AALT images for the Woodyerd & Symons case:

Memorandum: that on June 15 in this same term before the king’s justices of the Bench come Robert Woodyerd and Thomas Symons of the parish of Postwick in the county of Norfolk and the Norwich diocese in their proper persons. And they give it to the court here to be understood that,

[Relation of Relevant Law]

[Parliamentary Authorization for High Commission]

whereas in the statute published in the Parliament of the Lady Elizabeth late queen of England held at Westminster in the county of Middlesex on January 23 in the first year of her reign among other things it was enacted by the authority of the same Parliament that such jurisdictions, privileges and spiritual and ecclesiastical pre-eminences that there were or then could be legitimately exercised or used beforehand by any spiritual or ecclesiastical power or authority for the visitation of the ecclesiastical estate and persons and for the reformation, order, and correction of the same and of all manner errors, heresies (in English, heresies), schisms (in English, scismes), abuses, offenses, contempts, and enormities would thenceforth in perpetuity by the authority of the same Parliament be united and annexed to the imperial crown of this realm of England and that the same late queen, her heirs and successors the kings and queens of this realm would have full power and authority by virtue of the abovesaid act by letters patent under the great seal of England to sign, name, and authorize when and as often as the same late queen, her heirs and successors should judge it suitable and convenient and for such and so long time as it should please the said late queen, her heirs and successors such person or persons being natural born subjects of the said late queen, her heirs and successors as the same late queen, her heirs and successors should judge suitable to exercise, use, occupy and maintain under the same late queen, her heirs and successors all manner jurisdictions, privileges, and pre-eminences touching or concerning in any way any spiritual or ecclesiastical jurisdiction within the said late queen’s lordships of England and Ireland or any other lordships or regions of that late queen and to use, reform, ordain, correct, and emend all such errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, offenses, contempts, and enormities whatsoever that by any spiritual or ecclesiastical power, authority, or jurisdiction could legitimately be reformed, ordained, corrected, restrained, or emended to the pleasure of almighty God, the increase of virtue, and the preservation of the peace and unity of this realm of England; and that such person or persons so named, assigned, appointed, and authorized by the said late queen, her heirs and successors after the abovesaid letters patent made and delivered to him or them as has been said above would have full power and authority by virtue of the abovesaid act and the same letters patent under the said late queen, her heirs or successors to exercise, use, and occupy all the premises according to the tenor and effect of the same letters patent, any matter or cause to the contrary notwithstanding, as by the same act among other things it more fully appears;

[Magna Carta Protection of Free Men]

and whereas also in Magna Carta it is contained that no free man should be taken or imprisoned or disseised of his free tenement or liberties or his free customs or be outlawed or exiled or destroyed in any manner except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land as in that charter it is more fully contained;

[Articuli Cleri Specification for Prohibition and Royal Jurisdiction]

and whereas also by the Articuli Cleri among other things it has been ordained that if a prelate impose a monetary penalty on anyone for a sin and he demands it, a royal prohibition would issue, and it was further ordained by the Articuli Cleri abovesaid among other things that if anyone lay violent hands on a cleric, for that violence done it ought to be emended coram Rege [before the king] as in those articles it is more fully contained;

[James I’s General Pardon]

and whereas also at the Parliament of the now lord king held at Westminster in the county of Middlesex on November 5 in the third year of his reign by the authority of the same Parliament among other things it was enacted that all and singular the subjects of the said lord king both spiritual and temporal of this realm of England, Wales, the Isles of Jersey and Guernsey and the vill of Berwick, the heirs, successors, executors and administrators of them and each of them and all and singular bodies incorporated in any way, cities, burroughs, counties, ridings, hundreds, lathes, rapes, wapentakes, vills, towns, hamlets, and tithings and each of them and of their successors, and the successors of each of them would be by the authority of the same Parliament acquitted, pardoned, relaxed, and exonerated in regard to the said lord king, his heirs and successors and each of them concerning all treasons, felonies, offenses, contempts, wrongs, entries, injuries, deceits, misdeeds, forfeitures, penalties and sums of money, penalties of life, penalties corporal and pecuniary and generally concerning all other causes, complaints, suits, judgments, and executions in the same act afterwards not excepted or excluded which by the said lord king in any way or ways could be pardoned before and until September 25 then last past, to each and every one of the subjects of the said lord king, incorporated bodies, cities, boroughs, counties, ridings, hundreds, lathes, rapes, wapentakes, vills, towns, and tithings or each of them;

