admittance for two things are necessary to Phisitians that is learning and experience and upon that there is the proverb Experto credo Roberto And the Statute intends that none shall practise here but those which are most learned and expert more then ordinary And for that the Statute provides that none shall practise here without allowance and examination by the Bishop of London and the Deane of Pauls and four learned Doctors But in other places the examination is referred only to the Bishop of the Diocesse and the reason of the difference is for that that London is the hart of the Kingdome And here the King and his Court the Magistrates and Judges of the Law and other Magistrates are resident and with this agreed the government of other well governed Cities in Italy and other Nations as it appeares by the preamble of the said Letters Patents and it appeares by the Statute that this was not intended to extend to Imposters only for that that the word Imposter is not mentioned in the Statute And the Statute provides that they shall be punished as well for doing and using as for ill using And also it is provided that the Statute of 1. Marie 1. Parliament chap. 9. That the Gardians Goalers or Keepers of the Wardes Goales and Prisons within the City and precinct of that shall receive into his Prison all such person and persons so offending which are sent or committed to them and those safely shall keep without Bayl till the party so committed shall be discharged by the said President or other person by the said Colledge to that authorised by which it appeares that the Goalers Keepers of Prisons have power to retain such which are committed That then the President shall have power to commit for things Implyed are as strong as things Expressed as it appeares by the Com. Stradlinge and Morgans Case And also in the Earle of Leicesters Case where it is agreed that Joynture before Coverture cannot be waved and this is implyed within the Statute of 27. H. 8. And so the Statute of 2. Ed. 6. Provides that after seven yeares Tythes shall be payd by which it is Collected by Implycation that during seven yeares Tythes shall not be payd and so he prayed Judgement for the Defendants Dodridge Serjeant of the King for the Plaintiff said that the Statute of 24 H. 8. chap. 5. and the Letters Patents gives power to four Censors to punish for ill executing doing and using the faculty of a Phisitian and the Plaintiff was not charged for ill executing of it doing or using But it is averred where Revera the Plaintiff was nothing sufficient to exercise the said Art and being examined lesse apt to answer and thereupon they forbade him and being sent for and not appearing was amerced five pound and order that he should be Arrested and being Arrested upon his appearance being examined if he would submit himselfe to the said Colledge he answered and confessed that he had practised within the said City being a Doctor of physick as aforesaid as wel to him it was lawfull and that he would practise here againe for which he was committed to Prison So that he was amerced for his contempt in the using of the said Art and committed to Prison for his answer upon his examination And he conceived that there are two questions considerable First if the Colledge may restraine a Doctor of phisick of his practise in London Secondly admitting that they may then if these are the causes for which they may commit by their Letters Patents the first reason is drawn from the Letters Patents and the said Statutes in which he said that the intent of the King was the end of his work And this intent shall be expounded for three reasons apparent in the words contained in the Grant First Intempestive Conatibus occurrere Secondly Improborum Hominum qui medicinam Magis avaritiae suae causa quam ullius bonae Conscientiae fiducia profitebantur audaciam Compescere Thirdly which would invite learned men to practise here and for that would quod Collegium prefectum Doctorum et graviorum virorum qui medicinarent in urbe nostra Londino et suburbibus infra septem millia passium in urbe quaqâ—â— versus publice Exerceant institui volumus et imparamus And further he said that there are three sorts of men which meddle with the Body of a man First is the learned man which reades all Bookes extant and his knowledge is speculative and by that he knew the nature of all simples And the second is practive the knowledge of which is only his experience he may give Probatum est But the ignorance of the cause of the disease and the nature of the things which he applies for the cure of that And the third is an Imposter which takes upon him the knowledg which he hath not and every of them the Colledge may punish for Male utenda faciendo vel exequendo by what way they will And this was not the first care which was had for in the 9. H. 5. was a private Act made for Phisitians by which there is great regard to them which are learned and educated in the University And for that the Act provides that they shall not be prejudicall to any of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge and with this agrees 3. H. 8. 