Juniata sentinel and Republican. [volume] (Mifflintown, Juniata County, Pa.) 1873-1955, 1877-09-05

referred the matter to the king. The
king sent for Philip de BrOi. and cross
questioned him in Becket's presence.
Ii was not denied that he had killed a
man. The king inquired what Beckett
was prepared to do. Becket's answer.
for the present and all similar cases,
was that a clerk i'm orders accused of
felony must be tried in the first instance
in an ecclesiastical court, and punished
according TO ecclesiastical law. If the
crime was found to be of peculiarly
dark kind, the accused might be de-
prived OF, his orders, and if he again Of
Tended, should lose his privilege. But
for the offence for which he was de-
prived he was not to be again tried or
punished: the deprivation itself was TO
suffice. The king, always moderate,
was unwilling to press the question 10
extremity. He condemned the judg-
ment of the bishop of Lincoln's court.
He insisted that the murderer should
have a real trial. But he appointed a
mixed commission of bishops and lay
men to try him, the bishops having the
preponderating voice. Philip de Broi
pleaded that he had made his purgation
in the regular manner, that he had made
his peace with the family of the man he
had killed, and that the matter was thus
ended. He apologized for having in
suited the sheriff, and professed himself
willing to make reasonable reparation.
The sentence of the commission was
that his beneficies should be sequestered
for two years, and that if the sheriff in
sisted upon it, he should be tiogged.
So weak a judgement showed Henry
the real value of Becke.'s theory. The
criminal clerk Was TO be amenable to the
law as soon as he had been degraded,
not BEFORE; and it was perfectly plain
that clerks never would be degraded.
They might .comit murder upon murder,
robbery upon robbery, and the law
would be unable to touch them. Ii
could not be. The king insisted that a
sacred profession should not he used as
a screen for the protection of felony.
He summoned the whole body of the
bishops to meet him in council at West
minister inOctober. The council met. The
archbishop was resolute. He replied
for the other bishops in an absolute re-
fusal TO make any concession. The
Judges and the laity generally were
growing excited. Had the clergy been
saints, the claims advanced by them
would have been scarcely tolerable.
Being what they were, such pretensions
We're ridiculous. Beckett might speak
in their name; he did not speak their
real opinions. Arnulf, bishop of Lis
ieuX. came over to use his influence
with Beckett, but he found him ineXor-
able. To risk the peace of the
Church in so indefensible a quarrel
seemed obstinate folly. The bishop of
Lisieux and several of the English pre-
lates wrote privately to the pope To en-
treat him to interfere. Alexander
had no liking for Beckett. He had
known him long, and had no belief in
the lately assumed airs of sanctity.
Threatened as he was by the emperor
and the anti-pope, he had no disposition
to quarrel with Henry, nor in the par
ticular question at issue does he seem
to have thought the archbishop in the
right. On the spot he despatched a le-
gate. a monk named Philip of Aumone,
to tell Beckett that he must obey the laws
of the realm. and submit to the kings
pleasure. The king was at Woodstock.
The archbishop, thus commanded, could
not refuse to obey. He repaired to the
court. He gave his promise. He un-
dertook, bona .fde et sine mdl0 iRgeRio, to
submit 10 the laws o the land, whatever
they might be found to be. But vague
engagement of th skind was unsatis-
factory, and might afterwards be evaded.
The question of the immunities of the
clergy had been publicly raised. The
attention of the nation had been called
lit. Once for all the position in which
the clergy were to stand to the law of
the land must be clearly and and finally
laid down. The judges had been di-
rected to inquire into the customs
which had been of use in England un-
der the kings grandfather, Henry /.
4 second council was called to meet at
Clarendon, near Winchester, in the fol-
lowing January, when these customs,
reduced to writing, would be placed in
the arehbishop's and bishops hands,
and they would be required to consent
10 them in detail.-NineteeRth Century.