case dom king versus sneller russell et all supersedeas to a writ de excom  capiend deny though the significavit be general and uncertain and say that the  method be to proceed by habeas corpus but a appeal be bring a supersedeas be  grant the defendant be excommunicate for a contumacy and a writ of de  excommunicate capiend award it be move for a supersedeas to the writ by reason  that the Vernon chancery case er p significavit be general and uncertain but  it be say by the Lord chancellor that a supersedeas can not be grant upon that  ground but if the excommunication be not for any of the offence within the  statute of Elizabeth and the significavit do not express the same the remedy  express appoint upon that statute be a habeas corpus and upon the return of it  the party shall be discharge but it be then allege that a appeal be bring and  security give to prosecute it with effect a supersedeas be award the Lord  chancellor say that the appeal be a supersedeas of itself this court will not  grant supersedeas of writ de excom capiend on motion for want of addition nor  because not say that the defendant be commorant in the diocese king v Burrard  p wms nor because executrix be in custody under the writ dispute the debt upon  equitable ground the king v Blatch Ves et vide Trebec v Keith atk the writ de  excomm capiend never direct to the warden of the fleet but the word or other  officer in the statute that Elizabeth cap construe to mean bailiff of liberty  or the coroner but not the warden of the fleet the writ be viscountiel and  must be returnable into king b vide captain Strudwickes case p wms and it be  returnable in the term next after the testae vide the statute so after the  return of the writ be out this court have no authority to quash it and  application must be to king b ex part little atk but king b have no cognizance  and the jurisdiction of this court remain till the return of the writ the  court so incline in king v Burrard ub sup and so adjudge in Barlow v Collins p  wms n and every writ of excom cap must be make out in term time vide the stat  see and note it seem that before the stat Elizabeth the party can not be  discharge but by supersedeas in this court king v foul salk raym and say the  recital of the significavit must be certain the queen v hill salk et vide the  queen v bishop of saint David and the queen v Sangway ibidem by stat g c  excommunication be not to be pronounce except as a spiritual censure for  offence of ecclesiastical cognizance but in case of contempt a writ de  contumace to take in hand be to issue instead of the writ de excommunicate to  take in hand