Bentley versus bishop elien in b r of the power of visitor in prohibition the  plaintiff declare that h December in the thirteenth year of his reign find  Trinity college in Cambridge and that his successor queen Elizabeth make a  body of statute the that whereof be entitle de instructress si res to drive  out amotione and speak of the bishop of Ely there be the word to make straight  to punish to drive out that he be cite to appear before the bishop as special  visitor appoint by the say that statute of Elizabeth to answer to article  which be insist upon as violation of the statute some of which be long before  the last Act of grace and other of they be for set the college seal in  conjunction with the fellow the bishop for a consultation set out a former  statute of Edward in these word visitator bishop eliensis sit and aver that he  be visitor general and as such have a right to proceed upon the article the  doctor put in a immaterial replication to which there be a demurrer and after  several argument these point be rule fortescue first that though several of  the fact charge appear to be before the Act of grace yet they be not pardon by  that statute but be still inquireable by the visitor there be two sort of  corporation first those that be for public government second those that be for  private charity the first of these be govern by the commonlaw but the second  be the creature of the founder and govern by his private law not that the  particular person be exempt from the commonlaw but the body in general be and  as these be private law they be in the nature of trust and the breach of they  be no crime cognisable by the commonlaw the king power of pardon arise from  his have the executive power in he and though in this case the king be founder  yet the breach of his private statute be not crime against the crown the crime  pardon be such as be against the public law and statute of the realm whereas  those be in the nature of domestic rule for the better order of a private  family fortescue er p second that though several of the crime impute to he for  violation of the statute of the college appear to be do by he in conjunction  with other yet that be no reason to exclude the inquiry of the visitor suppose  the whole body shall join in set the seal to a deed to encourage a murder will  they not be several punishable in their natural capacity if he be not concur  in the Act and it be only as to he a virtual consent as include in the  body that will be proper matter of excuse if a power be lodge in two or three  justice and they abuse it be they not several punishable for it their be  corporate act therefore be no ground for a prohibition three that by the  statute Edward the bishop of Ely and his successor be appoint general visitor  it be bishop eliensis without any Christian name accord to the case h b power  in act of parliament give to fortescue bishop or justice will vest in their  successor without the word for the time be fourthly that though the three  former determination be in favour of the suit below yet the prohibition ought  to stand because the bishop have not cite the doctor upon the foot of his  general visitatorial power but as a special visitor appoint by the that  statute of Elizabeth which the court say he be not for be before appoint  general visitor there remain no far power in the crown with regard to enlarge  the visitatorial power they say it be a question they will not determine  whether when the crown have give statute and appoint a visitor the successor  can any way alter or adnul the former statute the practice indeed have be  otherwise but it have never be determine to be good for this last reason they  be all of opinion that the prohibition ought to stand and give judgement  accord this judgement be afterward reverse in the house of lord upon a writ of  error and the prohibition be order to stand as to many and a consultation  award as to other of the article exhibit before the bishop against the doctor  and the bishop be order to pay the doctor for his cost fortescue de term pasch  george I in the king bench settlement OF the poor