CCCLXXV bishop and redmans case word which amount to covenant bishop a doctor  of the civil law bring a action of covenant against Redman archdeacon of  Canterbury and declare upon a indenture by which the defendant do constitute  the plaintiff official suum of his archdeaconry for three year and give to he  by the say indenture origination to send to to lead in whoever clergyman ad  whoever a favor ecclesiastic infra deanery predict and also probate of will  and further grant to he omnen of every sort deanery jurisdiction svan predict  without action of attacking denial restriction c after which doctor young be  create bishop of Rochester which be in the jurisdiction of the say  archdeaconry and the defendant take upon he to enthronize the say bishop in  his say church and take of he for his fee twenty noble whereupon the plaintiff  bring this action it be move for the defendant that upon the matter the action  do lie for the office of enthronizing or enstalling of a bishop do not pass by  the say indenture nor be there any word in the indenture that do extend unto  it for the bishop be not a clark and the plaintiff by the indenture have not  to do but with clarks not with bishop and it appear by the grant of subsidy by  the clergy in parliament that a bishop and a clark be distinct thing see tool  hereof to bear before clergyman c also the plaintiff have not to do with a  bishopric but with benefice and a bishopric be not a benefice but a high thing  and further the plaintiff have power to admit and induct which do not extend  to install or inthronization for that belong to a bishop and the court be  clear of opinion that by this grant there do not pass any power to instal or  inthronize bishop and the general word I e all men of every sort jurisdiction  deanery prediction do not mend the matter for the word prediction do not  Leonard er p restrain the word all men of every sort c but admit that it be  move if upon this indenture covenant lie for there be not any express covenant  yet the word without action of attacking denial restriction do amount to so  much to make the defendant subject to his action if the matter in itself will  have serve for he and so be the opinion of the court hill Elizabeth in the  king bench