%6o Constitutional History. [chap.
treatment of delinquent clergy1. The promise of archbishop
Arundel was not fulfilled.
Into the peculiar questions of ecclesiastical jurisdiction we
are not called to inquire, for, in so far as it worked within its
own proper sphere, its proceedings had no bearing on the
subject before us. One further point, and that a most important
one, the question of appeals to Rome, must be likewise briefly
noticed and dismissed.
Rarity of 403. Except in the earliest days of Anglo-Saxon Christianity,
ɪjeaɪs from when AVilfrid carried his suit to Rome, contrary to the decisions
to Rome. of the kings and witan of Northumbria, there are no traces of
appeals to the pope earlier than the Norman Conquest. Re-
course was indeed from time to time had to the holy see for the
determination of points touching the bishops for which insular
history and custom furnished no rules ; in the ninth century
a pope interceded to obtain the restoration of a dethroned king
of Northumbria2, and king Kenulf of Mercia, who had obtained
papal confirmation of the restored dignity of Canterbury, is
said to have declared that neither for pope nor for Caesar
would he consent to the restoration of archbishop Wulfred3.
but on these three occasions the points at issue were political
rather than legal, and the action of the papal envoy that of
ɪɪɪ Anglo- a mediator rather than a judge. Even in the later days of the
West-Saxon dynasty, when intercourse with the continental
powers was much more frequent than before, the case of an
application to Rome for leave to marry within the prohibited
degrees seems to be the only recorded instance of a judicial
resort thither ; and in that case Dunstan is found resisting the
papal mandate1. There can be no doubt that the Norman
kings, influenced by continental usage, and not in the first
instance unwilling to extend the authority of the papacy to
which they knew themselves to be indebted, allowed the intro-
duction of the practice of referring cases to the successor of
S. Peter as supreme judge, although they did, as much as they
could, restrain the practice by making their own licence an
l See the petition of 1410, above, p. 65, note 4. 2 Councils, &c., iii. 561.
s Ibid, iii. 587, 588, 602, 4 Memorials of S. Dunstan, p. 67.
XIX.]
Appeals to Home.
361
absolutely necessary preliminary. Anyhow, even in the reign Introdnc-
of the Conqueror, disputed questions were carried to Home for appeals,
decision. William had before the Conquest been a suitor there
in the matter of his marriage. The questions at issue between
the sees of York and Canterbury were debated there. The
bishop of Durham in his quarrel with William Rufus 1 threat-
ened to appeal to the pope in a tone that shows the idea of
such an appeal to be familiar to the persons to whom he spoke :
and one of Anselm’s charges against that king was that he
hindered the prosecution of appeals2. It would seem certain
from these facts that thus early, in matters which the royal
tribunal was incompetent to decide, a right of appeal under
royal licence was recognised. That Henry of Blois, whilst he ξ'fegtio≈
filled the office of legate, from n39 to 1144, introduced the of ι‰is.
practice, is an unwarranted conclusion from the words of the
contemporary writer, which seem to refer rather to appeals
to his own Iegatine jurisdiction than to that of the court of
Rome3. But although the custom was older, the frequency
of appeal much increased under Stephen. In a Iegatine council
held by archbishop Theobald in the king’s presence, in 1151,
three appeals were made to the pope 4. We have noted the
cases of disputed elections that occurred in his reign. Early Mnitipiiea-
in the next reign we find a matrimonial cause, that of Richard peals.
of Anesty, referred to Rome, and the correspondence of John of
Salisbury shows that in almost every department of ecclesiastical
jurisdiction the system was in full working before the election
of Becket to the primacy 5. By the Constitutions of Clarendon
Henry attempted to stop or at least to control it. He forbade l⅛Λi<ι∣ien
ιnι1..,,, ., ,. , by Henry II
benenced ecclesiastics to quit the realm without licence, and, in the Con-
n ∙ 1 1 1 . λ Stitutions of
having provided a regular succession of appellate courts from clarendon.
that of the archdeacon to that of the archbishop, ordered that
without royal assent controversy should proceed no further6.
This restriction of the liberty of appeal was one of the great
points of the struggle with Becket, and, when the king was
1 See above, vol. i. p. 477.
s H. Hunt. f. 226.
', Foed. i. 20,
Anselm, Epp. lib. iiɪ. ep. 40.
Ibid.
Select Charters, p. 138.