Andrews dr martin against the archbishop OF Canterbury prohibition refuse to a  appeal to the archbishop of Canterbury as visitor of mertoncollege Oxford upon  a suggestion that the bishop of Winchester be the visitor the archbishop of c  and none other have always exercise the visitatorial power a appellant may  move for a prohibition to his own appeal motion buy solicitor general strange  for a prohibition to a appeal make to the archbishop if Canterbury as visitor  of mertoncollege in Oxford by dr martin one of the fellow thereof from a  complaint against he by the say college and this prohibition be pray at the  instance of dr martin himself which it be urge may be do and be suggest  several charter and statute of the college whereby as it be urge it appear  that the bishop of Winchester be visitor of the college he be call in the  original statute and several other specific protector pater defensor c of the  college on the other side several record from the archbishop registry at  Lambeth be produce whereby it appear that from the year which be about six  year after the death of Walter de Merton the founder to the present time the  archbishop of c have exercise a visitatorial power over this college and in  all the charter they be call patron pater c and it be say that the reason of  the appellation give to the bishop of Winchester of specific protector c be  that the college be find at maudlin in the county of Surre former within the  diocese f Winchester and afterward remove to the diocese of oxon and the  charter be confirm by the bishop of Winchester and the dean and chapter  thereof it be argue in favour of the prohibition by Mr solicitor general  sergeant Parker and other that as there be a act visitor on the one side and  the right of the other depend on a variety of evidence the matter ought to be  try and in the case of a visitor it be a rule that if there be any doubt the  court will not determine the point of jurisdiction on a motion and so it be  lie down by Mr reeve afterward chief justice of the Andrews common plea in the  king and the bishop of Ely in this court and Mr solicitor say that in the case  of university college and orie college both of which be of royal foundation  there be much long usage of a visitatorial power than here and yet the right  be find against the usage but in the principal case the whole court be strong  of opinion that a prohibition ought not to be grant for no one beside the  archbishop of c bath exercise a visitatorial power over this college and there  bath be so long a usage that though this do not give a right it be a very  strong proof of one to which point lee c j cite I vent beside no one appear  now who claim the visitatorialf power beside the archbishop neither the bishop  of Winchester nor the heir of the founder in which last the right must be if  none be constitute visitor as this college be of private foundation but the  present motion be only at the instance of a single fellow and therefore the  case which have be cite differ from this because in those there be several  claimant and different right and statute the claim by the bishop of Lincoln in  the case of oriel college be as loci of order and probin just say that if the  bishop of Winchester have join in this complaint there will Andrews er p be no  reason for grant a prohibition because by the word of the charter he be at  most but a special visitor however the matter be now adjourn that the court  may look into the case cite at the bar and afterward this term c I say they  have look into and consider those case but that they retain their former  opinion a prohibition be therefore deny note while such part of the record  produce on the archbishop side which be very long be read as his counsel  direct it be insist by sergeant Parker on the other side that the whole shall  be read but the court order such part as the archbishop counsel think Andrews  material to be first read and afterward sergeant Parker waive the other point