case the king against OXENDEN see this case post page a mandamus do not lie to  restore a proctor in the spiritual court for they have jurisdiction over their  own officer SC post SC lev S c shower KB er p holt S c Mod S c Carth S c skin  S c S salk now I argue a that a mandamus do lie to restore a proctor to the  exercise of his office that be undue remove because his business concern the  administration of public justice and tend to the public welfare a mandamus lie  for all office of a public nature or relate to the administration of justice  this office be necessary for it be moral impossible that all manner of person  as infant child person disease who pray relief of justice can do all their own  business shower KB there any more than they can without a attorney it be  therefore to be compare to that of a attorney he take a oath as a officer of  the court and this appear by the return where the oath be mention nay they be  mention in poll act as well as atorneys nay he be mention in Richard c and  therefore may be well presume to be time immemorial the ecclesiastical court  be a court of justice allow by and know to the commonlaw of England it be a  court for punishment of offence and immorality as incest adultery drunkenness  c a proctor be a officer there and this court will take notice of he for you  need no information as Mr attorney say to acquaint you with the nature of his  office but only for remembrance as to the objection that there never be a  mandamus grant for to restore a proctor I answer that there never be one move  for such trivial cause but there always be a first in every action and if the  same reason hold in this as in the other it be as fit to be grant as in those  this court have a general jurisdiction over all the other court in England  especial over the inferior court and court Christian you will correct what  inferior court do amiss you have grant attachment for the abuse of your  process it be true you will not meddle with the court of common plea about  their own officer or concern but that be because the course of their court be  the law and of that they be judge and they be one of the superior court but it  be otherwise in inferior court for there their course do not justify if  contrary to the general law of the land here be a man injure there be no  relief in the world but submission to the wrongdoer unless you allow he the  aid of this writ beside in common case if the ecclesiastical court proceed  otherwise than accord to the law of the land even in cause belong to their own  jurisdiction you grant prohibition as in case of refusal to admit one witness  to prove payment of a legacy b you do take notice of the prejudicial act of  the court Christian as excommunication you allow it as a disability you write  to they to absolve they by the writ de caution to send to prohibition be  direct to the proctor as well as to the judge and party you do every shower KB  day make rule upon notice to the proctor then a mandamus be a remedial writ  like to a habeas corpus and this be our livelihood it support our family and  we have no other remedy for a assize do not lie therefore a mandamus do c a  action of the case be but imperfect that only give damage it work no  restitution and a action upon the case can recover damage to we for the loss  of a life practice and therefore must be repeat which the law abhor a mandamus  lie in several case though not so frequent for officer in bag be case d the  reason give in the first resolution there be that which reach this case  videlicet that to than court of king bench belong authority not only to  correct error in judicial proceed but other error and misdemeanour  extrajudicial tend to the breach of the peace or oppression of the subject or  to the raise of faction controversy or debate or to any manner of  misgovernment so that no wrong or injury either public or private may be do  but that it may be reform or punish by due course of law all this reach our  case this court be the supreme court of justice in all cause whatsoever e and  this a see the return make to this mandamus and the first argument on it post  and the second argument with the opinion of the judge post b see the case of  shatter v friend ante c king v Barker burr king v Wheeler b r h king v bp of  Chester term Rep d   roll Rep e hawk p c shower KB er p court send mandamuss  to they to command they to grant administration to inferior court to proceed  to judgement and execution to restore a act of a inferior court as burst of  Canterbury f Hastings of white chapel for a parish clerk g to swear a  churchwarden h or constable I who be but annual officer nay for a assistant of  a company as to one of the skinner company as I have be inform king which  office be not of great trust this concern himself and family and all that  think fit to employ he and since their number be stint to twentyeight it  concern everybody for no man but may have occasion for his help it concern the  public as court of arch be a court of justice for punish offender and  determine of ecclesiastical right but after all the court be of opinion that  no mandamus lie that the king have two jurisdiction one temporal another  ecclesiastical and they have different law and different process and they be  judge of their own officer that this be no temporal office that they can not  take notice shower KB of what he be or what estate he have whether for life or  how that he be a spiritual person and they have jurisdiction of he that they  make and they may unmake he and they cite Jones   roll Rep and roll Abr and so  no mandamus by holt chief justice eyres and Gregory justice dolben justice be  absent but he be of the same opinion c shower KB michaelmas term the second of  William and mary in the king bench sir John holt Knt chief justice sir William  dolben Knt sir William Gregory Knt sir Giles eyres Knt justice sir George  Treby Knt attorney general sir John summer Knt solicitor general