case the king against the university OF cambridge refer to Bonaker v Evans Q b  marquis of Abergavenny v bishop of Llandaff Q b d time allow to show cause to  a mandamus a mandamus lie to restore a member of a university to doctor degree  from which he have be degrade by the university court for speak contemptuous  word of the v icechancellor and of the process of the court S c ld ray S c  stram S c fort mandamus to the vicechancellor master and scholar of Cambridge  to restore dr Bentley to the degree to which he have be admit by the  university and have be surreptitious degrade as be suggest or that they shall  show cause why he shall not be restore the counsel for the university desire  time to show cause why a mandamus shall not go for that there be several old  book and charter which be necessary to be inspect before they can show cause  and thereupon the time be enlarge for that purpose and upon another day it be  argue for the university that by virtue of a charter give to they by queen  Elizabeth they have a court of judicature to try and determine all matter  arise within their jurisdiction in which court a plaint be levy by dr  Middleton modern report er p against dr Bentley and thereupon a summons be  send by the beadle to the doctor which he receive and speak contemptuous word  of the court for which he be degrade and from which no appeal will lie no more  than a writ of error will lie for impose a fine by a temporal court for a  contempt because every court of record be entrust with the final judgement of  what shall be a contempt to their authority therefore if a appeal or a writ of  error will lie in such case it will put the trial of what be a contempt modern  report to the discretion and judgement of a superior court and to strip a  inferior court of that power which they have by law to judge what be a  contempt to they whereas contempt of the authority of court be undoubted to be  judge by the same court to who the contempt be offer which be the reason that  a writ of error will not lie on a sentence for a contempt to this court but  then it must be plain prove now the same thing be do by a mandamus after a  indirect manner as will have be do by a appeal or writ of error if that will  lie but as a appeal will not lie for a contempt so neither will a mandamus for  admit this degradation have be ad it pleases yet a temporal court can not  grant a mandamus it be like the case of a recorder of a corporation who be  removable at will and be displace move for a mandamus but it be deny beside  the constant course and custom of this university warrant a discretionary  power among they to confer degree on some and to degrade other for any  contempt and in this case they have do all they can to bring dr Bentley to a  easy agreement for after the first summons they send another in write by their  beadle but the doctor door be then shut and he will not be see then they  adjourn from day today on purpose to give he leave to appear before they will  suspend he but when he contemptuous decline they first suspend and afterward  degrade he now as a mandamus be never yet grant to admit a man to a degree in  the university after he have perform all his exercise so there ought to be  none to restore one after a degradation because degree be arbitrary give by  the university and so be degradation arbitrary make for if they shall by any  mean rash admit a unlearned man to a degree they may upon better information  degrade he without take a traverse to the return of a mandamus which must be  try by a jury of lie freeholder beside these degree be but title of honour and  precedency and give no temporal right and for that reason a mandamus ought not  to go for if a knight shall be degrade in a court of honour no mandamus will  lie to restore he lev a which be a case in point therefore if it shall lie in  this case it will introduce a new method to evade modern report the privilege  give by this charter which be afterward confirm by parliament and as it have  be former adjudge in the case of castle v Litchfield Hardres b that a  certiorari or writ of error will not lie to correct a judgement give for a  contempt so no mandamus ought to go which be in effect the same if it shall be  object that his degree qualify he for some temporal employment of which he  will be incapable without it now admit that to be true yet such employment be  only consequential and not direct incident to his degree and therefore ought  not to be regard and be another objection shall be make videlicet that the  doctor will have appear by a proctor but be not allow so to do though this may  be true yet it be no objection of weight because it may not be the course of  their court to admit such appearance and the university have a privilege to  proceed accord to their own law as a encouragement to learning and if they  have proceed accord this court will not interpose now take the case as it  stand upon dr Bentley affidavit there will be no reason to grant a mandamus  for be make oath that he have appeal from the sentence of the university court  which if true then there be another remedy for he to be restore videlicet by a  appeal and where there be another remedy a mandamus be never grant moreover  the doctor make oath that the university