423. per Curiam It being moved in Arrest of Judgment and the plaintiff never had Judgment in it Mich. 1650 inter Winter and Barnard â—djudged In Action upon the Case for words the plaintiff Thomas Bâ—owne declares that one A. G. had a Bastard Son begotten of her Body then living the Defendant knowing it of his Malice to defame him and to bring him in danger of the Statute of 18 Eliz. having Speech of the said Bastard and of the plaintiff said of the Plaintiff that Brown is the reputed Father of that Child whereby he was greatly prejudicâ—d in bargaining and selling and put to great Expences for the clearing of himself in hac parte the Action lyes not for these words upon this Declaration because it is not said by the plaintiff that he was to be punished by the said Statute for he was not to have corporal punishment or to be imprisoned unless the Bastard be some charge to the Parish Hill 11. Car. B. R. inter Salter and Brown Adjudged in Writ of Error In an Action upon the Case for scandalous words if the plaintiff declare that the Defendant said these words of the plaintiff being a Feme sole viz. This is that Whore that my man A. got a Bastard by and withal spent all my money And being asked by an other person standing by whether he were not mistaken for the Maid hath been but little above a year in Town the defendant replyed The Quean hath been too long to my Cost No Action lyes for these words for to say that a Woman had a Bastard is no cause of Action Trin. 1651. Inter Owen and Jevan Adjudged in Arrest of Judgment If a man saith of another He was the true Patron of the Advowsâ—n of S. but he hath lost that Patronage and Presentation by being a Symonist and a Recusant both which I will prove him to be yet no Action lyes for by the Symony only comes the loss of the Presentation pro hac vice by the Temporal Law and the Recusancy only toucheth him in Religion sor it doth not appear that he intends him to be a Recusant according to the Statute Trin. 16. Jac. B. R. Sir John Tasborough's Case adjudged in Arrest of Judgment Iâ— a man saith of an other He hath forsworn himself no Action lyes for these words Pasch 40. Eliz. B. R. To say to a man Thou hast forsworn thy self Leak Court no Action lyes without shewing what manner of Court it is because that it cannot be intended nor known whether it be such a Court as may compel one to swear or not Mich 8. Jac. B. R. Inter Law and Bennet per Curiam If a man saith of an other He did forswear me ineuendo the plaintiff 46 s. worth of Tithes in Canterbury Court no Action lyes for these words for there are divers Courts in Canterbury and it is not shewn in what Court nor before what Judge nor that the Judge had Authority to hold Plea of Tithes Pasch 43. Eliz. B. R. Inter Bray and Partridge adjudged If a man say of J. S. I had not been cast in that Action if it had not been for the Oath of J. S. and he was forsworn and I marvel that B. would marry his Daughter to such a forsworn man In an Action upon the case for these words if the Plaintiff aver that there was an Issue between him and A. and that Ad Curiam Baronis de Geton Soca Domini Regis tenta apud S. in Comitatu praedicto He himself was produced as a Witness and sworn about the matter of the Issue and afterwards the defendant having Communication of this Issue spoke the words aforesaid No Action lyes upon this Declaration because that it is not alledged that S. is within the Soke of Geton and so peradventure the Court was held out of their Jurisdiction and also because that it is not alledged that he was sworn about a matter pertinent to the Issue Miâ—h 11. Jac. B. R. Inter Crawford and Brice adjudged If a man saith of an other he is a forsworn Knave for he swore that the wood was worth 40 s. where it was dear of 13 s. 4 d. No Action lyes for those words though he aver that there was Communication between them of the matter at the Assises where the Plaintiff was sworn as a Witness because that he did not say directly that the Wood was not worth 40 s. but that it was dear of 13 s. 4 d. Also it doth not appear that the Defendant intended it sworn at the Assises Hill 13. Jac. B. R. Inter Stephen Apthorpe and Cockerel adjudged If a man saith to an other Thou wert forsworn in B Court which is but a Court-Baron no Action lyes because it is no Court of Record Pasch 8. Jac. in Scaccario Inter Perie and Rock agreed per Curiam If a man saith to another Thou art forsworn and didst take a false Oath at the Assises at Hereford against J. S. No Action lyes for these words without an Averment that it was at a Tryal or before the Court or Jury for it might be at the Assises in a private house or other place Pasch 15. Car. B. R. Inter Prichard and Smith Adjudged per