case collins against JESSOT previous to the marriage Act the spiritual court  be not prohibit from proceed to dissolve a marriage contract per word de  present time or per word de going to be for in both case the matter be  matrimonial and within the jurisdiction of the court nor be it necessary for  the libel to show that a dissolution of the contract be the object of the suit  king move for a prohibition to the spiritual court for libel there to dissolve  a marriage because of a precontract but the libel do not set forth that it be  in order to a dissolution and therefore the suggestion be that the libel do  not in certainty show the end of the prosecution as it be say they ought to do  that the court here may see whether it be a end proper for they to prosecute  for f n b a holt chief justice if a contract be per word de present time it  amount to a actual marriage which the very party themselves can dissolve by  release or other mutual agreement for it be as much a marriage in the sight of  God as if it have be in fancy church with this difference that if they cohabit  before marriage in fancy church they be for that punishable by ecclesiastical  censure and if after such contract either of they lie with another they will  punish such offender as a adulterer and if the contract be per word de going  to be and after either of the party so contract without a previous release or  discharge of the contract marry another it will be a good cause with they of a  dissolution of a second marriage and of decree the first contract be be  perfect into a marriage queen in all respects totan cur concess except the  last point whereof Powell justice doubt upon which holt chief justice add that  it be first resolve in my Lord Vaughan time that a action will well lie at  commonlaw for breach of such a executory contract per word de going to be  which resolution Vaughan all man oppose because the party have this remedy in  the spiritual court which be agree by all but notwithstanding it be resolve  that the party have his election of either remedy and that by bring a action  at commonlaw and that appear on record the remedy in the spiritual court be  actual release for now in lieu of a performance of the contract he shall  recover damage and be quote a case which he remember have be try at guildhall  which be a action for breach of such a promise and upon issue of non assumpsit  proof be make of the promise but the defendant show that he have be sue for  the same matter in the spiritual court and produce a sentence against the  plaintiff the plaintiff notwithstanding this proof be nonsuit because that  they be the proper judge in the spiritual court whether it be a precontract or  not modern and if a man and woman make mutual promise of inter modern er p  marriage in going to be and the man give the woman a hundred pound in  satisfaction of the promise and she accept it so it be a good discharge of the  contract but now by the marriage Act Geo c S it be enact that in no case  whatsoever shall any suit or proceed he have in any ecclesiastical court in  order to compel a celebration of any marriage in fancy church by reason of any  contract of matrimony whatsoever whether per word de present time or per word  de going to be any law or usage to the contrary notwithstanding a and be stir  again at another day per curian the spiritual court have jurisdiction of all  matrimonial cause whatsoever and where it appear to we that the cause be  spiritual of which in consequence they have conuzance unless it be by reason  of some collateral temporal matter in it we ought not to prohibit they and it  be no reason here to prohibit they because this may be a future contract for  breach of which a action at law will lie no more than when they libel for lie  violent hand upon a spiritual man for which a action at law lie for he for the  battery and a suit in the spiritual court for the irreverence to his character  see Kelly v walker cro Elizabeth b and by holt chief justice there be a great  diversity between the spiritual court and the court of admiralty in reference  to suggestion for prohibition for the admiralty have jurisdiction in respect  of the locality of the cause of action let the nature of the action be what it  will and therefore for a prohibition though they lie the cause to arise super  deeply mare the party may suggest the contrary to oust they of jurisdiction  but the jurisdiction of the spiritual court be in respect of the nature of the  thing videlicet whether it be matrimonial or testamentary for the origin of  the jurisdiction of the spiritual court in testamentary matter see lambard  Saxon law bp Wilkins Linwood Selden eadm a and therefore if it appear by the  libel to be of that nature we will not prohibit they Powell justice condemned  the diversity in Fitzherbert Fitzherbert n b a b between a promise to give he  ten pound with his daughter in marriage and to pay he ten pound if he marry  his daughter holt chief justice say that by the first be understand ten pound  to be lie down upon the book at the time of marriage and therefore it be  matrimonial and the prohibition be deny per totan curian