case dean and chapter OF dublin versus DOWGATT Lord chancellor Cowper stram  whether error lie on a rule or award of a mandamus the archdeacon of Dublin  move for a mandamus in the court of king bench in Ireland to be direct to the  dean and chapter of Dublin command they to admit he to a stall in the  cathedral church of Dublin and to a vote in the chapter peer William and upon  that motion and argument thereon the court of b r there grant first a mandamus  then a alias and at last a peremptory mandamus afterward the dean and chapter  bring a writ of error issue out of the court of chancery here and returnable  in the court of b b at Westminster and it be move in regard the king bench in  Ireland have not make any return to the writ of error that the court of  chancery will order they to make their return and in the mean time to stay all  the proceed upon the mandamus for which purpose it be insist saint that a writ  of error be a writ of right and the king writ and the only remedy that the  subject have to be redress when wrong by the erroneous proceed in a inferior  court as the court of king bench in Ireland be with respect to the court of  king bench in England vide post Vol two friar v Barnard dly that if a writ of  error do not lie in this case on account of it be not be a judgement but only  a rule upon a motion yet the court of b b in Ireland ought to return this like  the case where the statute of James cap say that after issue join a habeas  corpus shall not remove a cause out of a inferior court still the inferior  court ought to make their return to the court from whence the habeas corpus  issue of the special matter though they have liberty to proceed  notwithstanding Carthew Watson v clark dly that upon a mandamus since the  statute relate to mandamuss annae cap which allow special plead to it it be  plain error lie but however there ought to be a return to the writ peer  William on the other side it be say that it be very true since the statute  which allow special plead to a mandamus error lie of a judgement thereon  because it be now in the nature of a action and cost be give by the statute  for that side which prevail peer William er p but this be no argument that  error lie of a mandamus where there be no plea to it and only a rule award for  the mandamus which be not in nature of a judgement that the late statute of  mandamuss do not extend to Ireland so that there can be no special plead by  way of replication to it as now there may be in England that this be like a  prohibition grant upon a motion of which no writ of error lie as be adjudge in  the house of lord in the bishop of saint David case who move for a prohibition  in the king bench to stay the proceed in the archbishop court in order to his  deprivation and the court of king bench deny it and on that the bishop of  saint David bring error in the house of lord who hold it do not lie salk ld  ray which be apprehend to be the same case but if there be a declaration upon  a prohibition aid a judgement give thereupon in such case error will lie but  it be say the court of b b in Ireland be dispose to show all obedienced  respect to the court of chancery and only desire time to consider what to  return and doubt whether this writ of error lie and that they will submit  until they shall make a return to the writ of error to stay proceed upon the  mandamus the court give they their own time peer William on this occasion  Parker c I who together with c I king and c b bury be desire by Lord  chancellor Cowper to assist at the motion say that the court of chancery may  supersede this writ of error because improvident to flow out if it be so also  he say that a mandamus since the late statute be in the nature of a action  special replication and plead therein be admit and cost give to either side  that prevail and that a case have happen in the king bench where judgement be  give upon special plead upon the late statute for the mandamus and the  defendant bring error and it be admit error lie yet this be hold to be no  supersedeas to the peremptory mandamus for that such a construction will quite  defeat the end of the statute and prevent the officer who be choose annual  from have any fruit of the mandamus and king c I take notice that the word of  the statute be that in case judgement be give for the mandamus a peremptory  mandamus shall be grant without delay vide sect upon return be make to the  writ of error it be afterward determine in the court of king b and affirm upon  appeal to the house of lord that no writ of error will lie upon award of a  peremptory mandamus bro p c so king v Hearle stram but see Kynaston v mayor of  Shrewsbury stram queen v paty salk peer William de term S the number three