11. and the priviledges of them and the Docti et graves homines mentioned in the Letters Patents are the learned men mentioned in the Act for the Statute provides that they shall punish according to these Statutes and late edicts And by the former Lawes the Universities that their priviledges were excepted and by their former Statutes the Letters Patents ought to be directed for it is referred to them Also the Statutes of this Realme have alwaies had great respect to the Gradiats of the Universities and it is not without cause for Sudavit et Alsit and hath no other reward but this degree which is Doctor and for that the Statute of 21 H. 8. prefers Graduates and provides that Doctors of Divinity or Batchelors shall be capable of two Benefices with Cure without dispensation And so 13. Eliz. provides that none shall be presented to a Benefice above the value of thirty pound per annum if he be not a Doctor or Bachelor of Divinity And to the objection that none shall practise in London or seven miles circute of it without licence that this clause shall be expounded according to the matter and to that he agreed for the other branches of the Statute are made to cherish grave and learned men and for that it shall not be intended that this branch was made for the punishment of those but of others which the Statute intended to punish And to the second objection that every Doctor is not the learned and grave man intended within the Statute for the knowledge of many of them is only speculative without practise to that he answered that
l. as it appears by Fleta and Brian the authority of the Marshall was absolute in civill and criminall causes at the Common Law and that Statute restrains them for Debts but not for Trespasse of what nature soever and therefore see the Statute of 30 l. 1. 5 E. 3. ch 2. and 10 E. 3. ch 2. Swaffe versus Solley Trin. 14 Jacobi rotulo 689. An Action of Trespass brought wherefore he took his Close the Defendant justifies for a way the Plaintiff replies that he did the Trespass of his own wrong without any cause alledged and so an Issue joyned and after a Verdict for it was moved in arrest of Judgement that the Issue was not well reined and prayed a new Triall because the Issue ought to be speciall but that exception was disallowed and adjudged that it was helped by the Statute of Jeofails by the opinion of the whole Court PLaint versus Thirley Hill 6 Jacobi rotulo 161. An Action of Trespass brought wherefore by force and Arms the Goods and chattells of the plaintif did take and impound the Defendant pleaded the common Barr and the plaintif assigns the place and are at issue upon that and after a verdict it was moved in arrest of Judgement that there was no Issue joyned because the Lands are not in question and so no assignment necessary and Judgement was stayed but afterwards upon a motion Judgement was given for the plaintif because the Issue was holpen by the Statute of Jeofails and there was the like case upon a Demurrer in the court of common pleas Trin. 4 Jacobi rotulo 1131. CHild versus Heely 13 Jacobi rotulo 3381. vel 381. An Action of Trespass brought wherefore by force and Arms the Close Hedges and Gates of the Plaintiff at W. did break and his grass with walking over it did destroy and other his Grass with Cattell did eat and consume the plaintiff assigned one Close of pasture called Drew and another close called Sutton one other close called L. and the Defendant as to the Trespass except the breaking of the close called G. and P. and the treading c. with his feet and eating with his cattell in the said close called P. and E. not guilty and as to the breaking of the close c. saith the plaintif ought not to have his Action because he saith that E. 6. was seised of the Mannour of W. of which one Messuage c. was copy-hold and shews the custome for a way and another custome for a Common and conveys the Copy-hold to himself and justifies as to the pedibus ambulandi and as to the Trespasse with the Cattell justifies for Common the Plaintif replies as to the Trespass pedibus ambulandi that it was of his own wrong without any cause alledged and traverses the way and as to Trespass with the Cattell demurres and the cause of the Demurrer was as it appeared by motion because in the justification of the Cattell the Defendant had not alledged any custome for Common and so the Plaintif could not take any Issue of