Curiam If a man saith to an other Thou deservest to be hanged no Action lyes for these Words because it only expresseth his Opinion and Judgment of him Trin. 4. Jac. Inter Hake and Molton adjudged If a man saith to J. S. Thou art a scurvey bad Fellow and hast done that thou deservest to be hanged No Action lyes Mich. 11. Car. B. R. inter Fisher and Atkinson adjudged per Cur. in arrest of Judgment after Verdict for the plaintiff If a man saith to another You are no true Subject to the King no Action lyes for these words because they are too general for it might be he had not paid his Taxes Mich. 5. Jac. B. R. inter Smith and Turner adjudged If a man saith to another Thou art a Rogue and an arrant Rogue and I will prove thee to be a Rogue no Action lyes Mich. 41. 42. Eliz. B. R. adjudged FINIS THE TABLE Abatement WHERE the Death of one of the Parties after Summons and Severans shall abate the Writ and where not page 1 2. What shall be a good Plea to a Writ what not p. 2 3. In what Cases the Writ shall abate de facto p. 4. What Pleas shall abate the Writ in the whole and what in part p. 5 6 7 8 9 What Pleas in Abatement go only to the person and what to the Writ or Aâ—tion p. 9 10. How matters of Record shall be pleaded in Abatement p. 12. 13. Who shall be admitted to plead in Abatement who not p. 14. Where the Writ abates in part by the Act of the Court and where by the Parties Confession p. 15 16. That a Defendant or Tenant cannot abate a Writ by his own Act but the Act of the Plaintiff or Demandant Act
not an Action for the whole or for part the Writ shall abate de facto as in Quare Impedit if it appears by the plaintiff's shewing that the Church is full by his own Presentation the Writ shall abate de facto Some Pleas abate the Writ in the whole and some but in part As In Trespass against two one appears and pleads that the other was dead die impetrationis brevis or that there was no such person in rerum natura there the whole Writ shall abate But it is otherwise where one of the Defendants dyes after purchasing the Writ 18 E. 4. 1. 2 H. 7. 16. Rast Entr. 126. Trespass against husband and wife after Verdict and before the day in Bank the husband dyes in Cro. Caroli 509. it is doubted if the writ shall abate but it is agreed there That if the wife dyes it shall not abate against the husband But in case for Slander by the wife the writ shall abate after Verdict Heb. 129. Account against two one dyes after the first Judgment the Writ shall abate only against him In Right of Advowson the Defendant pleads that the Plaintiff was seised of the sixth part die impetrationis brevis this shall abate the whole Writ 5 H. 7. 7. In Debt upon an Obligation the defendant pleads That after the writ purchased the plaintiff had received parcel and shews an Acquittance the whole writ shall abate and yet it is a good plea in barr for that part 5 H. 7. 41. a. Rast Entr. 160. 7 E. 4. 19. 15 H. 7. 10. 3 H. 7. 3. Quere if in Debt upon simple Contract the plaintiff receives part pendente brevi if it shall abate the writ In Debt upon an Obligation with Condition to deliver 20 Quarters of Barley the defendant pleads in Abatement that pendente billa the plaintiff had accepted 15 parcel of the said 20 and adjudged to be an ill Plea because it is collateral and not parcel of the Sum contained in the Obligation 3 Cro. 253. Where the defendant pleads matter that entitles the plaintiff or demandant to a better writ it shall abate the other as in a Writ of Ayel Seisin of the Father So in Mortd ' ancestor his own Seisin c. But in Formedon or Writ of Right darrein Seisin is no Plea for in Formedon the Gift and not the Seisin is the Title and it is not within the Statute of 32 H 8. of Limitations to be brought within 50 years 12 Eliz. Dyer 290. 4 E. 4. 32. b. If the Tenant brings a Writ of Mesne of two Acres and depending the writ he alieneth one of them the writ shall abate The same Law in an Action of Wast brought of two acres if the plaintiff aliens the Reversion of one of them the writ shall abate Where it appears that the writ was never good in part it shall abate in the whole As in Trespass against 3 if one be dead after the writ purchased the writ shall abate in the whole per 7 E. 4. The same Law if Trespass be brought against three and one saith that there is no such Name in Rerum Natura as the third person's name Judicium de Brevi if it be found the Writ shall abate in the whole because that I have joyned with me such a person who hath no colour or cause of affirmance my affirmance shall abate Where the writ is good for part and for part shall abate As in Debt upon Obligation against two they both deny the deed and it is found the deed of one of them and not of the other yet the Plaintiff shall recover against him whose deed it is 40 E. 3. Praecipe quod reddat against Tenant for life the Reversion descends to him depending the writ the writ shall not abate Misnomer in Trespass shall not abate the writ but only against him who pleads the Plea 5 E. 4 2. 