have no power to degrade he if so  then he be not degrade for want of a sufficient power so to do and consequent  a mandamus ought not to go for it be impossible that a man shall be restore to  his degree who be never degrade but on the other side it be say that the merit  of this cause ought not to be argue upon a motion but upon the return of the  mandamus and for that reason it ought to be grant modern report er p the court  all care shall be take that justice shall be duly administer in the university  but if they assume a arbitrary power exempt from the jurisdiction of any other  court of judicature then they may do what they please without control and  where people be under such a government they be in a very bad condition but  this court have a great regard to the learning of the university than to admit  the arbitrary sentence of a vicechancellor to be final modern report as to  what have be say that the degree in the university be only honorary this be a  mistake for they be blend with a temporal right so far as to deserve a  mandamus to restore a man degrade it be true this may have be a proper  objection before the statute of Henry c and car c be make which render a man  incapable of a benefice if he have not take his degree in some university for  before those statute such degree be only title of precedency and the allow  they or a degradation be no temporal advantage or loss therefore in such case  the temporal court have no reason to interpose and this may be the reason why  the university degrade ad it pleases and of their constant course so to do but  this be no objection since the make those statute neither shall it be say that  where a corporation have admit a man Willing to his freedom that they shall  have power to disfranchise he because they do not like he neither can the  university give degree to who they please and take they away ad it pleases and  though their counsel have object against this mandamus for that they have a  exempt and absolute jurisdiction among themselves this seem to be a good  reason why it shall be grant though it may have be otherwise if they have show  that they have a visitor to who a appeal will lie for probable that may have  exclude the superintendency of this court but to deny a degree to he who have  perform all his exercise to qualify he for a degree will be a great  discouragement to learning and in such case this court will grant a mandamus  to admit he especial since it be accompany with a temporal interest now admit  it shall be enact by some statute that a man shall be incapable of such a  office if he be not a knight shall not a knight degrade have a mandamus  certain he shall and so have dr Bentley in this case the mandamus be grant and  the university make this return modern report that the university have be a  ancient university temps doubt c and also a corporation by the name of  chancellor master and scholar that they have have the care and education of  the youth and scholar there that they have have and use the right of confer  degree on any person who they please and the same person ab eistdem step near  stubbornness well aliquan alian legitimate well the pure milk of reason causan  suspenders well deprivare that a court be grant by queen Elizabeth to the  university to be hold before the vicechancellor for the time be or his deputy  and to have cognizance of all plead c except matter of freehold and felony  that the privilege of the university have be confirm by Act of parliament  Elizabeth c a that doctor coniers Middleton levy a plaint in the say court  against doctor Bentley in a plea of debt for four pound six shilling they both  reside within the same university secundum experience curke and play process  super quo at his petition the court award a process ad compellend predict  ricardum Bentley ad a pare d in person the vicechancellor or his deputy ad  prox cur quod indeed decretum the twentythird of September to be deliberate  Edwardo clarke beadle of the court that the say Edward clarke accessit ad  dictum r Bentley et to stretch out dictum decretum et superinde the say  twentythird of September the say r Bentley have discourse with the say Edward  clarke concern doctor Gooch be then vicechancellor say that the decree be  unlawful and unstatutable et quod not mock to give ear that doctor Gooch non  to be Self judge et foolishly to put in motion et alian word contumeliosa  propalavit et dictum decretum de shades of dead Edward clarke to take away  that at the next court doctor Middleton appear and declare in debt for four  pound six shilling second custom at which court the say Edward clarke a  certain laying down to hold forth to the register of the say contempt and  disobedience of the say r Bentley that thereupon the vicechancellor with  consent of seven doctor of the university who be head of college declare that  the say r Bentley pro contempt there to hang up to be ab omni step undertake  distinction et jure and he be accord suspend the return further show that  there be a custom within modern report er p the university to assemble the  master of the college in the university which assembly be style a congregation  and have power super stubbornness well other legitimate es the pure milk of  reason causan to deprive any person