[Common Law Jurisdiction over Wrongs and the Construction of Statutes]

and whereas also all and singular pleas and cognizances of pleas of whatsoever trespasses, trespasses on the case, scandals, and the putting forth of words, disturbances of the peace and excesses against the royal peace committed or perpetrated and also concerning any whatsoever oppressions, misdeeds, misbehaviors, and other offenses against the royal peace or against the form and effect of the common law or of any statutes of this realm of England perpetrated or committed emerging within this realm of England as well as all pleas and business concerning the explanation, interpretation, construction, or exposition of any of the statutes of this realm of England and other business of this realm and the pleas and cognizances of pleas look and pertain to the lord king now and his royal crown and not to the ecclesiastical or civil forum in any way and by the common laws of the land of this realm of England in the royal courts of record before the king himself or his justices and other justices and judges secular and temporal ought and always up to this time have been accustomed and were supposed to be tried, determined, and discussed and not by ecclesiastical or civil laws or censures in ecclesiastical or civil courts before spiritual, ecclesiastical, or civil judges;

[Petitioners’ Standing as Free Men]

And whereas also the same Robert Woodyerd and Thomas Symons are free men of this realm of England and so have been through their whole lifetimes all the way back and to the present and by reason thereof ought to have and enjoy all and singular the liberties and free customs of this realm of England until now used and approved for whatsoever lieges of the said now lord king and his progenitors kings and queens of England,

[Prosecution of Petitioners in the Court of High Commission]

Nevertheless a certain Edward Lane cleric, current rector of the parish church of Postwick abovesaid in the abovesaid county of Norfolk, not ignorant of all and singular the premises but scheming and maliciously intending not only unduly to burden, oppress, and fatigue the same Robert and Thomas against the due form of the law of this realm of England and against the form and effect of the abovesaid statutes but also indeed to disinherit the same now lord king and his royal crown and to draw the cognizance of pleas that look and pertain to the same now lord king and his crown to another examination in court Christian and in that way falsely and maliciously to derogate and annul the common law and customs of this realm of England abovesaid owed to the same Robert and Thomas and to every subject of the said now lord king and to despoil and completely to deprive the same Robert and Thomas thereof and to diminish and annul the proceeds and profits looking to the royal crown that by trials, examinations, and punishments of such manner wrongs, oppressions, misdeeds, misbehaviors, and offenses can happen to become and to be had for the same lord king, accusing the same Robert and Thomas concerning and on certain things, matters, and causes pardoned and relaxed by the abovesaid act of general pardon of the said now lord king (if any such matters had been committed and perpetrated by the same Robert and Thomas) and in the same act not excepted or excluded and that before the publication of the abovesaid act of the abovesaid first year of the said late Queen Elizabeth could not legitimately have been reformed, ordained, corrected, restrained or emended by any spiritual or ecclesiastical power, authority, or jurisdiction, lately drew them into a plea in court Christian before the commissioners of the said now lord king in ecclesiastical causes and less justly constrained the same Robert and Thomas to appear in the same court Christian before the aforementioned commissioners, and thereon the same commissioners then in the same court Christian at the promotion and prosecution of the abovesaid Edward Lane made against the same Robert and Thomas in this part among other things objected to the same Robert and Thomas by articling in the mode and form and in these words following, to wit:

[The Articles against the Petitioners]

“In the first place, Wee obiect unto yow that yow knowe believe or have heard say that Edward Lane clerke parson of the parishe church of Postweeke aforesaid hath bene & is a publique preacher of the Word of god lawfully authorized of good note & that yow are his parishioners & have so continued diverse yeares last past & for a publique preacher is commonly accompted, reputed & taken. And we object jointly and diversely and of each.

Likewise, Wee obiect that yow the said Robert ////1474///// Woodyerd knowing the premisses to be trewe have notwithstanding in the moneths of March, Aprill, May, June, July, August, and September in the year of the lord 1606 or in some or one of those moneths unreverently & uncharitably behaved your self towards the said Master Lane & in contempte of him & his preaching & holie function of the ministrie did in the churchyard of Postweeke aforesaid in angry & quarellsome manner utter publiquely before diverse parishioners these or the like wordes in effect, viz.: ‘Yow (speaking to the said Maister Lane) will lye as much for advauntage as any man in the cowntrey & by reason of your chiding and brawling aforesaid yow are to be suspended from the entry of the church according to the state of Edward VI.’ And we object as abovesaid.

