'tione sequatur homicidium, fiat irregularis.” And Azpilcueta Navarrus saith, that Cajetan in the other place, and by consequence Sotus, is to be understood with a limitation, as meaning, Venationem passerum et perdicum ad aucupis cantum, vel accipitris, sine armis in provinciis non venationem ursorum, apro'rum, et cervorum, quæ armis exercetur.' Enchirid. cap. 27, sect. 237. Wherein, the distinction he taketh, making a main difference between venationem ludicrum and venationem murtium, concludeth plainly, the case in band to have wrought irregularity. And the Apologist finding no sure ground in this assertion,

by the Apologist; that is, animus or intentio innocua; and actio legitima. Touching the intent, no: e is so impious as to imagine that his lordship intended to hurt any man: yet is there this difference between his intent and theirs in the cases aliedged: they intended to hurt ncither man nor beast, he, though not to hurt a man, yet to kill a beast: they, nihil sævum aut non legitimum:' he, legitimum quiddam 'sed tamen sævum.' For there is a kind of cruelty in the slaughter of every thing; and therefore in the old law, Lev. 17, 13, He that 'take'h any beast or fowl by hunting that may be eaten; shall pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust;' that the cruelty ap-buildeth no otherwise upon it, than if it be pear not, as I take it. And in our law, those that were exercised in slaughter of beasts, were not received to be triers of the life of a man. Much is to be said out of histories to this purpose.

But to come to the point whereon all dependeth, Whether the action his fordship was now about, be lawful or not? The places of Azorius and Ivo are truly c.ted; and I doubt them not to be law: that is, to this effect, That it 'worketh no irregularity, where, in a lawful action a clerk killeth a man casually, having 'first used all diligence to prevent it.' And it appeareth that his lordship did this so carefully, that all were continually called upon, not only to stand off, but so far off as sheweth his lordship to be very unskilful in the use of his bow; | and may therefore touch him in discretion for meddling with so dangerous an engine in so great an assembly; and consequently produce irregularity even by the words of Azorius alledged to excuse him, though the action be lawful: nam & ne quamvis homicidiom casu sequatur, ob culpam nostram levem vel levis- | simam, multoruin est opinio irregularitatem 'contrahi.'

true as out of great reason' be saith it may 'be so held and passeth from it to his chietest place of refuge, shewing that the canon that makes hunting to be actio illicita doth no way touch his lordship.

First, for that upon the matter there is no such canon: insomuch as Gratian himself, that collected the canons, brandeth this to be fales and no better than chaff. It is true, he brandeth it with the term palea, and was a worthy man; but noted generally to have mistaken many things, and some extremely. But if that be the meaning of the word, his error seemeth very perspicuous, as finding this canon ascribed to the council of Orleans and not finding it there, he presently branded it, palea. But the canonists have many other opinions of it, as to signify rà madaiù, antiqua; or of wéka, rursUM. John Andrea, Imota, Alexandrinus and Jason, famous professors, think this title to be put over the heads of many canons, to signify they were added by Protopalea a cardinal, since Gratian's time. And experience excludeth the first interpretation of the word, for that the canons so entituled are very many, and not rejected as spurii or palea. Besides, Burchard bishop of Wormes, who lived long before Gratian, hath this very canon in his second book, cap. 213, and there ascribed, as it ought, to the council of Meldis; as also by Ivo, part. 6, cap 288. If then it be any where in the coun cils, it sufficeth; though the collector mistook the place, which is easily done: as even the evangelist Matthew, ca. 27, 9, citeth a place out of the prophet Jeremy, which is not found there, but in Zachariah.

But to fall from the tree by reaching at a twig; we will rest upon the chief station in the case, the nature of the action; which though it be forbidden, yet according to Soto, Covarruvias and Suarez, as it is alledged, induceth not irregularity when homicide follows thereon, if it be not therefore forbidden, because it may draw on homicide: concluding, that though hunting be forbidden to a clergyman, yet for that it is not forbidden in respect of danger of life, but for decency, &c. Irregularity followeth not thereupon. As for Covarius and Suarez, I have thein not; but Soto is not hap. pily alledged. For though he incline to that opinion, with Cajetan, yet he taketh a distinction that woundeth the case in question; and that is, Venatione, quæ armis et relis tit, p.q'fecto fiet clericus irregularis: and this falleth out to be now the case. For this hunting was performed with a cross-bow, a deadly and a dangerous weapon, that hath been the occasion of many bloody misfortunes. But in a former passage, Soto also saith, that Cajetan and Syl-imp. taking notice of it, about the year 820, vester and Doctores juris canonici universalem regulam, astruunt, quod omnis qui dat 'operam rei illicita, quandocunque ex illą da