13. 2 H. 7. 16. 33 H. 6. 23. A Praecipe is brought by three joyntly several Tenancy in parcel or in the whole is pleaded by one of the Tenants it shall abate the whole Writ and against all Rast Entr. 248. 270 1 2 3. 364 5. 282. In Right of Advowson against two as Jointenants the death of one shall abate the writ but secus in Assise of Novel disseisin or Mortd ancestor for there it sufficeth if there be any Tenant to the Freehold Cro. Car. 574 583 Rast Entr. 107. In an Appeal against two no such person in Rerum Natura as to one shall abate the whole writ but it is otherwise of the death of one as it seems 29 H. 7. 21. 2 H. 7. 8. But it is otherwise in an Assise or Writ of Dower as in Pollard's Case Com' 89. b. In Trespass in F. and H. the defendant said that there is not any such Vill or Hamlet in the said County and the better Opinion was That this Plea shall abate the whole Writ 4 E. 4. 33. a. Co. Lit. 155. b. Rast Entr. 108 298. Co. Entr. 121. But Quaere how it should have been tryed for it seems by a Jury of the Visne or Neighbourhood of F. Debt against two Executors one said That whereas he is nam'd of S. that he was of D. the day of the Writ purchas'd and prayes Judgment of the Writ and agreed That if the Plea was found for him that the Writ should abate against both and yet the other shall answer but the other plea shall be first tryed 21 H. 6. 4. Rast Entr. 108 295 298 299. 160. In Trespass against two one pleads that the place in question is within his Fee and demands Judgment of this writ quare vi et armis the writ shall abate against him only So where the one is Feme covert Jointenancy in the Demandant or Coparcener shall be pleaded in Abatement 22. E. 4. 4. 2 H. 7. 16. Cro. Eliz. 554. Rast Entr. 615. In a Quare Impedit against two one pleads that there was no such Church as was named in the Writ the other pleaded that there was no such Bishop of Lincoln as was there named and Issue was joyned upon the first Plea but to the second Plea the Plaintiffs demurred and the first being found for the Defendant the whole Writ did abate Hobart 250. In a Writ of Error the death of one of the Plaintiffs shall abate the whole writ Some Pleas in Abatement go only to the person of the plaintiff or defendant others to the Writ or Action As Excommunication in the Plaintiff or Demandant may be pleaded in disability of his person but every Excommunication shall not disable As if a Major or Bailiffs and Communalty or any other Body aggregate of many bring their Action Excommunication in the Major or Bailiffs shall not disable them because they sue and answer by Attorney but it is otherwise of a sole Corporation So if Executors or Administrators be Excommunicated they may be disabled for every one that hath to do with aâ—person Excommunicated either by commerce
Plea in Abatement of the Writ before the default saved 40 E. 3. 2. In a Writ of Aiel Besaiel and Cosinage one shall not plead to the points of the Writ after he hath pleaded in Barr but it is otherwise in an Assise of Mortd ' ancestor as it seems 40 E. 3. 19. Where the Writ abates in part by the Act of the Court and where it is abated by the Parties own Confession As if an Executor brings an Action de clauso fracto de bonis asportatis in this case the Writ shall abate for part and as to the rest it shall be effectual But where the Writ is abated by the Plaintiff it is reason although that it be of his own Conusans that if it abate that the whole shall abate In Assise against two the one pleads in Barr as to a moiety the other pleads jointenancy with a third person the Plaintiff may choose him who pleads in Barr for his Tenant and confess that his writ is false for the other part In Assise against two the one is Tenant the other is Disseisor which Disseisor makes default the other accepts his Companion Tenant with him and pleads in Barr the Plaintiff dissables the Tenant and doth not answer to the Barr for in this case he hath accepted a Tenant which is not Tenant As if Praecipe quòd reddat be brought by two where one is a Bastard or by two persons as Heirs where one of them in truth is not Heir in these cases the whole Writ shallabate because that that is meerly false whichis supposed to be true Two Executors bring an Action of Trespass of Goods carried away in the life-time of the Testator and also of Trees cut down here the Writ is good notwithstanding that the Executors cannot have the Writ for the Trees cut