case the bishop OF cloyne against gibbons error out of Ireland error from  Ireland of vicarsgeneral if the chancellor of a diocese be faulty the  archbishop have cognizance of it not the bishop Qure S c holt institution and  induction dr lane if a chancellor of a diocese commit a irregularity in his  office the bishop can call he to a account in his own court but ought to carry  it before the archbishop a vicargeneral be create by a bishop but his office  be by the law and he may exercise such a jurisdiction as belong to his office  which be a general jurisdiction and the bishop can hear cause himself neither  matrimonial nor other but it must be do by his proper officer and if he refuse  or neglect to make a officer the law have take care to provide that the  archbishop and then the queen shall every presentation ought to be under the  seal of the consistory court for modern report er p he say he know no other  seal neither have the bishop any other court but the consistory court bishop  may delegate all external jurisdiction but consecration of church or  confirmation c which be annex to the person of the bishop there be no  difference between a vicargeneral and a chancellor Linwood a lindw lib title  pa a describe what the vicargeneral may do a vicargeneral can dispose of any  live in the gift of the bishop because it be annex to the bishop as his  personal property b Li decr ti b institution and induction be a act of the law  and though by his grant the vicargeneral institution and induction he be not  conclude himself yet his vicar have a concur jurisdiction he compare the  except institution and induction in the general grant to the chancellor modern  report to a lord of a manor grant a patent to his steward reserve that his  steward shall not take a surrender nor make a admittance this he say be a  nullity for when the bishop or lord have make a officer the law give he his  power reservatis we such a jurisdiction of itself do not exclude the  chancellor but only leaves a power to the bishop which otherwise he will have  lose and so they have a concur jurisdiction dr Floyd a vicargeneral be a  temporal officer and the bishop may have turn he out at pleasure but by the  confirmation of the dean and chapter and by the temporal law he have a  freehold but the intent of the law be not to give away all the authority from  the bishop but the chancellor be only to assist and help the bishop he say the  law will not take notice of a certificate upon a capias excommunicate from a  chancellor for in the eye of the law the bishop be the ordinary there be a  difference between judge ordinarii and judge delegat in the civil law grant of  licence to schoolmaster belong to the bishop and no chancellor ever pretend to  this he say that by a general grant of chancellorship the power of institution  induction c do not pass without special word and so many other thing which be  inherent in a bishop but if institution belong to the office of a vicargeneral  then such a revocation be void and repugnant which the court seem to agree in  the court order search how their ancient patent run and if there be ancient  any revocation holt chief justice say be think the bishop may sit in court for  he be a judge but he can deprive his chancellor of his temporal fee if before  the statute of Henry the eight which enable layman to be chancellor  institution de jure belong to the chancellor then reserve this now be void but  if it require special word to pass it then it may be reserve but it be a  matter of great moment the court order it to be argue again next term in  Trinity term in the five year of queen whether the judge be unanimous of  opinion that the judgement give in Ireland for a consultation shall be reverse  holt chief justice say the bishop can not cite Gibbons for take the money due  on the parishioner at the time of the sequestration for the bishop have the  same remedy for the ecclesiastical duty which the incumbent shall have have  and that be against the parishioner who possible pay these duty in their own  wrong if the ordinary appoint a sequestrator and any person disturb he  trespass lie this be a good induction de facto and such incumbent shall not be  draw into the spiritual court by reason of the institution Powell justice the  institution shall not be controvert after induction in the spiritual court so  their foundation here of the bishop be wrong and he show he as if the  sequestration be still in be and take no notice of the institution nor  induction and it be for retain the due which shall belong to the sequestrator  which be ill for the sequestrator shall complain in fine the trial of  induction belong to the temporal court powys justice they will bring the trial  of induction ad other examen the parishioner shall be sue for the due and not  Gibbons but the bishop take the parson for the wrongdoer gold justice accord  for after induction the spiritual court can try it for that be in truth only  to try whether the induction be good which be cognisable at law the judgement  be reverse modern report er p