cccxii palm and the bishop OF PETERBOROUGHS case quare hinder refusal of the  bishop in a quare hinder by Margaret palm against the bishop of Peterborough  who plead that the plaintiff do present unto he one I S of who the bishop ask  if be be within order and if he have his letter of order and because the  presentee can not show the bishop his order he refuse he and command he to  come another time and show to he his order and that the presentee do never do  it nor offer to the say bishop his say order without that be do disturb he in  other manner and by periam and Anderson it be no plea for upon his own show  the defendant be a disturber for although that the statute of Elizabeth  require that no man shall be admit to a benefice with cure of soul if he be  not a deacon yet the statute do not extend to compel the clark to show his  order and therefore when he for such a frivolous cause do refuse to admit he  the same be a disturbance and afterward exception be take to the count because  that the plaintiff be tenant for life of the advowson of the gift of her  husband have not allege any presentment in her husband or any of his ancestor  but only in her self but that be not allow for that point have be late  overrule in this court in the case betwixt Specot and the bishop of Exeter h  adjudge accord way h and the clear opinion of the court be that the count be  good notwithstanding that exception as to the matter of the plea the court  doubt of it for the plea be that the bishop demand of the clerk present his  letter of order and letter testimonial of his good behaviour and his letter  missive and be do not show they but request of the bishop the space of a week  to satisfy the bishop in those point which be allow unto he but he never  return for which cause the bishop afterward refuse c and it be say upon that  plea that the clark who be present ought to make proof to the bishop that he  be a deacon and that he have order otherwise by the statute of Elizabeth the  bishop be not bind to admit such clark but the statute do not compel the clark  to show his order for perhaps he have lose they but how his order shall be  prove it be much doubt Anderson the bishop may examine he upon oath if he have  order or not but as to the letter testimonial of his good behaviour and  sufficiency the bishop ought to examine the same himself and if he give day  and defer the admission because he be not resolve therein he be a disturber if  the clark come to he in a convenient time and the bishop can refuse a clark  for the want of letter testimonial cor degg   Rep degg pasch Elizabeth in the  common plead