—nt Anno 22. Eliz. A Commission to examine witnesses issued but the plaintant at the place and day appointed brought not his Commissioners nor the Commission whereby the defendants Commissioners could not fit to examine but the plaintant procured certaine witnesses to be examined before one of the Town Clarkes of Yorke touching the matter in variance but ordered no witnesses so taken shall be received into this Court nor the plaintant take any benefit thereby and a new Commission is awarded Hareforth and Lowther plaintants Gates defendant Anno 22. Eliz. Iohn Davis made oath that his boy served a Subpoena upon the defendant for the which the said boy was apprehended and imprisoned in the Marches of Wales therefore an Attachment is awarded against the defendant Dastoines plaintant Apprice defendant Anno 22. Eliz. The defendant made oath that both the said parties dwell in the Jurisdiction of the Marches of Wales and that the matter of the plaintants Bill is but for a lease for yeares and no title of Freehold therefore dismissed Moore plaintant Mashall defendant Anno 22. Eliz. Iohn Lord Zouch deceased late Father to the plaintant did give the Mannor of Winford Eagle with th' appertenances in the County of Dorset intailed to the Father of the defendant reserving 40 l. a yeare rent to him and his Heires and after about three yeares last past granted 25 l. parcell of the said rent to the plaintants for their lives and the defendants Father did atturne and pay the rent to the plaintants untill about two or three yeares before his death which was about six years since sithence which time the defendant being issue in taile and seized refused to pay the said rent but ordered by this court to pay it if he shew not good cause to the contrary Zouch uxor plaintants Siddenâ—am defendant Anno 22. Eliz. The plaintant seeketh reliefe by way of contribution for that one of the defendants hath a rent charge out of this the plaintants lands and out of one other of the defendants lands and yet seeketh to lay the whole burthen of the rent charge upon his the plaintants lands and because the defend would not answer therefore an Injunction is granted for staying of the suits of the rent Dolman plaintant Vavasor aliis defendants Anno 22. Eliz. It appeareth by oath that the defendant is both senselesse and dumbe and therefore cannot instruct his Counsell to draw his answer and therefore ordered that no Attachment or other processe of contempt be awarded against the defendant for not answering without speciall order of this Court Altham plaintant Smith defendant An. 22. Eliz. The plaintant bought of the defendant the reversion of a Copyhold which he could not enjoy confessed by the defendants answer thereupon a Subpoena is awarded against the defendant to shew cause why he should not repay the money received upon the bargaine Picketon plaintant Littecote aliis defendants An. 22. Eliz. The defendants were not served with processe and yet the plaintant brought up divers witnesses to be examined but ordered they should not be examined untill the defendants have answered Episcopus Sallesbury plaintant Hinde and Hinde defendants Anno 22. Eliz. The plaintant was drawne to drinke and filled with drink spoke some words against the defendant for which he brought an action upon the case at the common Law whereupon the plaintant exhibited his Bill of complaint and got an Injunction pro non solutione Finis It is ordered that the defend paying the Queenes fine shall have liberty to proceed and the Bill to be dismissed Qui peccat ebrius luat sobrius Kendrick plaintant Hopkins defendant Anno 22. Eliz. Forasmuch as the Major of Barnestable hath certified that Iohn Barker made oath before him that he did shew and offer to deliver to the defendant a Subpoena which he would not accept and hath not appeared therefore an attachment Peris plaintant Thomas defendant Anno 22. Eliz. The plaintants made motion to have publication of witnesses taken 1. and 2. Philip and Mary betweene one Thomas Shrub then plaintant and now deceased whose daughters and Coheires the plaintants wives are and Henry Barnard then defendant now likewise deceased touching lands in the occupation of the defendant and ordered the plaintants shall exhibite a Bill for publication against the defendants and call them by the Subpoena to answer and then order shall be taken Clarke uxor Papwell uxor Stockes plaintants Eve Mellers and Wodham defendants Anno 22. Eliz. The defendant was served with a Subpoena at the suit of Hanmer and for want of a Bill got costs and the plaintant upon Affidavit that the
