CCXXVIII. The Queen and the Bishop of Gloucester's Case. Trin. 29 Eliz. In the Kings Bench.
THe Queen recovered in a Quare Impedit against the Bishop of Gloucester, and one S. in which Quare Impedit, the Bishop pleaded as Ordinary; scil. Quod ipse nihil habet nec habere clamat in Ecclesia praedict. neq, in Advocatione ejusdem nisi Admissionem, Institutionem, &c. And now the Bishop and S. the Incumbent brought a Writ of Error; And, If this Writ of Error brought joyntly by the Bishop and the Incumbent, was well brought, was the Question? Some held, That the Bishop had not cause to bring Error, for that he had disclaimed in the Church, and the Patronage of it: For if in a Praecipe quod reddat the Tenant dis∣claims, he shall never have a Writ of Error. 16 E. 3. 7. Fitz. Error, 78. And Note, That in the Writ of Error at the Bar, the perclose was, Ad grave damnum Episcopi; whereas the Bishop could not be grieved by the said Iudgment, because he had nothing, nor claimed any thing in the Church, &c.
Wray, The Writ of Error had been the better, if those words, (ad grave damnum Episcopi) had been left out, for the Bishop hath lost nothing.
And it was Objected by some, If the Iudgment in this Case be reversed, the usual Iudgment cannot be given; scil. That the Bishop shall be restored to all which he lost, &c.
Wray, The Bishop shall joyn for Conformity of Law, and for privity of Record; and the Plea of the Bishop is not so strong as a Disclaymer: For in case of a Disclaimer, the Iudgment is, That the Plaintiff shall take nothing by his Writ; but in the case of the Bishop here, the Iudgment is, Quod querens recuperet prae∣sentationem suam versus dictum Episcopum ad Ecclesiam praedictam.