Primary tabs
Transcription
[Page 3]
I have given every attention to this case, & I think it is clear that no Proceeding at Law could be instituted against the Dean & Chapter of Lincoln. The jurisdiction of a Court of Common Law on a subject of a similar nature with the present, was a Question very fully investigated in the case of Jefferson v. The Bishop of Durham reported in Bosanquet and Puller's Reports Vol. 1, P. 105 in which Lord Chief Justice Eyre & the Judges of the Court of Common Pleas decided that that Court of Common Law and in effect that the Court of King's Bench also could not issue a Writ of Prohibition against a Bishop to restrain him from committing waste on the estates of his See. This case however does by no means decide that the Court of Chancery has not the Power of issuing a Writ of Prohibition. But I think that the more immediate his See. The and material point therefore to be considered, is whether the Court of Chancery upon an Information being filed against the Dean & Chapter in the name of the Attorney General, can exercise the same Jurisdiction over them, as it does against Individuals in an ordinary case of Waste. This question is as I apprehend perfectly novel. I can find no traces of any application to the Chanceller upon an occasion of this kind. Instances have not unfrequently occurred of Injunctions being granted on Bills filed by private Patrons against Rectors to restrain them from committing waste on the Estates & Lands belonging to their Rectories, as in Strachey v, Francis 2d Atkyns 216, Hoskins vs Fetherstone 2d Brown 552, Knight vs Mosley Ambler 176; but I believe that no instance can be found of an Information by the Attorney General to restrain a Chapter or a Bishop. The Distinction