Likewise, We obiect unto yow Robert Woodyerd that in harvest last in the feildes of Postweeke where the said Maister Lane came to see the casting or setting forth of his tithes & finding faulte with your bad tithing of certayne pease growing in the said feild & peaceably & charitably admonishing yow thereof, yow forthwith in furious and contemptuous manner spake to him & said ‘Yow are a brabbler; yow have done nothing this moneth but brabble; yow are a knave, an arrant knave; yow neede not be so lustie; yow are but a cowkeepers sonne’ with many other wordes of disgrace & reproache. And we object as above.

Likewise, Wee obiect that yow the sayd Roberte Woodyerd being not content to utter the said reproachfull speaches or wordes to the said Maister Lanes face but since that tyme at diverse times and places before diverse of the parishioners of Postweeke & others boasted and gloried in uttering & speaking of the wordes in the next precedent article & withall have said that now yow have mett with your parson & taken him downe, meaning & speaking of the said Maister Lane. And we object as above.

Likewise, We obiect unto yow Roberte Woodyerd that within the tyme aforesaid to the entent that yow might shewe your inveterate hatred & malice toward the said Maister Lane and his calling have animated & incited your wife who is knowne to be a woman of a contentious & slaunderous spiritt & to have raysed much debate & controversie amongst her neighbours & especially betweene them & the said Maister Lane & his wife & children to miscall & revile the said Maister Lane & that yow and your said wife and either of yow have said & reported as well in the presence as absence of the said Maister Lane that he is a man of a large & badd conscience & his wife a woman of a large & badd conscience & wold take more tithe than was dew to them and that the said Edwarde Lane did take & carie away three cockes of haye of yours for tythe more then he had right unto, with many such false and slanderous imputations therby labouringe & endevoringe as much as in yow lyeth to empeach and obscure the creditt and estimacion of the said Master Lane amongst his neighbours & others & to bringe his doctrine & office of his ministery into contempt & disgrace, to his great preiudice & offence & to the evill example of others. And we object as above.

Likewise, We object that yow the said Thomas Simons have these many yeares last past especially since the last of September 1605 unreverently & uncharitablie abused & miscalled the said Master Lane & in the moneths of October, November, December, Januarie, February, & March 1605 & in the moneths of March, May, June, July, August & September last past or in one of them within the parishe of Postwicke aforesaid have said & uttered unto him at what tyme he hath charged yow with disorderly & uniust tythinge & charitably admonished yow thereof these or the like wordes in effect, viz.: ‘Thow (speaking to the said Master Lane) cannest not tell what thow wouldest have; thow are a devill & no man; I (meaning your selfe) did preferre tenne articles against the within the consistory of Norwiche & thow diddest forsweare they selfe in every one of them’ & these your speeches yow have bruted & reported publickly in divers places & before divers persons often & sundry tymes as well within the said parishe of Postwicke as other parishes adioyninge, addinge withall that he the said Master Lane hath forsworne himselfe & that he is a very beast & a forsworne beast, to the great discreditt & disgrace of the said Master Lane & reproche & contempt of his ministery & callinge. And we object jointly and diversely and of each.

Likewise, We doe obiect unto yow the said Thomas Symons that yow have not only a hatred & sinister opinion of the said Master Lane but against the order & whole estate of the clergye & ministery & their mayntenance & have often & sundry tymes within the tyme & places aforesaid & before divers persons publickly affirmed & maynteyned this erroneous opinion, viz.: that it is contrary to the Word of God that ministers should have any tythes or sue for any tithes & for the maytenance thereof yow have said, ‘Where can yow fynde or can it be founde in all the bible any scripture to prove that it is lawfull for any minister to sue his parishioners for any tythes’; & by your actions yow doe iustefie the same opinyon, for yow have & doe deteyne your tythes from the said Master Lane your parson & counselled & perswaded diverse others the parishioners of Postwicke to doe the like, whereby great malice & contention is rysen & encreased betwene the said Master Lane & his parishioners. And we object as above.

Likewise, We obiect unto yow Thomas Symons that within the tyme & places aforesaid yow have very unreverently carried your selfe against the ministers & preachers of the Worde of God by publickly scoffinge & raylinge on them in callinge them Master Parsons & especially the said Master Lane & in alehouses, markett places & milhouses & other places where resort of company hath bene have used & uttered these speaches, viz.: ‘Oh, Master Parson forsooth (meaninge & speakinge of the said Master Lane) will have tythe cockes egges’ and when the rest of the parishioners of Postwicke did pay accordinge to the custome of the towne as they affirmed two egges for the cocke yow went & enquired of them, saying, ‘Have yow payde the parson any cockes egges’ & thereupon your wyfe by your meanes & incouragement in scorne & derision hath said of the said Master Lane that ‘yf he would have suche egges lett Master Parson goe into my henne puller & looke what the cocke layeth & take that for his tythe,’ so that by these scoffes & scornfull speches diverse parsons had a badde opinyon of the sayd Master Lane & your faourers have sayd that it is pittie that he liveth, to the great offence of the said Master Lane & others of the ministery. And we object as above.