that custome but had alledged a custome for the way as for the common and the court were of opinion that it was well pleaded and Judgement upon the Demurrer for the Defendant FAirchild versus Gair Pasch 3 Jac. An Action of Trespasse brought for the tiths of the Church of B. and therein a speciall verdict was as followeth the Defendant was collated to this Church of B. being a Donative by A. and B. the Patrons and that the Church was exempt from the Jurisdiction of any Ordinary the Defendant resigned to A. and C. who was a stranger and to other persons who had no Interest his Church of B. with all Rights c. and afterwards the persons passe their Rights to D. who collates and interests the Plaintiff in the Church by reason whereof he seised the Tithes in question and the Defendant took them and concludes that upon the matter c. and if the Resignation be good then they find for the Plaintiff otherwise for the Defendant and by the opinion of the whole Court Judgement was given for the Plaintiffe for the Resignation was good both in respect of the thing resigned and of the person to whom it was made for it being a Donative and exempt from ordinary Jurisdiction the Resignation must be into his hands and the Incumbent shall not be constrained to keep the Church whether he will or no if the Patron will not accept it and because there is no person to whom the Resignation can be made but onely into the hands of the Patron it is good and although the Resignation be to one Patron and to a stranger it is good to both the Patrons and void as to the stranger and the more strong it is because of the following words to wit to all persons whatsoever which words involve all that have any manner of interest and then seeing it is found that D. who collated the Plaintiff and the Estate of both the Patrons although no agreement be found of the Patrons it is not materiall and the resting of the Plaintiff in the Church is good to give him power to take the profits by reason of the primer possession and although the Defendant did resigne but the Church onely yet it is good to all that appertains to the Church and that which the Defendant may have as Rector there 6 E. 3. is that if the Patron grant Ecclesiam that will passe the Avowson but Herlethen said that was in ancient time and therefore not so then to which the court seemed to agree and the court waived the Dispute of any other thing but onely the Resignation for of that onely the Jury doubted and was onely referred to the court but Popham chief Justice said that if the Patron would not collate any man to such a Donative there was no way to compell him but he is left to his own conscience and he might in time of the vacancy take the profits and sue for the Tithes in the spirituall court for such Donatives at first grow by consent of all persons who have any manner of Right or Interest to wit the Ordinary and Parishioners but Gawdy Fenner Yelverton and Williams against him that the Ordinary might compel him to collate any clerk for the Rectory is only exempted from the power of the Ordinary and not the Patron and that is onely as to charges to be taxed upon the church for the ordinary attendance in a Visitation and such like and Popham said that although the Church in execution of the charge is spirituall yet the patron may collate and a meer lay man as the King may make a temporall man a Dean which hath often happened but all the other Judges were against him in case of the person which is meerly spritual but as to the Deanery they did agree it for the function is temporall but yet Williams said that lay men who have Deaneries ought to have and at all
Canterbury shall not be avoidance of the said Canon and he agreed that a Canon against Statute Law or Common Law or any Custome shall not bind the Subject and agreed that so it had been adjudged in this Court But he denyed that the exposition of any Statute belonged to the Ecclesiasticall Court for the Statute is meer temporall though it concern spirituall things and it shall be expounded according to the Rules of the common Law see 5. Edw. 4. Keasors Case And so concludes that this suit was against the Statute of 23. H. 8. For it ought to have its beginning in the Court of the Bishop of London And this exposition of the Statute is made for the Defendant 94. Canon which was ex presly made against the Court of Arches and inflicts suspension by the space of three moneths upon the Judges which offend against it from their Office and awarded that Prohibition shall be granted and with that agreed Warburton and Foster Justices but Walmsley Justice was of contrary opinion that is that no Prohibition shall be granted by the Court of Common Pleas but in case where the Suit is there hanging And this was objected