Barnardiston king b dr snape and the bishop OF lincoln vide ante the chief  justice deliver now the resolution of the court upon this case he Barnardiston  king b er p say the principal matter they rely upon be the same with that in  Philips and berry case Mod that wherever a general visitor be appoint and his  time for visit be prescribe to particular state time the court will always  construe that to be understand of his visit ex duty and not to hinder his come  in at other time upon a private appeal unless there be direct negative word to  that effect for if it be not for such a construction the body will be leave  without any redress in the mean time he say too that the reason of that  resolution warrant they in another they make that wherever a visitor be  appoint only to particular purpose and his time of visit confine in this  manner they will always construe it with the distinction before mention he  observe too that the bishop in the present case be general visitor for the  word in the recital in the statute of visitation make he so and the conclusion  reckon up all the instance which it can be suppose there may be occasion for  exercise this authority but though it have not they be yet of opinion a  certain number of particular instance will not have circumscribe the general  jurisdiction before give and here he think a proper rule may be apply that  where particular word be in the same sentence which the general word be in  they may be construe to abridge the sense of they but where they be in  distinct clause the second shall only be construe as a lose enumeration and  especial too in ancient write where perhaps so much accuracy be not observe as  now there be then as to the negative word so much insist on they be of opinion  they do not at all refer to this right which be now claim as visitor for the  word be quoad alian that what be mention as visitor but they think they may  well refer to the general notion which be at that time receive of his visit as  ordinary the chief justice then give a answer to some of the main objection  the first he take notice of be the provost be visitor himself as to some  particular thing but that be observe can not be for the bishop have undoubted  a right of control what he have do when be come in upon a general visitation  and all visitor be necessary in the very notion of the word final judge then  as to the objection about the oath he say it be determine that will not bind  the party in Applefords case and in Colworths cite in that of Philips and  berry but beside in the present case the oath be far from be general for it be  that he will not appeal when he shall be punish secundum exigentiani  statutoram however there be one good effect that this oath may have that if  the appeal be find unjust it will be good cause to expel he for these reason  he say the court be resolve that a consultation shall be award upon which Mr  Harding as counsel for the bishop say he do not know but it may be proper  Barnardiston king b to move for cost but the court observe that they can not  give cost but where some Act of parliament have allow they and then Mr strange  say that the statute of king William do give cost on demurrer in prohibition  upon which the court tell they that if so they have a right to they without  make this application