232 Proceedings of the Council of Maryland, 1707.

       Lib. C. B. that have made these objections but Satisfied that the habs

                  Corpus Act 31° Car 2d Rs Cap. 11. which Mr Smithson has

                  altogether proceeded (did it Extend to this province) has

                  neither Expression nor Intent to bayle any but such who are

                  comitted for such Supposed Criminall Matters for which they

                  are Lyable to be Indicted. The Jurisdiction of the Courts of

                  Starr Chamber and high Ecclesiasticall Courts with others

                  of that nature having Long before Vanished and not left

                  any Shaddow behind them at the time of the making that

                  Act.

                    2dly As to the Courts of comon Law having enlarged

                  psons comitted for contempts in the Court of Chanry as weli

                  as in the high Comission Court will not be denyed, And in

                  the latter Severall comitted for contempt of their Decrees and

                  even in the Case of Alymony But the reason is plain because

                  of its being an inferiour Court to the K. B. And that those

                  Comissioners had either taken upon them that for which an

                  Action lay at Comon Law, as in Sr Anthony Ropers Case in

                  hughes Abr. about the pension &c or because they have

                  Exceeded their Authority given by by fining and Impri

                  soning where they had no such Authority of any Legall

                  proceedings in the Spirituall Courts before that time Used

          p. 103  (even under the Usurpation of the pope) to Warrant them

                  And as to persons enlarged on 2 H. 4. 15. by the Bishops for

                  Heresie not being fundamentall the Case is as wide because

                  their Authority was declared by Stat. which they Exceeded

                  in not confining themselves to the Heresies declared by the

                  first four Generall Councells &c. And therefore it was the

                  Court of the Kings Bench adjuvantib alijs Iusticiarijs dni Reg

                  were able to Judge as well of that fact as their authoritys to

                  Imprison &c. But as to persons in the contempt of the De

                  crees of the high Court of Chancery being bayled on habs

                  Corpus by one Iustice I know no Presidents, tho. I must

                  acknowledge the Judges of the said Courts of Comon Law

                  have resolved to bayle on comtempts in not obeying Injunc

                  tions and Especiall where the Complaints had remedy at

                  Comon Law or where barred by Stat. of premunire to re

                  examine their Iudgmt given in the Kings Courts. Yet note

                  that where any such Enlargments have been It was p tot.

                  Cur. & non p mo Capital Justit.

                    As to this perticular case surely Mr Smithson never under

                  stood its Circumstances, for when I reflect that the Court of

                  Chancery in England has power to relieve in any case where

                  the Comon Law is defective, certainly this new Settled

                  province where there is no Stat. to prohibite her Majestys

                  being also Supreme as well in Spiritualls as Temporalls and