of their degree et super purification to  set up again that accord a congregation be assemble seventeenth of October  when doctor Gooch to make known contempt predict pro quo suspense et deprivat  to be et petit quod dejicia et exclude c et superiude look prmissis et bed  laying down predict the say congregation confirm the decree of suspension and  further order that the say r Bentley de omni step undertake et distinction et  jure inside dejicie et exclude et pro his cause c it be object against this  return in general that admit the vicechancellor master and scholar have a  power of give degree and of suspend and degrade for reasonable cause yet that  power must be under the inspection of this court unless they can show some  good cause to exclude it now by this return they do not pretend that any  appeal do lie to a proper visitor but have absolute exclude all visitatorial  inspection so that by their own show they be subject to the jurisdiction of  this court as all other corporation be beside every man who be admit to a  degree in the university have a freehold for life of which several statute  take notice as for instance the statute Henry c enact that the several person  therein name and who be admit to degree in either of our university and not by  grace only may purchase a dispensation to keep two benefice with cure c which  benefice be for life so by the statute car c it be enact that the incumbent of  church unite must be graduate in one of our university which union be likewise  for life and no person be capable of such benefice but graduate therefore this  court will take notice of such degree as entitle the graduate to some temporal  right and if so modern report then the question will be on this return whether  the sentence give in the vicechancellors court be legal or not it be admit  that the doctor be guilty of a contempt for which they may have punish he if  they have proceed in a right method but it be certain wrong to take away a man  freehold by any other mean than per law terr then as to the return itself it  appear that there be four cause to suspend the doctor first in say that the  vicechancellor act rash for foolishly stir about imply rash as well as foolish  and in the return shall be take in mild sensum second in say that the  vicechancellor be not his judge three by take the process from the beadle  fourthly in say that other process be illegal but they do not return any  custom of suspend or degrade though if they have it have be void if it be  unreasonable as it be hold in the case of the city of London that a  unreasonable custom though confirm by Act of parliament be void neither do  they set forth what punishment be to be inflict for a contempt in case the  offender have not be a graduate then they say that the deposition for this  contumacy be exhibit by the beadle c now by reason of this hasty judgement  those deposition ought to be very plain but it do not appear that they be take  before a proper magistrate who have power to tender a oath but only that they  be take de contempt predicto now the word deposition do not ex way termini  imply that it be take on oath for it be a relative word and denote no charge  Yelv latch Inst a and it do not appear but that it may be take to clear he of  a contempt and conviction be daily quash for such fault where they fix no  crime on the convict now if they have return before who the deposition be take  it may have appear to be before one who have no power to take they another  part of the return be that the power of confer degree be in the  vicechancellors master and scholar and so be the power of suspend and degrade  therefore of their own show the vicechancellors court have n such power it be  like a corporation which have power to remove a freeman but if be be remove by  a court of a corporation it be illegal modern report by the law of England a  man can be twice punish for the same offence but here the doctor be twice  punish for this contempt first he be suspend by the vicechancellors court and  afterward upon a grace propose to a congregation of doctor and head of house  by the say vicechancellor he by the advice and consent of seven other doctor  of the university be degrade which be a double punishment for how can that  congregation take modern report er p notice of the suspension it not come  before they either by writ of error or appeal so that it be a extrajudicial  cause and in a very extraordinary manner and can be a confirmation of the  first sentence but a second punishment independent of the first which be the  suspension and that also for the same crime so that it be wrong and unjust  beside of their own show that court and that congregation have only a  jurisdiction over those who reside in the university and therefore the doctor  can not be suspend unless he reside there which for aught appear must be take  by intendment for it be nowhere express allege that he do reside there neither  do they show to who the contempt be unless it shall be intend to that court  who send the summons it be likewise return that a process issue to summon dr  Bentley to appear at the next court but they do not show the nature of this  process whether it be by arrest distress or summons which ought to have be set  forth neither do