down and if they pray to have an other Writ for the Trees cut down then the whole Writ shall abate quod nota A Defendant or Tenant cannot abate a Writ by his Act but the Act of the Plaintiff or Demandant and the Act of God and also the Act of an Estranger may abate the Writ In a writ of Ravishment de gard by the death of the Infant the writ shall not abate Tenant by Statute-Merchant is disseised the disseisor lets for life the Tenant by the Statute brings an Assise the Lessee dyes the writ shall not abate because he shall recover all in damages But it is otherwise where he is to recover the Freehold because in that case he cannot have the effect of his Judgment A Writ of Admesurement of Common is brought by one against three depending the writ the Plaintiff and one of the Defendants exchange their Lands to which the common is appendant if the writ shall abate it seems not because that notwithstanding the exchange the Plaintiff may have the effect of his Suit which is that the Common may be admesured and at all times pending the writ the Plaintiff and the Defendant who made the exchange were Tenants and the Writ of Admesurement granted between them by reason of their Tenure for there was no mean-time between the parting from the Free-hold in one Acre and the taking the Free-hold in the other Acre and that very instant that the Freehold of the one Acre was parted from the other was vested so that there was cause of Admesurement between them as well after the exchange as there was before A Writ of Admesurement is brought against three one hath nothing in the Common so that the Writ ought to abate because that non-tenure is a good Plea in this Action yet if he that hath nothing before any exception be taken to the Writ purchaseth an Acre of Land by which he ought to have Common in the same Land the Writ is made good As in Praecipe quod reddat brought against him that hath nothing and pending the Writ he purchaseth the same Lands the writ is good So it seems the writ is good notwithstanding no time between the exchange ergo à forciori when there is no mean instant But by the better opinion it seems that the writ shall abate notwithstanding that the party may have the effect of his Suit for that ground is not obsolutely general as Praecipe quòd reddat is brought against me and I have nothing in the Land and pending the writ the Land descends the writ shall abate I bring an Action of wast by reason of the reversion or a Quid juris clamat depending the writ I alien the same Reversion and after purchase the Reversion again yet the writ is abated If a writ of Partition or Nuper obiit be brought and pending the writ the demandant aliens and retakes the Estate to him yet the writ shall abate And yet in all these cases the Plaintiff may have the effect of his Suit But that which causeth the writ to abate is the Act of the Plaintiff for the writ depending he hath aliened that which gives him his cause of Action and therefore the writ shall abate as in the cases aforesaid for as to the Plaintaiff's part his own Act shall abate the writ and not the Act of God nor of the Law except in some cases and as for the Defendants or the Tenants part his own Act shall not abate the writ but the Act of God or of the Law may for if the Tenant aliens depending the writ yet the writ shall not abate but the Demandant shall recover and he that comes in by the Tenant shall be bound by that Recovery And if an exchange had been made by the Plaintiff with a stranger who had nothing in the Common the writ should have been abated without question So for that Acr◠which he had when the writ was brought he cannot maintain his writ for put the case that the day the writ was purchas'd the Plaintiff had not any Land by which he ought to have common and afterwards pending the writ he purchas'd an Acre of Land to which the Common is appendant this shall not make the writ good which was nought from the beginning When the writ is made abatable by the Act of the Plaintiff or Demandant Videlicet by his aliening of that thing which gives to him the cause of Action if he pending the writ doth purchase the same again it shall not revive the writ nor make it good WHere the Grant shall be good ab initio although it was incertainat the commencement Note If a Parson will Grant to me all the Wooll which he shall have for Tithe the next year to come this Grant is good and yet the quantity of the Wool is incertain at the time of the Grant But because it may be reduced to a certainty after the Grant it was held good enough 21 H. 6. 43. And so if a man will Grant to me the Perquisits of his Court this incertain Grant is good causâ quâ suprà 21 H. 6. 43. The same Law is where a Feoffment is
