Les reportes del cases in Camera Stellata, 1593 to 1609 from the original ms. of John Hawarde edited by William Paley Baildon Published 1894 Page 58
In Camera Stellata, 1 Julii,le jour apres le terme de trinitye, Elizab. 38, Anno Domini 1596, die jovis
Serjeant Harris moved for Garter, principal King of Arms, against Brooke and Clarentius, for reference of witnesses to Baron Ewens: ruled by the Lord Keeper that both sides should be referred to him to examine what persons concern the matter and the point now in question, and what persons are material to it, and they to have continuance on each side, but otherwise not.
Les reportes del cases in Camera Stellata, 1593 to 1609 from the original ms. of John Hawarde edited by William Paley Baildon Published 1894 Pages 66-68
In Camera Stellata, coram consillio ibidem, die veneris, 4° Februarij, 1596, Elizab. 39, termino Hillarij.
There was great expectation for the cause between the Earl of Kent, Clarencieux, and Brookesmouthe, a herald, and others plaintiffs, against Rotheram and Garter, now named Dethike, defendants. The offences were supposed, the wearinge & partinge of the Erle of Kent his cote of his baronies of Ruthin, Hastinges & Wastinges, by Rotheram, given by Garter falsely, corruptely, contrarye to his owne bookes, & to his owne knowledge, & after givinge the same Cote under his hande & sealle to the erle of Kente, & yet lastelye making a testimonialle under the sealle of the office to countenaunce & warrante Rotherams Coate wherebye the Erle of Kente showlde loose all his lyvinge, his three baronies, & the Queene her Castle of Ruthin & a [Page 67] 1000 li lande per annum boughte of the late Erle of Kente. The title was thus opened. Edmonde, Erle of Kente in 4 E. 4 had issue Anthonye par un venter & George par auter venter. Anthony died without issue; George entailed the land and the honours in special tail, and thus the now Earl of Kent had conveyed to him the land and the honours as heir in special tail. Rotheram and Garter say that true it is that Edmond had issue Anthonie, but Anthony had issue Katherine, who intermarried with our ancestor, Sir Thomas Rotheram; and Edmond, the father of Anthony, entailed the land and the baronies, but not the Earldom, to his heirs in special tail, and so Rotheram is heir in special tail. The issue [in the case] is, did Anthony die without issue or not. Of the whole matter there are three parts: 1, of the title to the arms or coats 2, of the right to the baronies, which have continued in the Earls of Kent from 4 Edward IV. without question; 3, if Anthony had issue Katherine or not. As to the proof of the falsehood and corruption of Garter, a great offence in him, the Lord Keeper and the Lords Chief Justices doubted if it could properly be tried in this Court, and they judged that it could not. As to the title to arms, it should properly be decided by the Lord Marshall and the Lord Constable of England, and titles of honour and dignity, such as baronies and the like, are to be decided by the Queen herself, who is the head and fountain and disposer of all royalties, honours and dignities; and so it was decided between the Earl of Arundell and the Earl of Devonshire, 37 Henry VI. Statute of 13 Richard II. Lord Scroope and Gravener [sic], appeal to the King. And it was so sentenced by the [majority of the] voices, but the Court was divided; and it was ruled by the Judges, to whom the Lords agreed [to refer], that it should not be dismissed; as to the issue, did Anthony have issue Katherine or not, it was referred to the common law, being a matter triable by the country; and after the trial of this, the [Page 68] falsehood, corruption, and malicious offence of Garter will be tried in this Court; for by many the offence was [deemed] great and heinous, and more worthy than many others to be sentenced in this Court. By the Earl of Essex: There cannot be a greater offence; for as God has reserved to Himself the authority to give virtue, so He has given to His vicar on earth, our Queen, the reward and remuneration of virtue, which are honours, baronies, and titles of dignity; and therefore to deceive her as to these rewards is a grievous offence and worthy of great punishment.
see STAC Kent