It is apparent also that many copies of councils are unperfect, and want some of the true canons, as neglected or not finished by the notary. But if need be, this canon hath further warrant, even from the times almost of the ri mitive church. For in Concil. Agathensi, of 35 bishops in An. 435, ca. 55, it is said, Sa'cerdotes et Levitæ canibus ad venandum et accipitribus non utantur.' And in Concil. Epaunensi, of 70 bishops, in an. 492. Ut episcopi venatores non sint, nec accipitres alant. The Capitularies also of Ludovicas

prohibiteth priests, ut venationes ferarum vel avium minime sectentur.' Addit. 3, ca. 43. So that we have no reason to account this

this is one, and gives his reasons: for in Charta de Foresta arch-bishops and bishops by name have liberty to hunt: and 13 Ric. 2, ca. 13. A clergy-man who hath 101. by the year, may keep grey-hounds to hunt.'

The name of Charta de Foresta (and also of

canon either supposititium or paleam; but rather to be, as it is indeed, waλalov, antiquum, or ex antiquis. According to which sense, the canons of like nature in the laws of the Wisigoths or Western-Goths are in every passage intituled by the very Latin word, not the Greek, antiqua. And Justinian himself seem-hunting,) 18, Claro lachrimab le nomen.' For eth to have had this distinction in his eye, the first breach that ever was made into the when he called his later constitutions Negas, freedom of clergy-men, and which gave passage i. e. novellas, that so they might be marked to all that followed, rose from the occasion of from those of old, which Cedrinus in Justini- clergy-mens hunting in forests: which Henry an's life callethús madaiùs vòpus, leges antiquas. 2, greatly discontented with, never rested, till His second objection is, That it is cited out by assent of the pope's legate Hugo Petroof the fourth council of Orleans, and it is not Iconis, he obtained a law in the 21st year of his there. This we have already answered, and reign, A. D. 1157, to convent them thereshewed where it is. fore before secular judges, and there to punish them.

Thirdly, he saith it forbiddeth hunting cum canibus et accipitribus, and none of these were there. It is strange, a keeper should go about to strike a deer, and not have his lime-bound to draw after him. But the canon goeth further, Canes ad venandum, aut accipitres, aut hujusmodi res habere non licet.' Where hu'jusmodi res,' seemeth to contain all instruments used in hunting.

But to our purpose: There is no contradiction (as I take it) between the canon de Clerico Venatore, and Charta or Statutum de Foresta. The canon doth say, they shall not hunt; and the statute doth not say they shall. The words of the statute, ca. 17, are thus: An arch-bishop, bishop, earl, or baron coming to us úpon our 'command and passing through our forest,' Liceat ei capere unam bestiam vel duas, per

Fourthly, voluptatis causa; not recreationis or valetudinis, which the books say is permit-visum forestarii, si præsens fuerit; sin autem, ted etiam episcopo. What his books say, I know not; but my book saith thus: Dic bre'viter, quod venari causa voluptatis est mortale 'peccatum, et in laico; sed venari causa ne'cessitatis vel indigentiæ corporis non est mortale peccatum; in clerico tamen potius prohibetur.' But he adjoineth, In venatione, 'potius delectatio quam actus attenditur.' Atho. in Othob. fol. 114, b. Neither is there here any mention of recreatio, unless delectatio and it be all one, as commonly we use it, and then forbidden. Besides, what action or recreation belonging to health is there, in letting off a cross-bow; wherein neither bend, hand, nor foot, no, not the nimblest member of the body, the eye, stirreth all that while.

faciat cornare, ne videatur furtum facere.' Here is no word of hunting; but that they may take a deer; and this they will say cannot be but either with dogs or engine, and so consequently by hunting. But the very words of Charta de Foresta seem to shew, that it was not meant, the bishop should be an huntsman, for that it admitteth him not to have so much skill in hunting as to wind an horn, though that by no law or canon be forbidden to him. And therefore saith not corniat ipse, but faciat corniare, let him cause an horn to be blown, &c. I conceive the meaning to be, that the bishops and barons shall each of them take as they may; the barons by hunting (if they will) in their own persons; the bishops as they may, by the hands of their officers and servants. It is a common phrase in all old Charters, that the bishops shall have Sac and Soc, Toll and Team, &c. i. e. cognisance of plea, suit of court, toll, and such other customs: shall we intend, that he must take these in his own person? No; it was not Henry 3d's meanSixthly, whereas he saith that the canoning, when he granted the charter of the forest, speaketh against clamosa venatio, not quiela or modesta; Ifind no such word or distinction in the canon; yet is there no doubt, that if the deer be not killed out of hand; but in recovering him, there must be both clamor and venatio.