Likewise, We doe obiect unto yow Thomas Symons that within the tyme aforesaid yow havinge payne or ache in your heade or other partes of your body yow have malitiously imputed the cause thereof to the said Master Lane & publickly in the Church & Chancell of Postwick aforesaid have said that yow had your health the worse for the said Master Lane & in his presence charged him therwith, sayinge, ‘I pray God my payne & greife be not the more for yow’ & that yow were never well since he reproved yow, viz., for your raylinge, revilinge, & scoffinge wordes & so soone as your payne was gone & yow felt no greife yow in scoffinge & deridinge maner said before divers persons that after yow had so spoken to the said Master Lane your payne & greife imediately went away, upon which imputacion & scoffinge behavior yow being demanded by the said Master Lane whether yow thought or reputed him to be a witch, yow answered doutfully & said, ‘I cannot tell but sure I am I have my health the better for yow (speaking to the saide Master Lane) & I fare the worse for your tounge.’ And we object as above.

Likewise, We do obiect unto yow Thomas Symons that within the tyme aforesaid in the parishe of Postwicke & other places adioyninge yow have said publickly before divers persons that ministers wyves are whores & their children bastardes, and to iustefie your wordes therein yow have called the wyfe of the said Master Lane “whore, drabbe, & arrant whore’ and withall have said that yow and such as yow are doe worke to maynteyne hir, hir husbande, & children. And we object as above.

Item, We obiect unto yow Thomas Symons that in harvest last past the said Master Lane talking with your man about his manner of tithynge and reprochinge him for that he tithed not as he ought, yow being present spake to Master Lane in the churchyard of Postwicke aforesaid & charged him to be a quarreller & that he did nothinge but quarrell all that harvest and so sone as the said Master Lane went from yow yow the said Thomas Symons most uncharitably & unchristianly used many imputacions against him in the churchyarde & uttered these wordes of him in the hearinge of divers persons: ‘Yf God will not take him (meaning the said Master Lane), I pray God the devill may sone fetch him from amongest us.’ And we object as above.

Likewise, We doe obiect unto yow Thomas Symons that within the tyme aforesaid & in the parishe of Postwicke aforesaid after such tyme as the said Master Lane preached & in his sermon hath reproved synne exhorted yow & the rest of his parishioners to amendment of lyfe, obedience to Goes lawes and the kinges, yow have taken excepcions against his preachinge & before divers persons have publickly affirmed that he hath preached false doctryne & that he preached but his owne fancy of malice & no truthe & when others have spoken in defence of the said Master Lane his preachinge & doctrine yow have replied in reprochfull & depradinge manner sayinge, ‘Yow heare good Woordes but where are the good deedes; he & others (meaninge the said Master Lane & other preachers) canne say well, but they doe & lyve wickedly; I would fayne see them doe well.’ And we object as above.

Likewise, We doe obiect unto yow & eyther of yow that by your contemptuous wordes uttered against the said Master Lane & your unreverent behavior towardes him many of the parishioners of Postwicke & others of the yonger sorte of the same have & doe account little of the said Master Lanes doctryne & are emboldened & encouraged by your meanes to prophane the sabaoth & hollidayes by playing at carde tables & other unlawfull games, yow your selves being associate & company kepers with them to the great offence of the said Master Lane, the contempt of the lawes of this realme & evill example of others. And we object as above.