they show where or when the next court be to be keep or for  what cause he shall appear there neither be it allege that he have notice of  either or that he be in contempt for if these thing have be set forth the  doctor may have a opportunity to defend his freehold how can a man be say to  be contumacious to a court when he do not know when and where they assemble as  a court now as to that matter it be a constant rule in all case where a  mandamus be grant that the party shall have notice of his charge but it do not  appear by this return that the doctor be summon to answer for a contempt so  that he be sentence without be hear which be illegal and against natural  justice as may appear by the case in the Edward a Henry   a side pl side style  fortesc Rep salk pl salk ld raym ld raym Mod Mod ante post Mod stram Sess Cas  pl pl pl pl pl Fol Cas of set and Rem Barnard king b a margin but if all the  cause return be true yet none of they be sufficient either to suspend or  degrade the doctor because a suspension by their own show must be for some  reasonable cause now they do not set forth that a contempt to this court be a  reasonable cause to suspend the doctor modern report it be true they have  allege a power time out of mind to suspend and degrade now this must be by  custom for they do not pretend to any jurisdiction by the civil law now all  custom in England be prima fancy to be intend at commonlaw unless special set  forth to be otherwise and they must have a reasonable commencement otherwise  they be not good but this custom be unreasonable and inconsistent with the  commonlaw it be of a power to suspend and degrade at pleasure and it be not  sufficient to show that they have a jurisdiction of the cause for that will  destroy all manner of right because if it shall be allow then every  corporation may show that they have a power to remove or disfranchise any  member thereof and give no account of the cause of such removal or  disfranchisement but the constant practice in such case be otherwise therefore  they ought to have set forth in this return that the contempt be a reasonable  cause of suspension upon the whole matter where ever a man lose anything  depend on a freehold a mandamus will lie if he have no other remedy it be  grant to a Presbyterian parson and direct to a justice of peace to admit he to  take the oath and subscribe the test that he may be entitle by law to preach  in his congregation and therefore a peremptory mandamus be pray it be argue  for the university and to maintain the return that there be nothing in this  case but what be usual in case of signature for as in the court of commonlaw  if the defendant refuse to appear upon process of those court issue out  against he then he be to be outlaw and if it be out of the spiritual court  then be be excommunicate so in these court of university a suspension or  degradation be the only method to enforce a obedience to their authority and  though they proceed in a different manner from the course of the commonlaw yet  if it be warrant by any other law or by the allow usage among they it be good  now this method of proceed be allow in all the university in Europe and as  they have a power to suspend so likewise they have a power to restore the  person suspend upon his modern report er p submission and by the charter grant  to this university by queen Elizabeth they have a particular power to  determine all cause arise within their jurisdiction it have be allege on the  other side before this mandamus be grant that degree in the university be only  title of honour and give as the reward of learning modern report and merit now  allow this to be true it be certain a very strange inference to say that the  person to who such degree be give can therefore lose they for a contempt or  any other demerit beside these degree be give by the university under a tacit  condition that the graduate shall conform themselves to the rule and usage  there and for that reason it be no novelty to proceed against they for  disobedience to those rule but warrant by the constant practice in all  university here and abroad now to answer the objection make against this  return first it be say that it do not appear that there be any reasonable  cause for this suspension nor how the process issue in answer to this  objection it plain appear that there be a plaint levy in the court against dr  Bentley accord to the custom of the university and that accord to such custom  process issue against he which must be a citation because that be the first  process in all ecclesiastical court or in case where the proceed be accord to  the course of the civil law which be the law general use in all university it  be true there be case cite on the other side which prove that the process must  contain the day when and the place where the court be to be hold and likewise  the cause of action all which be omit in this process the reason be because  this be a process accord to the civil law wherein such certainty be not  require as if it have be a process of commonlaw by which the time and place of  hold the court must be ascertain but where the time be uncertain as it be in  all inferior court videlicet when they be to be hold there be no occasion of  mention the day in the