Fifthly, the canon hath, Si sæpius detentus fuerit, if he make a life or occupation of it, which his lordship did not.' Burchard saith detectus, and with more reasou: and I suppose his lordship useth it very temperately: yet the apologist in his fifth section insinuateth, that his lordship doth it often.

Thus he counteth the mouth of the canon to be stopt. Yet because it is good to make sure work with so dangerous an object, now he setteth law upon law, the common against the canon or at least the statute, which indeed hath cracked a great sort of canons. That by the statute of Henry 8, 35, ca. 16. No canon is in force in England, which was not in use, or is contrary or derogatory to the laws or statutes of this realm, or to the prerogatives of 'the royal crown." Of which sort (he saith)

to break the laws of the church: for at the same time in Magna Charta, ca. 1, he granteth, that the church shall have Omnia jura sua in- · tegra et libertates suas illæsas;' which could not possibly be, if by his charter he changed the canons of the church, especially in matters.of doctrine and conscience: as, when the church teacheth that a clerk may not be a buntsman, for him to say that he shall be. Doubtless, if he would, the clergy would not then accept it.

In the person of a bishop there be three distinct faculties: his spiritual function, wherein he is a bishop; his legal ability, wherein he is a lay-man and hath liberty to contract, &c. and his temporal dignity, wherein he is a baron and peer of the realm, and participateth their privi

ledges. I could put cases wherein every of these may be seen severed from the other; but I should then wander from my matter. Only, I present them thus anatomized, that it may appear what portion the church had in them, what the common-wealth, and what the king; that o it may also the better appear how the laws both of the church and kingdom are to be applyed unto them respectively.

constitutions of the church of England; but Athon only upon those of Otho and Othebon; and Linwood, beginning where Athon left, upon those of Stephen arch-bishop of Canterbury and his successors. There are therefore a great number of canons and constitutions of the church of England, which neither of these canouists have either meddled with or so much as touched as also there be many statutes in force, which are no where mentioned in any of the abridgements. But Jo. de Burgo (another English canonist and chancellor of Cambridge, who wrote in Richard 2d's time) taketh notice of this canon, and that hunting was thereby forbidden to our clergy-men, as appeareth in his Pupilla Oculi, part. 7. ca. 10, m.

To go on. The Apology saith, That the

When therefore the king granted temporal lands unto them; though they took them as lay-barons, and in their temporal capacity, yet might they not otherwise use them than might stand with their spiritual function: no more than when he granted ecclesiastical possessions to a lay-mau, the grantee might otherwise use them than as a lay-man. For example; it was a common thing in old time, that the king grant-arch-bishop of Canterbury had formerly more ed churches to lay-men, by the name of Ecclesiam de Dale and Ecclesia de Sale; yet it was never intended that the grantee, though he had the churches to order and dispose, should (contrary to his vocation) meddle with the divine service, but present his clerk only. So in like manner, when the king granted to clergymen, chaces, parks, and warrens; it was not intended that, contrary to the rules of their profession and laws of the church, they should or might become hunters and foresters.

6

than twenty parks and chases, to use at his pleasure, and by charter hath free-warren in 'all his lands.'

