CLXXXIX. Parret and Doctor Matthews Case. Mich. 28 Eliz. In the Kings Bench.
A Praemunire was brought and prosecuted by the Queens At∣torny General and Parret,* 1.1 against Doctor Matthews Dean of Christ-Church in Oxford, and others, for that they procured the said Parret to be sued in the City of Oxford before the Commis∣sary there, in an Action of Trespass, by Libel according to the Ec∣clesiastical Law; In which Suit, Parret pleaded his Freehold, and so to the Iurisdiction of the Court; and yet they proceeded there, and Parret was Condemned and Imprisoned: And after∣ward, the said Suit depending, the Queens Attorny withdrew his Suit for the Queen.
It was now moved to the Court, If, notwithstanding that, the party Informer might proceed in his suit there? See 7 E. 4. 2. the King shall have Praemunire; and the party grieved, his Action, See Br. Praemunire, 13. for by Brook, None can have Praemunire but the King.
Cook, There is a President in the Book of Entries, 427. In a Praemunire, the words are, Ad respondendum tam Domino Regi quam R F. and that upon the Statute of 16 R. 2. And see ibid. 429. tam Domino Regi de Contemptu praedict. quam dicto A.B. de Damnis: But it was holden by the whole Court, That if the Queens Attorny will not ulterius prosequi, the party grieved cannot maintain that Suit; For the principal matter in the Praemu∣nire is the Conviction; and the putting of the party out of the Kings protection; and the damages are but accessary; and then the Principal being Released, the damages are gone. And it was also holden, That the Presidents in the Book of Entries, are not to be regarded; For there is not any Iudgment upon any of the pleadings there.