process because the person summon must take notice  himself when the court be to be keep as to the objection that it do not appear  that the deposition exhibit by the beadle to prove the contempt be take by a  proper magistrate upon oath who have power to administer such oath this may be  a proper objection if the proceed have be likewise at commonlaw but a oath in  such case be not require by the civil law because by that law it be sufficient  to say that it be do ex relation of the officer to who the contempt be offer  laying down import a oath if not why shall a oath be necessary the court be  the proper judge what sort of evidence to proceed on if their proceed be  different from proceed in this court that will be no reason for a peremptory  mandamus by the ecclesiastical law their court may proceed in suit by a wife  without her husband and this court will not grant a prohibition so the  admiralty court in England may execute a sentence in a foreign admiralty give  in a cause arise on land without be prohibit by the commonlaw and it be what  frequent happen even in court of commonlaw to order a man into custody for  speak modern report contemptuous word of such court upon a affidavit make that  the party be summon c as to the objection that the cause of action be not set  forth in the return for which the doctor be to appear one will think that he  who make this objection have not read the return because it plain set forth  that a plaint be levy by dr Middleton against the say dr Bentley and process  issue against he to appear c and that dr Middleton declare for his debt c and  as to the objection that there be not any contempt set forth the contrary be  certain true for it be return that the doctor take the process from the beadle  which be a contempt and this appear by a statute of the other university of  Oxford which be that if any person shall take the vice chancellor writ from  the beadle be shall be degrade if a graduate and if not a graduate then be  shall be otherwise punish by which it appear that university take it to be a  contempt to have their process take from a beadle it be true it do not appear  by this return in express word that it be take from he by violence or that it  be not restore but the word de shades of dead summonitoris to take away imply  a take by violence and force beside it appear by this return that the doctor  say he will not obey the summons and that the vicechancellor act foolish and  that he be not his judge which be speak to the beadle be certain a contempt  for if the doctor have anything to show why the vicechancellor have no  jurisdiction he ought as the law direct to have appear and show the cause  modern report er p and not to tell it to the beadle to bring their court and  their proceed into the contempt of the vulgar it have be far object that if  the day and place of hold this court have be set forth and notice likewise  give to the doctor to appear and answer a contempt he may then have a  opportunity of appear and clear himself from that charge but those thing be  omit in the return he can have no such opportunity in the return it be plain  that he be summon to appear at the next court and that for not appear he be  suspend which be a full answer to that objection but the suspension have be  good though the doctor have never be summon modern report it be true it be  against natural justice to punish a man without hear he but it be a mistake  method of argue to apply general rule to particular case for it be sufficient  if the doctor have a opportunity to be hear and that be not deny but it be  plain that he will not be hear for he speak contemptuous word of that court  where he shall be hear and therefore since he despise their authority there be  no occasion for a second summons to answer the contempt for the rule be contra  true stubbornness non greater number be avocand now where the civil law be the  rule and guide of the court and they proceed accord to that law the court in  Westminster hall always give credit to such proceed otherwise it may be of  very bad consequence to have a inferior court proceed by one law and to have  the sentence of such court reverse by a superior court where the proceed be by  another method and by another law the sentence give against the doctor be not  so very severe as it have be represent because upon his submission or clear  himself of the contempt he may be restore to his degree at any time and this  degradation which be only a mean to enforce his obedience will be quash so  that it be his own fault and obstinacy if he be not restore it have be say on  the other side that a disfranchisement of a freeman for a contempt to the  mayor court be never yet see which be very true but these case be far  different from degradation because where a member of a corporation be  disfranchise he be seclude from all privilege of that corporation and the rest  of the corporate body be deprive of their interest in he and of his vote in  any corporate act but it be otherwise in the case of a degradation because the  person degrade be still a member of the university for so be the doctor in  this case who be still head of a college it be true this degradation be a  personal reflection on he and he be thereby deprive of some benefit