Bulstrode dick and wife plaintiff against brown defendant prohibition Noy Benl  Poph in a prohibition the case appear to be this S the plaintiff libel in the  court Christian at Norwich for a legacy the defendant there plead show forth  the inventory which come to so much and plead full administer they there do  examine this and find that he have full administer and there a sentence give  for he against the plaintiff from which sentence they appeal afterward they  desert and leave the appeal and come into this court and pray a prohibition  and this be upon some suggestion make and none present in court to defend the  same upon a motion make termin pasch James a prohibition be grant but nothing  do in this during all this time no return at all make of it so that now by the  demise of the king there be no declaration in this prohibition and for this  cause the same be abate Calthorpe now move the court to have a consultation  because there be no cause show for the grant of the former prohibition this be  grant only upon a suggestion make that they proceed to try and determine  whether he have full administer or not of which they there have conusance for  they have their conusance of the principal S of the legacy they may also  determine of this there whether he have asset or not in his hand to pay this  legacy but if they will there determine or meddle with this which belong not  unto they they be then to be prohibit so of covin allege there to be in a  matter which concern the legacy or which be in discharge of this they may  there determine of this as appear by r fol in a case of a prohibition unto the  court Christian because they there proceed to try matter of covin pasch James  b r between Wallis plaintiff against Leyde defendant in a suit for a legacy in  the spiritual court they be at issue there upon a point of covin as touch  matter there allege in discharge of a legacy upon this a prohibition be pray  and deny and a consultation there grant because they have conusance of the  principal and for this cause they have cause also there to determine of the  accessary be covin concern the legacy it be there adjudge for the consultation  and the prohibition be deny and so he move here because no declaration nor any  return make and nothing do in the prohibition by reason of which this be abate  as it be here adjudge between Trumpley and maio termin pasch car r b r upon  which judgement it be move to have the say prohibition abate and it be move  because the sole suggestion for the first prohibition be because they there  hold plea to determine of full administer the which be no cause to grant a  prohibition they have power and conusance to hold plea and to determine of the  principal S the legacy and therefore they shall also have power to determine  the plea of full administer which go in discharge of the legacy and upon all  this a consultation be pray unto the court Christian of Norwich the  prohibition be abate by the demise of the king and not aid by nor yet within  the statute of e the court upon this give a day to the other side to show  cause why in this case a consultation shall not be grant at which day the  court be move to have the former prohibition grant to be renew the same be  before grant by the rule of the court and now determine and abate per demise  Le roy as it have be confess and admit a new prohibition be therefore pray  upon the same reason and suggestion upon which the court grant the former  Bulstrode all the reason offer to the court for to have a new prohibition in  this court be only this because the same be former move in court and the court  upon the motion make have grant the former prohibition the which they will not  have so do if they have not then see good cause for the grant of it but the  cause now appear not the suggestion it self against the prohibition be only  this for that they there hold plea and proceed to determine pleinment  administer which as it be urge they may well do have dower to determine the  principal S the suit for the legacy but the true cause for which the first  prohibition be grant as be conceive be this upon the suggestion misopened to  the court and a prohibition pray and then Bulstrode er p accord to the usual  course a day be give to the other side to show cause why a prohibition shall  not be grant and no notice be give of this motion and rule for default in show  of cause the prohibition issue of course but nothing do upon it it be  therefore now move again for a consultation upon the former reason and  authority dodderidge justice he bath desert his appeal and move for a  prohibition this be but matter of delay he have also delay this matter in the  prohibition so that by this course the party shall be enforce to expend more  than the value of his legacy before recovery of it they be at issue there in  the court Christian touch full administer they may there well try and  determine this this be there triable before they per testes they have there  conusance of the legacy and therefore of this plea also but if they de there  refuse to allow of this in proof which the law do allow of as to the discharge  of the party in point of asset this shall then be a good cause to have a  prohibition upon a true suggestion make of this but here the suggestion be  altogether insufficient and so no cause for a prohibition curian we de here  try full administer or not by a jury they there try this per testes and they  have conusance of this but if they in their proceed refuse such a proof for  full administer in discharge of the party which be Allowable at the commonlaw  a prohibition then be to be grant but here nothing be in this suggestion but  that they there go to issue only upon full administer or not the which of it  self be no cause to have a prohibition for if they de not in such a case  proceed there infinite delay shall be for they will then after sentence there  against they appeal and then will desert their appeal and come and move here  for a prohibition as here it be do in this case and this only for delay for  the prevent of which for this time and for the future the court give further  time for the plaintiff in the prohibition to see and to inform himself better  with the suggestion for a prohibition which at this time he have not so do and  to show better cause or a consultation shall be grant but by the whole court  they be there to proceed in the interim in court Christian without be prohibit  by this court and so no prohibition grant but to proceed there Beverely  Anonymous v twenty other Bulstrode er report date Beverley plaintiff and  against twenty other defendant prohibition in a bill before the council at  York wherein the case be the plaintiff prefer his bill against the defendant  before the council at York and in this he show that whereas Beverley his  father by his deed have grant unto he a yearly rentcharge of l per annum and  that he have deliver this deed unto Beverley the defendant to keep for his use  who refuse to deliver this unto he say that he have lose it so that by this he  be deprive of all his remedy at the commonlaw Bulstrode this rend be grant  unto he for life be the young son and by he deliver to the defendant be his  elder brother to keep for he and his use and by the conclusion of the bill he  pray process to have the defendant appear and to answer upon their oath touch  the say deed and to have delivery of this make to he and also to have he order  to pay the say annual rend unto he accord to the content of the deed upon this  Davies the king sergeant move the court for a prohibition to stay proceed  before the council at York this rend be matter of freehold with the determine  of which they be not there to meddle curian they be not there to determine  this matter nor yet to order any thing there as touch the rend this be matter  of freehold therefore by the rule of the court a prohibition be grant to  prohibit they from proceed there quoad the rend they be not there to meddle  with any determination of this but not to be prohibit quoad the deed for they  may there well proceed to examine any matter touch this and to order the  delivery of this there to the plaintiff if they find cause for it and so by  the rule of the court a prohibition be grant only quoad the rend but they to  proceed there with the residue of the matter in the bill contain Bulstrode er  p notam one have day give he to wage his law at the day he come not to wage  his law but make default the court be move for another day to be give he to  come and wage his law in regard he can not come at the first day to he prefix  to wage his law crew chief justice this day give he to come and wage his law  be not so peremptory unto he but that this do rest in the discretion of the  court to give unto he another day to come and wage his law upon good cause  show in excuse for his not come the first day to perform this for it may be so  that he may fall sick by the way or be otherwise hinder that he can not by any  possible mean come the first day and if it be so the act of God no default be  in he shall not put he to any prejudice but another day may well be give he to  de this the rest of the judge in this be all against he for that this day give  he to wage his law be peremptory unto he without any further day to be give  unto he to wage his law and therefore by the rule of the court a entry be make  upon the record quod to withdraw de lege and so by this he be oust from wage  of his law in this case afterward