also by the Civilians And the opinion of the Judges of the Kings Bench cited to prove it but prohibition was granted that notwithstanding And to the objection that the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury may have a consistory in the diocesse of every Bishop this was denyed but only where he was the Popes Legate and thenas Legate heshall have Jurisdiction of all the Diocesse of England it was agreed that there were three sorts of Legats First Legates a Latere and these were Cardinalls which were sent A Latere from the Pope The second A Legate born and these were the Arch-Bishops of Canterbury Yorke and Ments c. And these said Legates may cite any man out of any Diocesse within their Provinciall then there is a Legate given and these have Authority by speciall commission from the Pope Daringtons Case DAringtons Case was cited before the high Commissioners of the King for maintenance of the opinion of Brownisme and for slandering of one Mr. Eland a Minister and also of the Judges of the Common Law and was sentenced that for the first he should make his submission before the said Commissioners and also for the second that he should make submission to Mr. Eland and confesse his offence to him and pray that he will forgive him and so for the third also that he should make submission and that he shall be committed to prison untill he perform the said sentence and put in security that he will not here after make a Relaps in any of the said offences and after he made submission for the first offence according to the sentence and upon complaint to this Court Habeas Corpus was awarded to the Keeper of the Prison in which he was to bring in his Body with the cause of his taking and detaining and he certified the causes aforesaid but not the Submission and these were the causes of the taking and detaining of the said Darington and it was prayed by Serjeant Nicholls that he might be delivered and Coke cheife Justice said that the Ordinary by the common Law nor by the Statute De circumspecte aegatis cannot imprison for any offence though it be for Heresie Schisme or other erronious crime whatsoever and then by the Statute of 5. R. 2. chapter 5. 2. Statute It was awarded that Commissions should be directed to the Sheriffs and others to apprehend such which should be certified by the Prelates to be Preachers of the Heresie and the Favourers Maintainers and abettors to keep them in strong Prison untill they will justifie themselves by the Law of the holy Church But this was repealed by 5 Ed. 6. 12. And 1 Eliz. 1. And also by the Statute of 2 H. 4. 15. It was ordained that none shall preach or write any book contrary to the Catholique faith or determination of holy Church nor shall make any conventicles of such Sects and wicked Doctrines nor shall favour such preachers Every Ordinary may convent before him any person suspect of Heresie An obstinate Heretick shall be burned in an open place before the People and this Statute was also repealed by 25 H. 8. And 1 Eliz. 1. By expresse words and then by the Statute of 1. H. 7. 4. Power is given to all Arch-Bishops Bishops and other Ordinaries having Ecclesiasticall Jurisdictions to commit Clarks Preists c. To Ward and Prison for Adultery Fornication Incest or any other fleshly Incontinency there to abide for such time as shall be thought to their discretions convenient for the quality and quantity of their Trespas and these were all the Statutes which give Authority to the Ordinary to imprison any man And when the Statute of 1 Eliz. 1. Repealed the first two Statutes of 5 R. 2. 5. and 2 H. 4. 15. It was not the intent that these offences should be unpunished but the Queen would not leave and trust the Bishop which was but a man and when he is made Bishop cannot be removed with such generall and uncontroulable Power and Authority and for that this power and Authority was transferred by the said Statute of 1 Eliz. 1. To high Commissioners which the Queen might countermand at her pleasure and appoint new and so it was transferred from one to many and this Stature did not intend to give other Authority to high Commissioners to imprison any man which the Ordinary himselfe had not before the making of the Statute of 1 El. 1. And it was not the intent of the makers of the said Statute and Act of 1 Eliz. To alter any Lawes but to transfer the power of one to others and it was resolved that for working upon holy dayes the party shall not be punished before the high Commissioners in Reimores Case and it was also resolved in Symsones Case by the Lord Anderson cheife Justice of the Common place and Glanvile they then being Justices of Assise in the same place that a Pursivant came with a Warrant of the high Commissioners to attach one by