arise from  his degree in this university but he be still a member thereof all that be do  as to his degradation be secundum law et experience university who have a  power final to determine in such case yet that do not exclude other power to  inspect their action but if they proceed accord to their know law and custom  though a little different modern report from the commonlaw this court will  give credit to their proceed and not interpose now in this case they proceed  accord to the law and custom of the university for the vicechancellors court  have cognizance of all personal action arise there and where any of the member  thereof be concern except felony and this be a independent jurisdiction  exclusive of all other time out of mind and confirm by Act of parliament any  law custom statute or constitution notwithstanding and this be pure to give  they leave to proceed accord to the civil law it be trade hale in his history  of the commonlaw tell we that the king can give power by his charter to set up  any jurisdiction to proceed by any other mean than the commonlaw which show  that though he can do it by charter yet it may be do by Act of parliament as  it be do in this case on purpose that they may proceed by the civil law  therefore this court will not interpose to examine their proceed whether they  be right or not because that court proceed by a different law videlicet by the  civil law and they have return that the doctor be suspend accord to the custom  of the university so that this suspension must be accord to civil law as to  the objection that no particular custom be return for the vicechancellors  court either to suspend or degrade and that those be punishment not adequate  to the crime which be only a contempt the answer be that it plain appear to be  otherwise by the civil law which be to be the measure of the punishment in  this case it have be likewise object that those degree confer a temporal right  on those to who they be grant it be true those degree be grant by virtue of a  power give by the crown as all other honour and precedency modern report er p  be and the grant they be but the disposition or order of the precedency  include in that liberty give by the crown in sound a college like a  corporation which likewise be find by virtue of the king grant now all  collateral quality tack by the parliament to those degree do not alter the  power of the university to dispose they as matter of precedency nor alter the  nature of those very degree as if a Act of parliament shall be make that no  person shall be capable of such benefice but those who be breed at one of the  school at Eaton or modern report Westminster will such a statute make any  alteration in the discipline of those school but that still they may give  precedency to one scholar before another without the interposition of this  court and the university itself be but one great school videlicet school  Illustrious the case of holy order be still of a high nature and in  consequence thereof have a great temporal right yet that right may be take  away by a sentence in another court and not subject to the control of this or  any other temporal court as for instance the bishop of saint David salk a be  degrade in the spiritual court for simony and in consequence of such  degradation lose his barony but this court will not interpose so likewise  where any person be excommunicate or where a chancellor grant a sequestration  to enforce a obedience to the ecclesiastical law do prohibition or certiorar  will lie so a feme covert may sue in the spiritual court without her husband  and this be allow by their law this court will not interpose so justice of  peace have power by several statute finally to enclose and that in a summary  way and method different from the commonlaw and this court will give credit to  their proceed if they act accord now this suspension be no more than a amotion  by virtue of a clause in their charter so that if the clause be within their  jurisdiction a mandamus can be grant for alley irregularity for that be  altogether out of the case because this court be not to inquire thereof where  the cause be within the jurisdiction of the civil law and therefore in the  twelve year of William the three this court will not interpose in dr  Groenvelts case who be fine and imprison by the college of physician they have  power by a statute so to do if a man be excommunicate who be never cite this  court will not grant a prohibition the proper remedy be by appeal it be a  error in their proceed for a appeal lie de nullitatibus so if a Act of  parliament give justice of peace power to convict enact that no certiorari  shall be bring the person convict have no remedy but by action on the case if  the conviction be malicious this charter which create the vicechancellor have  exclusive clause the court ought not to question the regularity of their  proceed but a appeal may be bring in the senate it have be object that this  suspension be no more than a amotion by a corporation in common case so it can  not be do by the vicechancellors court no more than a man can be remove by a  court of a corporation but this objection be wrong for where the body of the  university be judge as in this case there the vicechancellor be only