Bowry versus Wallington where several prohibition may be grant in the same  case and where not note that in this case upon the statute of e it be agree by  the court that if there be a suit in the ecclesiastical court and a  prohibition award and afterward consultation grant that upon the same libel no  prohibition shall be grant again but if there be a appeal in this case then a  prohibition may be grant but with these difference if be who appeal pray the  prohibition there be shall not have it for then suit shall be defer in  infinitum in the ecclesiastical court if the prohibition and consultation be  upon the body of the matter and the substance of it for otherwise he shall be  put many time to try the same matter which be full of vexation and the case be  move again and argue by Noy which be thus Wallington libel in the  ecclesiastical court against Bowry for tithe of wool and lamb and Bowry upon  suggestion of a modus kill obtain a prohibition and have a attachment and  declare upon it and be at issue upon the modus which be find for the defendant  and consultation grant whereupon judgement be give in the ecclesiastical court  against Bowry upon which Bowry appeal and pray a new prohibition and have it  and Noy move for a consultation because that a prohibition and a attachment  upon it be but one suit for the contempt of the party in bring his suit in  another court and translate this from the king court and when it be once try  for the defendant the same thing shall not be try again and as to the statute  of e upon the mistake whereof the mistake be raise he confess that the print  book and also in the extract of the parliament one roll remain in the tower be  the same judge but the Parliamentroll it self and the petition be liceatque  judgment Church rites sive diocese eiden a hujusmodi and the answer to the  petition be one consultation grant suffice in this case and the parliament  Popham er p roll it self be bring into the court and view but he say that if  it be as it be in the print book and extract the same judge shall not be  intend the same personal judge but the same judge of conusance of the same  jurisdiction or daring for otherwise if another commissary be make as the  bishop may when he will his successor may be new prohibit and also one thing  may be infinite try for in many place the suit begin in the archdeacon court  and from he a appeal may be bring to the bishop Popham the same term in the  same court