The matter complained of by the Bill is for 5 l. debt for Fish therefore dismissed Foord Foord plaintants Richards defendant Anno 21. Eliz. Symonds Brocebridge made oath that the said Elizabeth and Anne two of the defendants are above the age of 70. yeares a peece and that the said William was comming up to London in his company and they were both robbed and William his horse taken from him whereby hee could not come to make his appearance therefore a Commission is granted to take all the said defendants answers in the countrey Hill plaintant Elizabeth Worley widdow William Stapleton and Anne his wife defendants Anno 21. Eliz. Memorand that the 20. day of February last Sir Nicholas Bacon Knight Lord Keeper of the Great Seale of England dyed at York house and the Seale being the same day sent for by the Lord Treasurer remained with the Queenes Majesty till the 12. day of April last on which day the same was delivered to Sir Tho. Bromly Knight Lord Chancellor of England Paschae 21. Eliz. Whereby an order of the 10. of Feb. last a Subpoena was awarded against the defendant to shew cause wherefore an award therein mentioned should not be ratified Now Mr. Flowerdew of councell on the defendants behalf informeth that the said award was not made by any order of this court and therefore desired that the said defend may not be compelled to performe the same It is ordered that Councell on both sides shall attend the morrow sevennight and then order shalll be taken Barkley Miles plaintant Moore defendant Anno 21. Eliz. The plaintant exhibited his Bill as a priviledged man to Sir Francis Kempe Prothonotary of this Court for Lands lying in the County Palatine of Chester and for that it appeared by Letters Patents openle shewed in Court under her Majesties Great Seale of England that this Court by any priviledge should not hold plea of any Lands lying within the said County Palatine It is therefore ordered to be dismissed if the plaintant shew not good cause William Lomley plaintant Thomas Greene Thomas Marlow Robert Taylor and Iames Wagge defendâ—nts An. 21. Eliz. The plaintant was adjudged to pay the defen. 37 s. 6 d. costs for that he being served with Subpoena in Hillar Terme appeared and by his answer disclaimed and yet after the plaintant served him with a Subpoena to rejoyne but afterwards the same costâ— were discharged by motion for that the defendant had before the costs put in his rejoynder but upon a disclaimer no costs is to be allowed Read plaintant Hawstead alias Lane defendants Anno 21. Eliz. The defendant was taken upon a Commission of Rebellion at the plaintants suite required his costs to be allowed him the Court asking the opinion of the Clerkes it was agreed with one consent that he should have his costs allowed therefore ordered accordingly Morgan plaint Ap Iohn Gowge defendant Anno 21. Eliz. The defendant maketh oath that he was served with a Billet in paper at the plaintants suit which Billet he lost by misfortune and upon his appearance no Bill is in Court against him therefore costs is awarded Brown alias Garris alias Pawdy plaintant Stoyck defend Anno 21. Eliz. The plaintant exhibited his Bill to examine witnesses in perpetuall memory touching a lease of Lands which hee and those by whom hee claimeth hath enjoyed 40. yeares the defendant by answer claimeth the Lands as Coppy-hold of inheritance to Mr. Sowthwell who is owner of the inheritance and within age and therefore prayed that no witnesses might be examined till Mr. Southwell be of full age and yet because the witnesses being old and may dye in the interim therefore a Subpoena is awarded against the defend to shew cause why a Commission should not be granted Hearing plaintant Fisher defendant An. 21. Eliz. Iohn Budden maketh oath that the defendants confessed unto him they were served with a Subpoena at the plaintants suite and have not appeared therefore an Attachment is granted Perry Ar plaintant Gatter alias Sharde and Cole defendants An. 21. Eliz. Upon the hearing of the matter for the Mannor of Laughtor and the Advowson of the Church of Laughton in the County of Bucking it appeared that the defendants and they from whom they claimed have beene in possession 100 yeares with divers discents therefore the defendants are dismissed Kinston plaintant Pigot aliis defendants Anno 21. Eliz. The defendant in Hillar Terme made oath that he could not answer without sight of evidences in the Country and having day given him he now hath put in