his Body for Adultery in a lay mans house and was sâ—ain with great deliberation and conference had with the other Judges that that was no Murder but Man-slaughter for they could not attach the Body of any man but ought to proceed by citation and excommunication But it was agreed that they might imprison for Brownisme for that was Herezie besides he maintaind that if the King do not govern his subjects as he ought that his Subjects may and ought to depose him and other such abhominable opinions and further that he might fine for that and he said that one Elyas Brown was hanged for that in the time of the last Queen for that that it doth not appear by the return that Darington hath himself conformed they could not deliver him for they ought to give credit to the return according to 9
and Governors of Trinity House against Boreman THe Master Brothers and Governors of Trinity House sue in the Admiralty Court one Boreman for that that where Queen Elizabeth by her Letters Patents under the great Seale of England bearing date the 36. yeare of her Reign had granted to them the ballasting of all Ships within the Bridg of London and the Sea and that no Ship shall take any ballast of any other but of them And for that that the said Boreman hath received Ballast of another within the place aforesaid hee was sued in the Admiralty Court And upon that Prohibition was prayed and day being given to hear both parties the Master of Trinity-house came into the Court and the Judges demanded of him for what end the said Suit was there begun if it were to have the Defendant in Prison or to have recompence or for other purpose But he could not give any answer to that upon that the Judges saying that the place being alleadged to be at Ratcliffe is within the body of the County without question and for that for the place shall be tryed at the common Law Secondly the Great Seale and Letters Patents of the King shall be expounded according to the course of the common Law and the Admiralty cannot punish by Imprisonment pecuniary punishment nor otherwise Thirdly the Letters Patents are void for for that one charge is raised upon the Subject for the private gain of this private house for they would not ballast any Ship under 2 d. for every tun of Ballast But if the Letters Patents have been made for publique good peradventure they had been good but a Prohibition was granted Note that the said Boreman was a Dutch-man and his two Ships were arrested and stayed by the Admiralls Warrant out of the said Court so that he was inforced to find sureties to answer to the said suit before he could have his Ships at liberty Huntley against Cage HEnry Huntly was Plaintiff in the high commission Court against Mary Clifford Widdow Defendant Huntley pretends that he was contracted to the Defendant and upon that complaines to the high Court of Commissioners and that she would marry her self to Cage and upon that the Arch-Bishop then did grant a Warrant to a Pursivant to attach Cage and the said Mary Clifford and upon that they were arrested by force of the said Warrant and upon that they were committed to Prison and being imprisoned an obligation of 2000 l. was taken by the said Commissioners of the said Mary Clifford by which she was bound to the King with condition that she should not marry her self nor contract to any other untill the same suit was determined in the same Court and also to appear before the Judge of the Arches within nine dayes after notice of that given And then being dwelling in Hâ—lborn after that Sir William Armstrodder obtained the said obligation of the King pretending that that was forfeited for that that the said Mary Clifford had married her self to Cage before that the said suite was ended and determined And upon that the said Mary Clifford was another time cited before the high Commissioners and a suit was there promoted against her Ex officio by Serle the Kings Proctor also had the 4th part of all fines and forfeitures which grew to the King by reason of the Ecclesiasticall Courts and then was articled against her first that she was marryed or contracted to Cage to that she refused to answer for that that it was the direct question upon which the forfeiture of the Bond depended and then this Article was referred to some Doctors who upon consideration seemed that the Article ought to be reformed and upon that the Article was made that she lived single and unmarried in a house with the said Cage which was as much as the first for shee could not make any direct answer to that without discovering whether the Bond were forfeited or not and upon all this matter a Prohibition was prayed to the high commission Court for the said Mary Clifford And all the Justices that is Coke cheife Justice Walmesley