Habuisse, lugubre: it seemeth the wisdom of the latter times, the more pity, dissented from the former; yet did not the former approve that bishops should use them at their pleasure, but as the laws and canons of the church permitted. For as they had many parks and warrens; so had they many castles and fortresses, and might for their safety dwell in them: but My long stay upon this point, is a prepara- as they might not be soldiers in the one, so tive to an answer to the next, which is the sta- might they not be huntsmen in the other. In tute of Ric. 2, being in the negative, That no like sort, the abbot and monks of St. Alban's 'priest nor other clerk, not advanced to 107. a | (as Mat. Paris reporteth the case, in an. 1240, year, shall have or keep any greyhound, nor pa. 205.) had free-warren at St. Alban's, &c. other dog to hunt; nor they shall not use by grant of the kings, and recovered damages ferrets, haves, nets, hare-pipes, nor cords, nor against many that entered into the same and other engines, for to take and destroy deer, hunted; for the having of it was lawful, as hares, nor conies, &c. upon pain of one year's appeareth in the Clementines Tit. de Statu ' imprisonment.' The statute, I say, is in the Monast. § Porro à Venatoribus. But it is negative, and saith that none under 104, a year there expressly forbidden, that either they should shall keep; but saith not in the affirmative, hunt in it themselves, or be present when that it shall be lawful for them that have 107. others do hunt, or that they should keep, a year to keep, &c. I should therefore think,Canes venaticos aut infra monasteria sea dothat this statute doth not discharge a priest,mus quas inhabitant, aut eorum clausuras, pa. having 10. a year using hunting, against the canon-law: : no more than the statute of Usury, forbidding a man to take above 101. loan for an 1007., giveth him liberty to take that 10. or doth discharge him against the canons of Usury.

207. Radulphus de Diceto in an. 1189, saith, that the bishops of that time affected to get into their hands Comitatus, vice-comitatus, vel castellarias; Counties, sheriffwicks, and constable-ships of castles; but shall we think they either did or might use them in their own persons, as with banners displayed to lead forth the soldiers of their county, or with sword and target to defend the walls of their castles, or with a white wand to collect the king's reve

Touching his inference, that Linwood speaketh not one word against hunting simply by clergy-men, but against their using it in places restrained; it is true, for the text of the canon led him no further; being only De Cle-nues, &c. rico, de transgressione Forestæ aut parci ali'cujus diffamato,' and made to no other intent than to aggravate the censure of the ecclesiastical law, which before was not sharp enough against offenders in that kind. But Johannes de Athon, as great a canonist and somewhat elder, whom Linwood often citeth and relieth upon as one well understanding the eclesiastical constitutions and the laws of England, hath apparently condemned it in the place by me recited. Yet is it to be noted, that neither Athon nor Linwood intended to gloss upon all the

It is true, that Walter, bishop of Durham, having bought the county of Northumberland of William the conqueror, would needs sit himself in the county-court; but he paid dearly for it; for his country-meu furiously slew him, even sitting there. Matt. Paris in an. 1075. So Hugh bishop of Coventry exercised the sheriff's place, but was excommunicate for it, as contra dignitatem episc.' and so acknowledged his error. Dicet. in an. 1190.

But every one will say, it was a common thing in old time for bishops to be judges in se cular courts. I confess it; and think it godly

the perpetual use of hunting by bishops in their parks; and by the particular examples of some eminent men his predecessors, and others. This point of use and example I have in a manner answered before; speaking, as it fell in my way, of bishops being secular judges. One line serveth to level at them both: yet for further and more perspicuous resolution of the matter, see both the example and the use censured in the decret. 34. distinct, ca. 1. by pope Nicholas, ad Albinum archiepisc. alias Aluinum.

copis et suffraganeis tuis convocare concilium, 'et hunc salutaribus colloquiis episcopum convenire, atque illi pastorali authoritate præci pere quatenus ab omnium bestiarum vel volucrum venatione penites alienus existat :' or (in short) to excommunicate him.