no answer but a demurrer contrary to the orders of this Court therefore an attachment is awarded against the defendant Farmer aliis plaintants Fox defendant Anno 21. Eliz. Iohn Harry made oath for the serving of a Subpoena on the defendants to rejoyn therefore Munday next is given to the defendants to rejoyne or else to lose the benefit thereof Ioanes aliis plaintants Whitney Miles aliis defendants An. 21. Eliz. Whereas a Commission issued out to examine witnesses on both parties which is returned executed upon oath made by Giles Brever that he served precepts from the Commissioners upon W. S. Tho. Lin T. C. and Io. Peers to be examined on the defendants behalf before the said Commissioners who appeared not it is therefore ordered that a new Commission be awarded to the former Commissioners at the defendants charge as well to examine the said four witnesses as any other Shepheard plaintant Shepheard aliis Defendants An. 21. Eliz. The Duke of Northumberland acknowledged a Recognizance of 1000 Markes to the Lord Crumwell and after granted certaine Lands to the defendant afterwards both the Duke and the Lord Cromwell were attainted of Treason whereby the Recognizance came to the Queen and in her name was put in suit by one Lane to whom her Majesty had granted the same recognizance who sought to extend the defendants said Lands alone whereas there are divers other Lands to a great valew in other mens hands lyable to the said Recognizance therefore it is ordered that no Liberate goe out upon the said extent untill the Court order the same The Queenes Majesty plaintant Colborne defendant Anno 21. Eliz. The plaintant sought to be relieved upon an Obligation of 300 l. which he entred into to make a joyneture unto his wife in consideration of 174 l. promised to him by the defendant in marriage which was never paid unto him therefore an Injunction is awarded if cause be not shewed Osborne plaintant Havers defend An. 21. Eli. The plaintant and defendant both joyned in Commission to examine witnesses and the plaintant having the carriage of the Commission did not execute the same but did examine witnesses here in Court therefore ordered the defend should have a new CoÌ„mission to the former Commissioners wherein the plaintant might also examine if he list and
precedent before the Judgements and not matter of agreement aâ—â—â—â— 8. We find in the said cases not onely the Bill preferred but motions orders injunctions and decrees thereupon for the discharging and releasing of the Judgements or abiding the possession thereupon obtained and sometimes for the meane profits and the release of the costs c. 9. We find in some of the cases in this very point that Judgement hath been given hath been stood upon by the defendants and alleadged by them by way of demurrer and overruled 10. We find that the Judges themselves in their own Courts when there appeared unto them matter of equity because they by their oath and office could not stay the Judgements except it be for some small time have directed the parties to seeke reliefe in Chancery 11. We find that this hath not onely been in the times of the severall Chancellors but by the Judges themselves and that without difficulty when they sate in Chancery in the vacancy or absence of the Chancellor 12. We find the hands of sundry principall Councellors at Lawâ— whereof divers of them are now Judges â—â—d some in chieâ—e place in Bills of this kind 13. Lastly here were offered to have beene shewed unto us many other presidents whereof we heard some read and found them to be of like nature with those contained in the note Francis Bacon Randell Crew Henry Mountague Hen. Yelverton And whereas also our said Attorney received one other Letter from our said Chancellor with a case there inclosed written likewise by our expresse commandment dated the 27. of March 1616 directing requiring him and the rest of our learned Councell together with the Attorney of our deare sonne the Prince to confer together upon the said cause and to consider advisedly of al the parts thereof and thereupon to peruse all the the Statutes of Praemunire or Provisoes and all other Statutesâ— as they shall conceive to be necessary to be considered of for the resolving the question propounded in that case and thereupon to report unto us their opinions in writing concerning the same which Letter and Case there inclosed follow in these words MAster Attorney His Majesty hath perused this case inclosed and hath commanded me to send it to you and his will and pleasure is that