A kind of porter et scholar university cantabrigiae v cross Mod post the  plaintiff bring a quare hinder by name of chancellor and scholar of the  university of Cambridge to present to the charge of long Addingham in  Yorkshire upon the statute of James c for vest the presentation of benefice  belong to the Popish recusant in the university and set forth the conviction  of sir W vavasor the patron the defendant pray judgement of the writ and plead  quod quer nominate et incorporate are et die impetrationis Br be nominate et  incorporate fuer per nomen chancellor a master et Sebolar universit cantabr et  non per nomen cancellar et scholar eniversit cantabr sive to some place  elsewhere nomin c to this the defendant demurrer and judgement of resp ouster  be give in c b upon this the defendant plead nul tiel record of the conviction  which be certify judgement final be give for the plaintiff and a gilbert case  writ of enquiry award upon the statute of W the defendant bring a writ of  error and the principal error assign be that the judgement of respon ouster be  erroneous and the writ ought to have abate Mr reeves pro quer in error argue  that it be essential to a corporation to have a name and it be like a name of  baptism in a particular person and if mistake may be plead in abatement he  admit that a corporation may have one name if incoporation and another to sue  by but in this case it be confess that the plaintiff be incorporate by the  name of chancellor master and scholar and nothing appear on the record to show  that they have any other name that there be many case in the law where a grant  of land may amount to gilbert case er p give a new name to a corporation but  that all of they stand upon their particular reason which can not affect this  case that it be a general rule lie down in the case of Alton and wood   that  the king grant shall not enure to a double intent and that the statute be  within the reason and must be take by the same rule that the college of  physician in London have one name of incorporation and another to sue by but  in a action bring by they against doctor salmon Trin W holt chief justice hold  that it be well bring by gilbert case their name of incorporation and if the  matter have be res integran and undetermined he shall have hold it in if it  have be bring by the other name that in the chancellor of Oxford case Rep the  donation make to the university of these presentation be put on the same  foundation as the case of a will and therefore any description whereby the  donee may be certain know will be sufficient cro so that be not the case of  grant the corporate name need not be strict pursue whether make to or by  corporation lane but in writ the same exact name idem syllable et word must be  strict pursue Rep b h Inst     stat de Terris templar e all the precedent in  these case be by the name of incorporation Rep hob winch the declaration be  defective in that it do not sufficient appear that the patron sir W v be a  recusant convict for want of a averment that he be above the age of sixteen at  that time which be the qualification require by the Act and come in here only  under the recital of the indictment gilbert case Mr Lutwyche for the defendant  in error insist that the statute grant to the university by the name of  chancellor and scholar have enable they to sue by it that the law be contrary  to the rule in I Rep for that the king grant shall enure to a double intent so  as by the same word to incorporate and grant that the case of a statute be  strong than that of a charter it be admit that the grant of a subject to the  chancellor and scholar of the university of Cambridge will be good then it be  no material variance and must have the same construction here in the case of  the Collegeo of physician it be hold good both way and for the same reason it  may be so here the same resolution be mich whether Prses el coll v roll object  that the plea in abatement be in plead that a plea in abatement ought to be  certain to every intent and take off every case that may possible make the  writ good this plea amount to no more than that on the day of purchase the  writ they be incorporate I e have their charter give they by such a name now  this may be true and yet before that they may be a corporation gilbert case by  the name of chancellor and scholar or in case they be not incorporate at all  by any particular charter then this Act must of necessity incorporate they by  that name to enable they to take and it do not appear that they lose their  first name for no acceptance be show of that incorporation that this case  ought to be take as favourable as possible because of the difficulty of  justify under this Act appear by the case of Lord Peter and the university  Cambridge lev Lutw as to the exception to the declaration it be admit that the  age be set forth in the indictment which be a judgement by default must now be  take to be true Mr reeves reply if they have such a power of sue by a  different name that ought to have be show by their replication here be no  necessity for the construction of a double intent for the university be a body  corporate before and may take by this as a description but if that be  otherwise sure it do not follow that because the Act grant a capacity to take  that therefore it shall give a capacity to sue or grant the case where the  king grant have be construe to a double intent have be general for the benefit  of the crown e as where a rend have be reserve gilbert case in order to enable  the crown to demand that rend and in die it be hold that if the rend be  release the corporation be Self facto dissolve gilbert case er p Parker chief  justice as to the exception to the plea it be that they be now and such a day  be name and incorporate by this name and none other the word incorporation do  not speak the Act but the effect of a incorporation otherwise you must upon  this plea extend the same Act to different time if the university have a power  of sue by another name that shall have be show on their part and not the  negative part on the other side there be no occasion to make these word  incorporate word for the effect of they be to invest this inheritance in the  chancellor master and scholar who be a corporation before and therefore that  effect may be attain without make these word incorporate word Eyre justice I  can think it a consequence that because these word be a sufficient description  to take by therefore they must give a name to sue by suppose a devise to the  university of Cambridge can they sue by that name or to the church of saint  Andrew Holborn which gilbert case be hold to be a devise to the patron can the  parson sue by the name of the church roll Abr l and I powis justice semble  contra curian advisare vult