their  locum to hold in order to execute justice modern report and the university be  active in he who have a delegate power to hold court before the whole body and  a part be imply to be act by the whole corporate body by their law as the  graviores cause such as grant degree or deprive and it be set forth that their  court have power to suspend or deprive and to restore upon submission but when  the doctor have contemned that court they may certain suspend he without a  second summons especial since the contempt be to that court by which he be  suspend it be object that he have no remedy but by a mandamus for though he  may be Willing to submit yet the vicechancellor may never call a court and it  be whole in his power not to call one now as to that matter there be a  constant call of two such court every year beside it be in his power upon  extraordinary case to call a convocation at any other time and this appear in  the very return but if it have not be set forth it be imply b that the course  of the civil law for by that law all punishment for contumacy be from the  nature of they temporary though impose in general term so that this university  have proceed as usual and as all other university in Christendom and it be  necessary in such case to use some extraordinary jurisdiction where young  person meet together from all place in the most unruly part of their life  otherwise it modern report er p will be of very ill consequence if the  governor can not enforce a obedience without be subject to the control of this  court upon the whole matter the doctor know that he be degrade and for what  cause and he ought to have make his submission before he move for a mandamus  and if that have be do be may have no occasion to apply himself to this court  Pratt chief justice this be a case of great consequence both as to the  property the honour and the learning of this university and concern every  graduate there though at present it be the case only of one learned man and  the head of a college the question be whether the university can suspend and  degrade and by what rule they may proceed in either or both of these case and  to this matter it be allow they may suspend or degrade for a reasonable cause  but then the cause must be special set forth that the court may judge whether  it be reasonable and accord to law and upon this ground it be that a return of  a suspension for contumacy general will not be good for the particular of the  contumacy ought to be specify Rep modern report it be agreeable to law that a  man shall not be deprive of his property without be hear unless it be by his  own default but it be hard that it shall be in the power of one man to suspend  or degrade another without any appeal for if he shall err as all man be  subject to error then the person suspend or degrade have do remedy it be allow  that this university have a jurisdiction in several case and this court will  support they in the exercise of such jurisdiction if they do not exceed their  proper bind and limit now as to the return there be several cause set forth  both for the suspension and degradation videlicet in say that he will not obey  the summons that it be illegal that the vicechancellor foolishly to put in  motion and that he be not his judge and all this speak to a beadle who serve  the process of their court and in a very indecent manner in diminution of the  authority thereof and to name it ridiculous which be consequent a contempt  thereof and if the like have be do to a officer of this court it will have be  account a great indignity and the person shall be punish but then the matter  must be bring before the court in a proper manner and whether that be do in  this case be now to be determine now by this return it appear that deposition  for a contempt be exhibit by the beadle but it do not show that those  deposition be take before a proper judge and this be the foundation of the  degradation it do not appear to this court that they have any power to degrade  the doctor but admit they have such a power then the next thing to be consider  on this return be whether the cause return be sufficient to justify this  degradation and if it be thermal whether it be well return modern report they  return that they have power to degrade for a contempt and this be give to they  by a charter of queen Elizabeth and for any other reasonable cause now the  cause return be neither for it be not a contempt to the university but to the  ViceChancellors court it be like a contempt to a mayor which can never be say  to be a contempt to the whole corporation therefore though they may degrade  for a contempt to the university it can be infer from thence that they may  degrade for a contempt to a private court of that university fortescue justice  the word be a contempt to the court for which he ought to have be commit if he  have be present in court and if not he ought to have be bind to his good  behaviour I do not see how a deprivation for this cause be agreeable to reason  or justice many custom of the university have be adjudge void it be a rule  that all custom shall be certain now this custom to deprive pro stubbornness  be uncertain as to the meaning of the word contumacy whether it mean contumacy  to the congregation to the