Warburton and Foster agreed that the Obligation was void for that it was taken by duresse of imprisonment for they can not imprison any Secondly that they ought not to examine any man upon his oath to make him to betray himself and to incur any penalty pecuâ—iary or corporall and Foster cited a Judgment in the Exchequer in Ralph Bowes Case where an English Bill was exhibited against one for bringing into England Cards without license and one which had a Monopoly upon that exhibited the said Bill and upon that the Defendant demurred in Law upon that and it was agreed that the Defendant shall not be compelled to answer to that upon his Oath for that that he had then incurred the danger of a penall Statute Thirdly that they cannot take any obligation by which a man shall be bound to appear in another Court but only in the Court where the obligation is taken no more then the Judges of this Court may take obligation of any man to appear before the Councell in the North And Walmesley also seemed that these high Commissioners ought to meddle only with things of the most high nature and not of things which concern Matrimonie and the ordinary Jurisdiction and Coke said that the high Commissioners cannot meddle with any civill causes betwixt party and party as keeping back tithes or not payment of a Legacy and lawfullnesse of Marriage but the causes with which they intermeddle ought to be criminall for otherwise they dissolve all ordinary Jurisdiction and by their sentence every man shall be concluded for he cannot appeal nor have any other remedy and also he said that in civill causes the high Commissioners cannot send a Pursivant to arrest any man by his Body for that was adjudged in Humptons Case 42. Eliz. By Anderson and his companion Judges in their circuit in the County of Northampton with conference had with all the Judges of England where the case was a Pursivant having a warrant to arrest the body of one for Incontinency and to have him before the high Commissioners and a Constable came in aid of the said Pursivant in Execution of his warrant and was slain and was adjudged as before that it was no Murder and the reason was for that that the high Commissioners cannot award any warrant or processe to arrest the Body of any man but if the warrant had been lawfully awarded it was agreed that it should be murder but as this case was it was resolved to be but Man-slaughter and also he said they cannot take in civill causes where they have no Jurisdiction but in criminall causes where they have Jurisdiction it seems they may take obligation as the case requires But he would not dispute that nor affirm nor disaffirm it but as the principall case was the obligation was made by Duresse and so it may
extortion 151 Jeofailes stat 168 Judgment arrested 182 Joynt Tenants for years of a Mill and grants c. 212 Judgment in a Writ of errour 215 Intendment where 234 Judgment Sur breife abatest errour 235 Imprisonment unlawfull 20 Impropriation 24 Instruction for the Presidents of Wales 29 Judgment reversed for the Outlawry only and confirmed for the other 39 Joynture 52 53 Information sur stat 21. H. 8 chap. 13. For non-residency 54 Judgment voyd 127 Informer exhibits a Bill in the Star chamber 151 Imprisonment for a force when or not 266 Justices of Peace and Auditors ought to make Record where and when Ibid. Indemptitas nominas 270 Jurors from two countyes 272 Infant levies a Fine brings errour 278 279 K KIngs Grant voyd for defect in recitall 241 King is specially favored in the Law 249 Kings Patent how to be taken 250 L LIcense from the Ordinary where 1 License how many kinds 3 27 Legates Jurisdictions ibidem License to a Copyholder when pleadable by whom 40 Limitation and Condition their difference 68 Levant couchant what 101 Lease by a Dean 134 Livery voyd where 135 Libellous Letters 152 Law of England of what it consists 198 Lateran Councell concerning Tithes 24 License to appropriate 25 License to a Copy-holder 40 Lord of a Mannor inclose the Demesnes 168 Letter of Attorney cannot be made by a wife 248 London the custome for an Inn-holder 234 Lease to determine upon limitation 292 Letters Patents how expounded 323 License in a Forrest 323 M MArriage disagreed to at yeares of consenting c. 36 Misnosmer in an obligation what it effects 48 Marriage a gift of all goods personall 91 Merchant 4 sorts 99 Meale accounted dead victual within the stat 5 Ed. 6 chap. 14. 116 Mayme is fellony 220 Modus decimandi 33 Murther sur Thames where tryable 37 Maxime in law 43 Misnosmer of a corporation 243 Mainténance 271 Minister arrested 301 Marshall court its jurisdiction 125 126 127 N NOn-suit 41 Nisi prius record amended 41. Non-residencie the statute 21 H. 8. 