and lawful as it was used at the first. For the bishop and the earl sat together in the county court: the bishop as chancellor, to deliver Dei rectum and populum docere; the earl as secular judge, to deliver rectum seculi and populum coercere; as is manifest by the laws of king Edgar and others. But when the bishops began to supply both places, and to be meer judges of secular courts, then were they prohibited by many canons. And therefore Roger bishop of Salisbury being importuned by the king to be his justice; would by no means ac-Quemadmodum relatione fidelium nostris aucept it, till he had obtained dispensation, not 'ribus intimatum est, quod Lanfredus episcopus, only from his metropolitan the archbishop of qui et juvenis esse dicitur, venationi sit dediCanterbury, but from the pope himself, as Di- tus; quod vitium plurimos etiam de clericali cetus affirmeth in an. 1190, and no doubt but catalogo, genere duntaxat Germanos et Galothers of wisdom did the like. In those things los irreverenter implicat, verum iste (si ita est therefore that bishops did against canons, we ' ut audivimus) merito juvenis dicitur, qui jumust take no example to follow them: for venilibus desideriis occupatus, nulla gravitate though their public actions be manifest, yet their constringitur.' Et infra: Nam (ut Beatus dicit dispensations and matter of excuse is for the Hieronymus) Venatorem nunquam legimus most part secret. Neither doth every thing sanctum.' Then blaming him also for being done against a canon produce irregularity, if too familiar with his daughter, he saith, Oporsome criminous mischance follow not thereon.tet ergo fraternitatem tuam synodale cum episFor the record that relateth that the bishop of Rochester was at his death to render to the archbishop of Canterbury his kennel of hounds as a mortuary, and that the law takes notice of it for the king sede vacante, under the name of muta canum and mulctura: I must (as they say in the law) demand Oyer of the record; we shall otherwise spend many words in vain. But that dogs should be given for a mortuary is against all likelihood. For a mortuary, is as an offering given (by him that dieth) unto the church, in recompence of his tithes forgotten; and it is a plain text, Deuter. xxviii. 18. Non 'offeres inercedem prostibuli, nec pretium canis in domo Domini.' But if there be no other word to signify a kennel of hounds, than muta canum and mulctura, the exposition may be doubtful, though it come somewhat near it. Freder. 2. emp. in the prologue to his second book de Venatione, speaking of an hawks-mue, saith, Domicula quæ dicitur muta; following the Italian vulgar, which cometh á mutando, because the hawk doth there change her coat. And for the affinity between dogs and hawks, it may be naraxensis transferred to a dog-kennel; and whether to the hounds themselves or no, it is not much material. For, no doubt, they that may have parks and warrens, may have dogs and hounds for hunting: but every body that may have hounds may not use them themselves, as appeareth by that which I said before out of the Clementines, and by the opinion of justice Brudnel, with the rest of the judges, 12 Hen. 8, fol. 5. where it is said, a man may keep hounds notwithstanding the statute of 13 R. 2, but he must not hunt; as he may keep apparel of cloth of gold, notwithstanding the statute of apparel, but he must not wear it. Besides, religious persons in ancient times were driven to have dog-kennels for the king's hounds: for Rad. Niger in an. . . . . . . saith, that king Henry 2, Abbates, bypodromos et canum custodes fecit.' After all this, his lordship is defended with

Here he sheweth hunting to be used both by a bishop and by a multitude of clerks, (plurimos.) But neither the person and dignity of the one, nor the multitude nor frequent use in the other, maketh the pope to abstain from condemning it. Howbeit, they whose example the Apologist alledgeth, little respected (as I think) the whole volume of canons.

Touching the record of the earl of Arundel's excommunication for taking up the archbishop of Canterbury's hounds coming into the earl's grounds to hunt; and the archbishop's pleading That it was lawful for him to hunt in any forest of England whensoever he would, we must (as we before said) pray Oyer of the record; for parols font plea, and their certainty appears not here, nor what became of the issue: which, though it fell out to be found for the archbishop, yet perhaps it discharged him not against the canon. And well might he be as bold with the canon, as he was with the law. For it is di rectly against the law both of England and France, to excommunicate a peer of the realm without the king's assent: and therefore Henry 3 was sore offended with the archbishop for this excommunication: (and the bishops of London and Norwich were called in question for the like in Henry the second's time; as Matthew Paris reporteth, p. 99.) But because his case sways the cause to the ground; I must dwell a little the longer upon it, to shew what became of it. The truth is, it was ended by comprise in the chapel at Slyndon upon Friday after the circumcision of our Lord, 1258, that is, 48 Hen. 3, in this manner: quod idem archiepiscopus 'et successores sui semel in quolibet anno et non plus, cum transierint per dictam forestam

(i. e. de Arundel) cum una lesia de sex lepo- | arch-bishop, and in the words recited by the raris sine aliis canibus et sine arcu habeant apologist. But these be exercises of war, not unum cursum in eundo et alium in redeundo; of religion; fit for barons not for bishops; who ita quod si capiant unam feram, illam habe- in ancient time, following the example of our bunt; si nihil capiant in illo cursu, nihil habe- Saviour and his apostles, walked on foot, as apbunt. Si vero capiant plus quam unam feram, peareth by Bede, Eccl. Hist. I. 3. ca. 14. and archiepiscopi qui pro tempore fuerint, habeant lib. 4. ca. 3. and beginning to ride, used here in quam elegerint, et residuum habeant dictus England mares, as Bede also witnesseth, lib. 2. Dominus Johannes et hæredes ejus,' &c. Then ca. 13. in other places mules, not horses; for is it further awarded, that the said earl, his Bellum hæc armenta minantur,' as not only heirs, and assigns, shall yearly for ever pay unto the poet saith, but as the scripture also, Prov. the said archbishop and his successors, 13 bucks | 21. ult. Equus paratur ad diem belli.' And and 13 does, (capias de fermysun as the record such belike, did this arch-bishop Cranmer saith) at times there appointed. And then fol- mount upon and manage, as the word simply, loweth this close, which maketh all plain; Et ut in famulatu suo non fuerit quisquam qui in actum est expresse inter partes de præcepto generosum equum salire, ac tractare elegantius et ordinatione dictorum arbitratorum, quod-potuisset.' Besides the shooting here mendictæ partes procurabunt confirmationem domini papæ et domini regis super præsenti con'firmatione.'

