The case of Sampson Hele, Esq; against the Right Reverend Father in God, Jonathan, Lord Bishop of Exon, and Gawen Hayman, clerk; in a quare impedit, now depending on a writ of error in the House of Lords.

About this Item

Title
The case of Sampson Hele, Esq; against the Right Reverend Father in God, Jonathan, Lord Bishop of Exon, and Gawen Hayman, clerk; in a quare impedit, now depending on a writ of error in the House of Lords.
Publication
[S.l. :: s.n.,
1692]
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/B18608.0001.001
Cite this Item
"The case of Sampson Hele, Esq; against the Right Reverend Father in God, Jonathan, Lord Bishop of Exon, and Gawen Hayman, clerk; in a quare impedit, now depending on a writ of error in the House of Lords." In the digital collection Early English Books Online 2. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/B18608.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 12, 2024.

Pages

Hill. Term, 2. Will. & Mariae.

SAmpson Hele, Esq; brought a quare impedit in the Court of Common-Pleas, against the Lord Bishop of Exon and Gawen Hayman, Clerk, for recovery of his Presentation to the Church of Southpole in Devon, the Advowson of which, is appendant to his Mannor of Southpole, of which he is Seized in Fee.

To which the Defendants appeared, and the Bishop pleaded, that he claimed nothing in the Church but as Ordinary, but said further, that the 15th of April An. 2d. Will. & Mariae, the Church became void; and the 19th of May, Anno praed. Mr. Hele presented one Fran∣cis Hodder, as his Clerk to the said Church, whom the Bishop on Examination sound to be Persona in literatura minus sufficiens seu capax ad habendum dictam Ecclesiam and therefore he refused to admit the said Hodder, and two and thirty days after, gave notice to Mr. Hele to pre∣sent another Clerk; who did not present any other Person, within six Months after the Death of the last Incumbent; whereupon, the right of Collation devolved to him as Ordinary, by Lapse, and he Presented the Defendant Hayman.

Mr. Hayman Pleaded the same Plea verbatim, as the Bishop Pleaded.

Mr. Hele by Replication says, That the said Francis Hodder, at the time when he was presented to the said Church, was Vicar of the Parish Church of Ʋgborough in the County of Devon; lawfully Admitted, Instituted, and Inducted thereunto, and was in Holy Orders, by Episcopal Ordination, from the late Bishop Sparrow, then Bishop of Exon; and in Reading, Praying, Preaching, Administring the Sacraments, and in all other things appertaining to the Priest's Office and Cure of Souls, was well and sufficiently Learned.

The Defendants, by Rejoinder to this Replication, maintain their Plea; and after some further Pleading, (not very material,) the Defendants Demurre, and the Plaintiff joins in Demurrer, and the matter is left to the consideration of the Court.

The only point in the Case, arose upon the Defendants Plea; and the main Objection thereunto, was, that it was too general and uncertain, not comprehending any particular or certain Cause of the Bishop's refusal of Mr. Hodder for; Learning in the general, comprehends all Humane Science; many parts whereof, are not at all requisite to the Qualification of a Priest; and by the general expression of minus sufficiens in litera∣tura it appeared not, in what part of Learning Mr. Hodder was deficient, so as the Temporal Courts could not thereupon Adjudge, whether the Cause, for which the Bishop refused Mr. Hodder, was a sufficient Cause in Law, to refuse him, or not.

The Cause depended two Years in the Common-Pleas, and was Argued thrice at the Bar, by Serjeants of either side; and in Hillary Term, 4 Reg. & Reginae nunc, &c. Judgment was given for the Plaintiff, by the unanimous Consent of the whole Court, upon the insufficiency of the Defendants Pleas, for the Reason above mentioned.

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.