Likewise, We doe obiect unto yow & eyther of yow that all & singular the premisses are true & that there is a publicke voice & fame thereof within the parishe of Postwicke & other parishes nye adioyninge to the great disgrace of the said Master Lane & to the publicke scandale of his function & ministery. And we object as above

as more fully appears among other things by the same articles exhibited in the abovesaid court Christian before the aforementioned commissioners in ecclesiastical causes in the abovesaid form and the true copy thereof put forth thereof here in court;

[Subsequent Process in High Commission in Violation of the Law]

and the abovesaid commissioners at the promotion of the abovesaid Edward Lane in the abovesaid court Christian less justly constrained the same Robert and Thomas to appear before them and to answer of and on the premises, when in truth the abovesaid English words specified above in the abovesaid articles supposed to have been said and published by the same Robert and Thomas or either of them (if the same had been said or spoken by the same Robert and Thomas in such manner and form as is contained in the same articles above) are not words so scandalous and defamatory for the saying and publishing of which any action can or ought to be had or maintained against the same Robert and Thomas or either of them by the laws of the land of this realm of England, and when in truth the same Robert and Thomas or either of them never said the abovesaid English words mentioned above in the abovesaid articles as supposed by the same articles, and also when in truth all and singular the premises objected and articled by the aforementioned commissioners against the same Robert and Thomas in the abovesaid manner and form supposed to have been done by them or either of them (if there had been anything) were examinable, triable, and punishable by the laws of the land of this realm of England and not by the ecclesiastical laws or censures and that before the publication of the abovesaid act of the abovesaid first year of the said late Queen Elizabeth could not legitimately have been reformed, ordained, corrected, restrained, or emended by any spiritual or ecclesiastical power, authority, or jurisdiction and thus the abovesaid commissioners ought not to have the cognizance thereof by virtue of that act,

[High Commission’s Refusal to Allocate the General Pardon]

and although the same Robert and Thomas and each of them at the abovesaid time of the publication of the abovesaid act of the general pardon of the said now lord king and long before and always afterwards to this time were and still are subjects of the said lord king now and born under his obedience within this realm of England, viz., at Postwick abovesaid in the abovesaid county of Norfolk and not some persons excepted or excluded in the abovesaid act of free pardon, and although also the abovesaid misbehaviors and contempts and all and singular the other premises objected, articled, and complained in the abovesaid court Christian by the aforementioned commissioners against the same Robert and Thomas or either of them supposed to have been committed and perpetrated by the same Robert and Thomas or either of them (if there were any) were committed and perpetrated before the abovesaid September 25 specified in the abovesaid act of general pardon and there is not any of them that is excepted or excluded in the same act of free pardon nor touched or mentioned in any any exception or exclusion of the same act but are completely pardoned and relaxed by the same act of free pardon;

[High Commission’s Attempt to Prevent Petitioners’ Access to Common Law]

and although also the same Robert and Thomas often pleaded and alleged both the abovesaid statutes and all and singular the other premises abovesaid alleged by them above in the abovesaid court Christian before the aforementioned commissioners in their exoneration of and on all and singular matters, causes, quarrels, and other premises objected and articled against the same Robert and Thomas in the abovesaid court Christian as set out and offered to prove them as inevitable truth and often sought and required from the aforementioned commissioners to be allocated to them in this part the benefit of the abovesaid free pardon, nevertheless the abovesaid commissioners not having consideration to the premises but scheming unduly to oppress, burden, and fatigue the same Robert and Thomas against the due form of the law of this realm of England and against the form and effect of the abovesaid statutes wholly refused and still refuse to admit, allocate or accept that plea, allegation, and proof and moreover the same commissioners at the promotion of the abovesaid Edward Lane committed the same Robert Woodyerd to the lord king’s prison of the Gatehouse under safe and strict custody and the same Thomas Symondes to the prison of the Clyncke under safe and strict custody, and the same commissioners detained and guarded the same Robert and Thomas thus in the abovesaid separate prisons lest they or either of them prosecute concerning the divers misbehaviors, injuries, trespasses and offenses inflicted, committed, and perpetrated by the aforementioned Edward Lane on the same Robert and Thomas in the said lord king’s court of the Bench here or in any other royal court of record freely as it is appropriate and expedient for all free men lieges of the said now lord king and lest the same Robert and Thomas or either of them be able to be tried by their peers according to the form of the abovesaid statute of Magna Carta, in contempt of the said now lord king and of his laws and the manifest damage, prejudice, and impoverishment of the same Robert and Thomas and against the form and effect of the common law of the realm of England and the abovesaid statute.

[Petition for and Grant of Writ of Prohibition]

And this the same Robert and Thomas are prepared to verify as the court here should consider, whereof the same Robert and Thomas humbly imploring the aid and munificence of the said now lord king’s court here seek a solemn remedy and the said lord king’s writ of prohibition to be directed to the aforementioned commissioners and each of them to prohibit them lest they or any of them proceed further in the premises or their depending matters whatsoever or hold further a plea before them touching the premises in any way. And it is granted to them etc.