6

tioned seemeth not to be the long-bowe, which stirreth the body and is profitable to health, but that deadly engine (which imagineth misBy this record it appeareth, that neither the chief as a law) the cross-bowe, whose force a earl could make this grant without licence from man cannot mitigate as in other weapons, and the king, (for that all forests are the king's, and is properly numbered amongst the instruments no subject can have them otherwise than in cus- of war; and therefore by a multitude of canons tody) nor the archbishop could safely use the prohibited to clergy-men, so that they may not privilege of hunting without dispensation from use them pro justitia exercenda' (as appeareth the pope and though I yet find not where the by the constit. of Othob. Tit.) de Clericis one was obtained from the pope, yet I find arma portan.' nor equitantes per loca periwhere the other was granted from the king;culosa,' as it is in the gloss upon the decret. and namely from Edward the first in the 2nd year of his reign; where all the award and composition beforesaid, is (by way of inspeximus) recited and confirmed. But the composition for the bucks and does, was after in Edvard the third's time released by the archbishop Simon Islip, having taken for the same 240 marks; as witness Antiqq. Britann. ca. 55.

of Gratian p. 992, where the text is, 'Clerici

arma portantes et usurarii excommunicentur.' But I have gone the length of my tedder, I mean as far as the Apology leadeth me; and therefore now mamum de tabula.

The case of this reverend and most worthy person deserveth great commiseration and tender handling for who can prevent such unexAnd it seemeth further by this record, that pected casualties? Yet may the consequence the archbishops of Canterbury had not at that prove so mischievous both to himself and those time dispensation from the pope, to hunt where that are to receive their consecration from him, they listed in any forest of England; for then as of necessity it must be carefully looked into should he not have needed special dispensation and provided for. Let me remember an ancient in this case. But howsoever the dispensation precedent, even in one of his own predecessors, or confirmation was hereupon obtained; it is Stigand, archbishop of Canterbury in the time apparent that it stretched no further than to of the conquest, who, because he had not cahunt with grey-hounds; for the bow is ex-nonically received his consecration, but from pressly forbidden and excepted.

the hands of pope Benedict (who stood excomIt may be, some will extend the word con- municate and sacris interdictus) was not only firmation, to be meant of some right of hunting, deprived himself by authority of a council, but which the arch-bishop (upon this arbitrement) also the bishops and abbots which had taken was to disinherit his church of: which I leave their consecration from him. Therefore the to the judgment of lawyers. For it may con- bishops of Wells and Hereford fore-seeing that tain both; though I never saw any precedent evil; to make all clear, fetch their consecration of the popes in that kind for so small a matter: at Rome from pope Nicholas: Vitabant enim but of the other kind, we have before made (saith Flor. Wigorn. in an. 1070.) à Stigando mention of one to Roger bishop of Salisbury, qui tunc Archiepiscopatui Doroberniæ præsi and a multitude of others are to be produced. debat, ordinari: quia noverant illum non CaAgain, if they have a dispensation for hunt-nonice Pallium suscepisse.' It is good to follow ing, yet it hath some limitation either for the the counsel of Gratian in the like matter: place or the manner; which his lordship (if he Consultius est in hujusmodi dubio abstinere justify under that) must shew particularly. 'quam celebrare,' ca. 24. 1716.

To come now at last to the last point of the Apology, drawn from the particular example of arch-bishop Cranmer; who, in the description of his life (Britannicarum Antiqq. ca. 68.) is set forth to hunt, shoot, and ride a great or stirring horse with notable activity, even when he was

But because we are fallen into a case, wherein perhaps some extraordinary consecration may be required; let me also relate a strange conse cration used in the entrance of the reign of Henry 1, an. 1100. where Eadmere a monk of Canterbury being elected by the clergy and