13 expounded 54 Non-suit after verdict 219 Nisi prius by proviso for whom 276 Notice where requisite 278 O ORdinary cannot imprison 4 Ordinary may imprison a preist by 1. H. 7. 4. Ibid Obligation taken for a legacy incourt court Christian 11 Ordinary may transmit 28 Office granted by a Bishop 137 Occupancy where â—02 Outlary in fellony was reversed 229 Offences exorbitant what 19 20 Obligation to performe covenants 167 Officers gradâ—all of the Kings bench who 282 Obligation with condition against law or impossible 281 Outlary 313 Office exerciseable by deputy where 334 335 P PRohibitionupon the stat of 13 H. 8 chap. 9 Polygamy punishable where and how 7 Prohibitionjoynt and severallcounts 7 Prohibition surle stat de simony 7 for not settingforth of tythes 9 Prescription for tythes 31 33 34 Prohibition to the admiralty 34 to court Baron 34 Prison private and common 41 Prescription for inhabitants 178 Prohibition for common 47 Prescription none after consultation duly granted 36 Parson deprived for drunknesse 37 Proofe what 57 Priviledg out of higher court to inferiour 101 Payment directed how 107 108 Patent of a Judge 122 Papist that not actionable 166 Possibility resonable where 173 Prescription and custome do differ wherein 198 Prescription 210 211 Prohibition to court Christans 215 Prerogative del roy 219 Prescription for waife and stray 219 Paunagium quid 236 Prohibition good sans action pendecit 17 Priviledg determined 22 Processe from the admiralty 29 Prohibition not grantable after consultation 36 Possessio fratris 43 Plurality with dispensation 45 Pardon of one attaint pro false verdict 47 Prescription where good where not 64 Per que servitia 84 Prescription for beasts sans number 101 Physitians colledge the authority 256 Physitans examined by whom 257 Priviledg of attorney allowed before the Deputy Marshall where 267 Partition without naming the parts good where 275 Prohibition to the Court of request 297 Copyholder prescribeth Pro ligno combustibuli 330 Q QUare impedit 45 Quo warranto 217 Quare ejecit infra terminum 133 Quare clausum fregit where it lieth 322 Quare Vi Armis where it will and of what 331 332 334 R RIght to a spirituall Office is temporall 12 Residency where 13 Ravishment against feme covert 59 91 92 93 Replevin 84 52 149 Right the Writ 138 Remainder in a Chattell 173 Release where not good 190 Release of one Church warden shall not bind the other 216 Restitution to the Heir of an accessory where the principall reversed the outlawry 220 Reservation of Rent at Michaelmas ten or dayes after 220 Reservation not taken strictly 221 Right to a tearm not grantable 226 Revocation the power when suspended 228 Return of the sheriff where good 145 Revocation of uses 157 Remainder of a Chattell 173 Request where necessary 176 Release of Dower by Fine 175 Replevin 248 Re-entry after possession executed 253 Release 254 Return of writs granted to a corporation 270 Replevin 297 Release 300 S STatutes ecclesiasticall by whom to be expounded 2 3 Surrender an attornment where 51 Scire fac by baile 76 Scire fac against an Executor 83 Surrender by Cognisor c. 97 Statutes pro bono publ taken by equity 110 111 Summons in Dower 122 Scire facias for whom 145 Seisin of a Rent p. vicâ—â—nt 237 Submission awarded 48 Survivorship not aâ—ongst Merchants 99 Statute penall 112 Scire facias speciall non-tenure a goodplea 146 Seisin to have Assise what sufficient 241 Slaunder of an Attorney what 252 Slaunder 272 276 299 Sheriffs power what 281 Vnder sheriff how limited ibid Sheriff may limit the Authority of his Vnder Sheriff 282 Sheriff committed for taking undue Fees 283 Suit begâ—n hanging another 293 Statutes how to be understood 305 306 307 T TYthes what Lands are free of them P. 8 21 22 23 24 Taxes for Church-Reparations and other like dutyes who are chargeable and how 10 Tithes not grantable P. Parol unless by way of Retainer 11 Tithes where discharged by unity of possession 26 Transmission of causes where 27 Tenant in Dower disseised 41 Tayl its incidents 67 By Copyhold custome 77 Its Creation and nature 79 Testibus lies what comes after no part of the Deed 99 Town cannot be corporate without the assent of the Major part c 100 Trespass for a commoner good 149 By the Lord against the commoner 168 Trespasse for assault 182 Tales challenged 235 Tythes their antiquity 24 Tythes of what not payable 32 33 Trespasse for breaking of a close 65 Teste of a ven fac amended post verdict 102 Trespasse for imprisonment 124 125 Tenant pur view with warranty 191 Testatum where no writ issued 209 Tythes not paid for seven yeares of what 257 Tayl 271 Trade with Infidells without licence 296 U VEn fa. amended after verdict 102 Voucher P. attorney 167 Voucher sur bre abateable the danger 185 Verdict speciall 187 188 189 Verdict doth not cast