vice chancellor to this court or to the university  whether to dr Gooch as head of the college or as judge of the inferior court  Pratt chief justice as to this matter the word be improper and indecent we  shall punish all person who shall speak so disrespectful of our process and  may bind they to their good behaviour but the authority seem too strong to  allow a power to remove a person from his freehold for such word Eyre justice  say that he be not satisfy that the university can deprive for a contempt to  the vicechancellor for a contempt to the vicechancellor be no contempt to the  university they can deprive for all contumacies nor have they return a power  to deprive for a contumacy to the vicechancellor it must be modern report er p  intend be general near stubbornness to extend only to contempt to the  university suppose in any other corporation a member shall offer a contempt to  a inferior court can the corporation deprive he No they can only punish he as  other inhabitant a proper punishment for a contempt be fine and imprisonment  but not loss of freehold a officer of this court ought not to lose his office  for contemptuous word to the court a tenant to the lord of a manor or district  can lose his estate for nonattendance at any court fortescue justice though a  degree in the university be only a civil honour yet interest and property be  the consequence of such degree the court consider it as such with all its  attendance it be like the case of a alderman which of itself be no profit only  by consequence all degree be original give by the crown and though the present  right of confer they be prescribe for by the university yet that prescription  must be presume to be find upon a right derive by authority from the crown so  that a person advance to the degree of a doctor c may be esteem to be advance  by the king there be no degree among the grease or Roman nor among the first  Christian they begin about the twelve or thirteenth century and have be since  attend with great privilege and profit university be the proper Latin word for  corporation a learned man of this university tell I that there be no degree  ever grant there until the university be a corporation the seminary for  education of youth be ancient hold in the cathedral of the church of the first  Christian beside where any person be degrade for a contumacy it ought to be by  that court to who the contempt be offer but it be not pretend by this return  that the vicechancellors court have any power to degrade neither do it appear  that dr Bentley be ever summon to answer this contempt and it be against  natural justice to deprive a man of his right before be be hear therefore if  there be a custom so to do such custom will be absolute void and it be a thing  of daily experience to grant prohibition to spiritual court if they deny the  defendant a copy of the libel because such denial be against natural justice  and now to offer a common instance videlicet suppose a officer of this court  shall show any contempt thereof can he be deprive of his office for such  contempt certain he can not it be true they who have argue for the university  insist that the proceed there be accord to the civil law and this they have do  to justify the suspension without be summon to answer the contempt but it do  not appear upon the return upon which this court be modern report to judge  that they proceed there by the civil law and if so then the court must intend  that they proceed by the commonlaw which they have not do for there be no  manner of proof that the doctor be summon to appear to answer the contempt and  it can never be say that a court which proceed accord to the commonBy which  law fortescue justice say property be infinite more preserve that by any law  in the whole world Vaugh Rep a law shall suspend or degrade a person without  be hear or summon it be say likewise that this be not a proceed by virtue of a  charter alone but by a charter confirm by Act of parliament now admit that to  be true it must be grant that conviction even upon act of parliament be  frequent quash for not summon the person convict though not require by the  statute because it be still against natural justice to convict without hear  the want of a summons be a objection that can never be get over have the  custom be return to deprive without summons it have be void as against natural  justice if a justice of peace convict any man without a summons such  conviction be void I hear a learned civilian say that God himself will not  condemn Adam for his transgression until he have call he to know what he can  say in his defence gentleman three such proceed be agreeable to justice admit  the university have a jurisdiction yet this court will inquire what they have  do and how they have use that jurisdiction as it be do in bushel case where it  be insist that the merit of the cause can not be inquire into upon the return  of a habeas corpus but it be overrule and this court can affirm the proceed in  this case without overrule bushel case and several other authority of the like  nature for which reason the court be unanimous in grant a peremptory mandamus  modern report er p and in easter term in the ten year of George the first the  doctor be restore to his degree