bishop of London v mercer company Trin g quare hinder quare hinder and  judgement for plaintiff a Writ of error bring and judgement affirm sergeant  Yelfield move that the defendant in error may have his damage and cost pro  dilation performance accord to the provision of h cap by which statute it be  enact that if the defendant or tenant before execution sue out any Writ of  error to reverse judgement in delay of execution that in that case if  judgement be affirm or the plaintiff in error nonsuit c the defendant in error  shall recover his cost and damage for this delay and wrong full vexation at  the discretion of the justice and cite a case in cro car where damage be give  in a Writ of error in quare hinder to the value of the live Mr fazakerly  content the question in this case arise upon the h c which statute give cost c  where none be before give by the commonlaw and wherever a statute be  introductory of a new law nothing shall be construe to be within the equity of  the Act but only what be within the express word of it and say by Lord Hobart  that such a Act be a negative and exclude all other case than W Kelynge er p  such as be express mention in the Act itself the court will therefore judge  whether this be such a Writ of error as fall within the description of the Act  and if it do not appear to be bring to delay execution only and create  vexation and trouble to the defendant it can be such a Writ as fall within the  intention of the statute it be in the memory of the court with what solemnity  this case be argue and what strong objection be make in support of the error  and though they be at last overrule yet the court take a considerable time to  consider of their judgement it can therefore be conceive that to delay  execution only or that any other vexatious intent can be the inducement to the  party to bring his Writ of error and consequent do not come within the  description of the Act in the case of smith and smith cro car error of a  judgement in formedon in remainder and the judgement affirm and because this  Writ be bring before execution and thereby execution delay it be move to have  cost assess to the defendant accord to the h but it be adjudge that forasmuch  as W Kelynge there be no cost or damage recover or allow in the first action  so that no execution be delay by only for the land that in this case no cost  be Allowable by the say statute so it be plain that no cost be to be give for  the detention of the land or to the suspension of the profit of the live by  the Writ of error but only for the suspension of the damage which be to be  recover by the judgement and if they mean no more than this we shall not then  have litigate the matter with they if the value of the live be to be the  measure of the damage in this case the plaintiff will have a double  satisfaction in value by the stat of h where a sequestration be appoint he be  to account with the next incumbent for the reception of the profit and we have  a affidavit that a sequestration have be appoint I will glad know what damage  the patron who be defendant can have sustain in this case suppose there have  be no Writ of error the profit of the live must have go to the incumbent he be  delay indeed in his right of presentation but that be not a thing Accountable  for if this construction shall prevail it will in a manner take away all writ  of error for when so severe a penalty attend they as the value of the live it  will deter all people from bring they notwithstanding the Writ shall in truth  be bring to try the opinion of another court vent foot v Berkeley judgement in  ejectment Writ of error bring and judgement affirm b pray cost for his delay  and charge but can not have they for no cost be in such case at commonlaw and  the stat h give they only where error be bring for delay of execution and  though he have not execution of his term yet he have it of his cost sergeant  Belfeild and Mr strange by way of reply two point be insist upon by Mr  fazakerly first that no damage be give by the statute in this case and his d  objection be to the measurement of they it be insist that the statute must be  construe strict be introductory of a new law but this be a remedial law to  prevent delay in execution and therefore to be explain liberal the court will  inquire quo mind the Writ of error be bring but by the event of the Writ as to  the second objection the two case cite out of crook sufficient prove the value  and quantum of the damage that be to be recover by the plaintiff in this case  that they shall be the full profit of the live as find by the jury and no  deduction for allowance to a curate in the interim for supply the cure as to  what be object that a sequestration be appoint who must account to the next  incumbent that be not the present question it be what the plaintiff be entitle  to and not what a three person may be entitle to advowson be asset and to keep  out the clerk be a damage to the patron W Kelynge Lord chief justice Raymond  this case require some consideration the Act of parliament that give damage in  this case be a remedial law to prevent delay in execution but not to be take  strict in a limit sense the court be not to determine quo mind the Writ of  error be bring but must judge by the event the statute indeed leaves it to the  discretion of the justice but that be only as to the quantum it do not appear  what damage can have accrue to the patron by this delay to make the plaintiff  in error answer so large as the value of the live amount to seem to be a hard  construction page and probin of the same opinion say adjournatur and the court  afterward give judgement and resolve that the value of the live shall not be  give in damage but only the interest of the pound be the W Kelynge er p damage  recover in the quare hinder for have there be no Writ of error bring the clerk  and not the patron who be the plaintiff must have have the profit of the live  therefore the patron have sustain no damage upon that account by the delay of  execution but the damage intend by the statute in this case arise from the  delay give to the plaintiff in prevent execution of the damage give upon the  quare hinder and because the Writ of error have be depend three year adjudge  that interest at pound per cent shall be pay from the time the Writ of error  be bring to the time that judgement be give upon it vide cro Elizabeth  Penruddock and clerk