chamberlain vers Hewitson the spiritual court may determine matter of temporal  cognizance which come collateral before they the plaintiff chamberlain move  for a prohibition to the spiritual court upon a suggestion that the defendant  Hewitson prefer article in the spiritual court against her for incontinency  with the husband of Hewitson and obtain sentence against her upon which mrs  chamberlain appeal to the court of delegate who confirm the former sentence  and make a decree that the plaintiff shall do penance and pay cost to mrs  Hewitson afterward the general pardon issue by which the penance be pardon and  now the defendant Hewitson libel in the spiritual court for the cost where the  plaintiff mrs chamberlain plead the release of the husband of mrs Hewitson a  which the spiritual court disallow and therefore she pray to have a  prohibition grant and sergeant wright for the defendant argue against the  prohibition that where getting to know chief there debet be getting to know  assessory to prove which rule and apply it to the present case he cite Yelv  Starkey vers Barton gore march pl cro James   Robert case a feoff be try in  the spiritual court in a case between tutter and Whiskins he argue that it be  in vain for any wife to Lord Raymond er p commence a suit against the  adulteress if the release shall be allow to bar her of her cost which be mere  the charge of the suit by which she have bring the criminal to condign  punishment therefore these cost ought not to be releaseable Lord Raymond by  the husband no more than the case of motam roll Rep roll Abr pl pl against  which it be argue for the plaintiff by sir Bartholomew shower that the  prohibition ought to be grant and of that opinion be the whole court and  resolve that the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical court shall extend to the  determination of the validity of letter patent feoff release c which come in  question there in matter proper within the ecclesiastical conusance provide  that in the determination of such collateral matter they do not deviate from  the rule of the commonlaw for if they do so a prohibition shall be grant it be  resolve that if a feme covert sue another in the spiritual court for  incontinency with her husband and recover cost if the husband release they the  wife be bar for since the husband be liable to the charge of the suit expend  by the wife he shall have the cost in recompense beside that the wife can have  a chattel interest exclusive of the husband but if the husband die the wife  shall have they because they be a choose in action and they shall not go to  the executor of the husband but if the husband and wife be divorce a month et  thoro and the wife have alimony allow her and she sue for defamation or other  injury and recover cost the husband release they yet the wife shall recover  they because they come instead of that which she have expend out of her  alimony which be a separate maintenance and not in the power of the husband  and this be the reason of Hotams case roll Abr pl but if the wife have a  legacy leave her the husband may release it roll Abr pl in the principal case  a prohibition be grant a note in salk Mod holt the plaintiff be state to have  move for a prohibition immediate upon plead the release Lord Raymond easter  term will c b sir George Treby chief justice sir Edward Nevil sir John Powell  sir John Powell of Gloucester justice