Page:English Historical Review Volume 37.djvu/185

 1922 THE GREAT STATUTE OF PEAEMUN1RE 111 That this was the attitude of the English Crown towards papal jurisdiction can readily be inferred from English and papal records of the time. There is no need, however, to multiply citations, for we luckily have two statements of the recognized principle. In 1412 the prior of B. (the name is not given in full) brought a writ of praemunire facias against the prior of N. because the latter had resorted to the court of Rome in a dispute between the two about an advowson. The particulars of the case, which was a complicated one, need not concern us. But in the course of the hearing, counsel for the defence asserted that if a clerk were despoiled of his benefice by another clerk, he could sue a spoliation in court Christian or in the court of Rome, at his choice ; for if a spoliation were sued, the right to the advowson of the benefice would not be at issue, and so the matter would not be temporal but spiritual. The bench held that the argument was not relevant to the case before it, but no one questioned its soundness. 1 The principle here assumed was affirmed still more clearly in October 1415 by the royal council. Roger Lansell, clerk, had obtained from Rome citations summoning Nicholas Ryecroft, goldsmith, to answer in the curia on certain matters which (ac- cording to Ryecroft) were prejudicial to the Crown and contrary to the laws and customs of the realm, in particular an ordinance of Edward III. Ryecroft then obtained a writ of praemunire facias against Lansell and five others, said to be accessories, and they were summoned before the king's bench. 2 Lansell, ' to appeals from English spiritual jurisdiction to the pope ', his statements, though defensible in the letter, are apt to give a false impression. For the English ecclesiastical courts were forbidden by the Crown to do many things which, in the view of the pope, they might and ought to have done. Nor must it be overlooked that the papal court was not merely a court of appeal, but also a court of first instance, and very frequently used as such by Englishmen. And to this jurisdiction of the pope as ' universal ordinary ' the statutes of 1353 and 1365 did set limits, the same limits of course as were already imposed on the jurisdiction of the English courts Christian. How far Dr. Pollard's assertions are applicable to the statute of 1393 will, I hope, become clear later on. 1 Year Book, 4 Hen. IV, p. 14. Counsel contended that if he presented a clerk to a church, and after institution and induction ' il est spoile de son benefice par un estrange Clerke, que de cest spoliation il puit suer en Court Christien, pur estre remise a sa Esglise, et a sa possession, ou en Court de Rome, a sa volunt, sans estre empeche de ceo, car par cest suit il n'est my mis a recoverer le droit de 1'advowson, eins pur estre remise a son benefice areremaine, et uncore pur cest recoverie jeo ne suy restitute a ma advowson, en quel case cest suit nest my temporal eins spiritual '. par vertue de notre brief de Premuniri facias proces soit fait ... en notre bane envers Roger Lansell clerc. . . de ce qe mesme cellui Roger deust avoir purchacez nadgairs en la courte de Rome plusieurs citacions appellacions et notificacions dicelles envers le susdit Nicholas Ryecroft pur lui avoir fait respondre en mesme la courte sur certaines choses en le susdit notre brief especifiez et plusieurs autres choses a nous et a notre corone prejudicieles encontre la duetee de sa ligeance en contempt et prejudice de nous peril ouvert de la disheritance de notre corone et encontre les loys et custumes VOL. XXXVII. NO. CXLVI. N
 * 'Comnie a ce qe nous avons entenduz a la suite de Nicholas Ryecroft orfeour