you call unto you Mr. Sarjeant Mountague Mr. Sarjeant Crew Mr. Sollicitor and Mr. Walter the Princes Attorney and you confer together thereupon and conâ—ider advisedly and deliberately of all the parts thereof and thereupon to peruse all the Statutes of Praemunire or Provisors and all other such Statutes as you shall conceive to be necessary to be considered of for the resolving the question propounded in this case this his Majesty would have be done with mature deliberation and yet with as much speed as conveniently you can and when you have sufficiently informed your selves therein then to report to him your opinions in writing and so I committ you to God and rest Your very loving friend T. Ellesmore Canc. At York house the 27. of March 1616. A. hath Judgement and execution in the Kings Bench or common Pleas against B. in an action of debt of 1000 l. And in an ejectione Firmae of the Mannor of D. B. complaines in the Chancery to be relieved against those Judgements according to conscience and equity allowing the Judgements to be lawfull and good by the rigour and strict rules of the common Lawes and the matters in conscience and equity such as the Judges of the common Law being no Judges in equity but bound by their oathes to doe the Law cannot give any remedy or reliefe for the same either by error or attaint or by any other meanes Questio Whither the Chancery may relieve B. in this or such like cases or else leave him utterly remedilesse and undone and if the Chancery be restrained by any Statute of Praemunire c. Then by what Statute or by what words in any Statute is the Chancery so restrained and conscience and equity banished excluded and damned and whereas according to our said commandment our said learned councell and the Attorney of our deare Son the Prince returned unto us a Certificate of their opinions upon the said Statutes under all their severall hands concerning the same case which Certificate followeth in these words According to your Majesties Commandment we have deliveratly advised of the case sent unto us by the Lord Chancellor and of the Statutes as well those of Praemunire as others as far as we take it may concerne the case and for our better information therein wee have thought fit to send for and peruse the originall Records themselves remaining in the Tower of London of those Statutes not onely appearing upon the Roll of Parliament with the Kings answers which is the warrant to the Roll of Parliament We have also taken into consideration as well Booke Lawes as divers other Acts of Parliament which may give light unto the Statutes whereupon the question properly growes together with such ancient Records and presidents as we could find as well those which maintaine the authority of the Chancery as those which seeme to impeach the same and upon the whole matter we are al of opinion that the Chancery may give reliefe to the case in question and that no Statute of Praemunire c. or other Statute restraines the same And because we know not what use your Majesty will be pleased to make of this our opinion either for the time present or future we are willing to give some reasons of the same not thinking fit to trouble your Majesty with all those things whereupon we have grounded our selves selecting out some principall things which moved us to be of this opinion to the end this same may be a fuller object of your Majesties Princely Judgement whereunto we alwayes submit our selves And first we must lay for a sure foundation that which was contained in our former Certificate concerning the continuall practise by the space now of six score yeares in the times of King Hen. the 7. King Hen. the 8. King Edward the sixt Queene Mary and Queene Elizabeth of this authority and that in the time when the same authority was mannaged not onely the Bishops which might be thought lesse skilfull or lesse affectionate towards the Lawes of the Land but also divers great Lawyers which could not but know and honour the Law as the meanes of their advancement Sir Thomas More and the Lord Audly the Lord Rich Sir Nicholas Bacon Sir Thomas Bromley and Sir Iohn Puckering and further that most of the late Judges of the Kingdome either as Judges when they sate in Chancery by Commission or as Councellors at Law when they set their hands to Bills have by their judgement and councell upheld the same authority and therefore for as much as it is a true ground That optimus legum interpres consuetudo especially when the practise or custome passeth not amongst vulgar persons but