was the Opinion of Twisden in the King's-Bench H. 22 23. Car. 2. That if a Forraign plea which is not local be pleaded the Plaintiff may demurr upon it but if it be local he cannot demurr upon it but then the plea must be sworn Debt on a Bond to account he pleads he accounted Plaintiff Assigns breach in 30 l. received not accounted for Defendant rejoynes and saies Robbed of it and gave notice Et hoc paratus c. good and not Et hoc pet it c. for now he leaves the other to traverse the Robbery though it makes a negative and affirmative Vere versus Smith P. 23. Car. 2 B. R. Cook versus Whorewood Debt on a Bond to perform Covenants to enjoy such Land against A. and B. Defendant pleads Covenants performed Plaintiff replyes and sayes A. and B. habentes jus virtute tituli eis inde fect ' ante Burg. predicta ' entred the Defendant demurrs because the breach Assigned too general but per Hall good enough he being a Stranger Twisden doubted Proctor versus Newton Trin. 23. Car. 2. B. R. Rot. 826 Debt on a Bond to save harmless from payment of Legacies and Assigns breach that A. sued in Chacery for a Legacy first not shewing were the Chancery was Secondly saying he sued for a Legacy and saies not in fact a Legacy was given Dainty versus Faire Mich. 10. Jac. B. R. Debt upon an Obligation dated at Hamburgh was brought in London and good for Hamburgh in that sence shall be taken for a place as Antwerp Tavern in London not for the Town of Hamburgh in Germany and it was brought in the Detinet only and yet good because of Forraign Coyne But naught if for English money A man may bring an Action of Debt upon a Statute-Merchant but not on a Statute-Staple Debt against a Prisoner for Debt or for an Attorney for Fees no Wager of Law lyes But a Prisoner for Lodging and Dyet may wage his Law It lyes not for Rent it lyes upon a simple contract if it be brought in Debt But if it brought in Case the Defendant cannot wage his Law A man brings an Action of Debt against two and hath Judgment and two Precipe's against them and Arrests one by Fieri facias and the other by Capias ad satisfaciendum it is vicious per totam Curiam But he may Arrest one by one Capias and the other by another Capias and if one of them satisfies the Judgment the others Body is free and with this agrees 36 H. 6. Hillary's Case and 4 E. 4 it is said that the Plaintiff shall have but unicam executionem i. e. unicam satisfactionem Mich 11 Jacobi in Communi Banco An Action of Debt ought to be brought in the Debet et Detinet against an Heir but against Executors only in the Detinet per Coke Lord Chief Justice ib. A man brings a Writ of Debt upon a Deed and declares de octinginta Libra the Defendant prays oyer of the Deed and hath it and it was octogesima Libra and good per totam Curiam and with this agrees 9 H. 6. et Pasch 12 Jacobi where yginta for viginti was adjudged good Mich. 13 Jacobi in C. B. Detinue IN Detinue of a Box of Writings the Defendant pleads that A. B. and C. have each of them severally brought their Writ of Detinue against him and brought the Writings into Court ready to deliver to whom the Court shall award they shall interplead and the interpleader shall be on the eldest Original viz. A. shall interplead with the Plaintiff to Barr his Title and B. shall plead against them all But vide if there be variance of the Writings c. in the Declaration when no interpleader shall be P. 4. E. 4. Pl. 11. 11. E 4. 11. a. 3 H. 6. 20. a. 32 H. 6. 25. b. 25 H. 6. 20. a. Trin. E. 4. Pl. 2. Detinue and counts of a purchase of an Annuity and the deed the Defendant pleads non Detinet Jury find the sale c. but it is not agreed that the Defendant should detayne the Deed till the money payd which is not before the plea but on the general Issue he ought not to have given that in Evidence but should have pleaded it for upon the general Issue that which would make a special Barr cannot be given in Evidence or if found by the Jury is it material vide Cest Case title Averment 22 H. 6. 37. Detinue of Charters and Counts of a writing Cont ' that I. S. infeoffed c. And though he said but in facto a Deed whereby I. S. infeoffed c. but Cont ' that c. And so for ought appears no Livery might be yet per curiam well for 't is a deed though nothing passed and the Action lyed But Princ. it may work by Confirmation 39 H. 6. 37. b. In Detinue after Verdict 't was moved in Arrest of Judgment that Sattago was not good but Sartago and igneum ferrum anglice a firegrate improper yet the Court adjudged the Declaration good enough Smith versus Warder 13 Car. 2. in B. R. Of Disclaimers and Discontinuances of Actions ONe brought an Action of Covenant and had Judgment and a Writ of Enquiry of damages and afterwards it was discontinued by Rule of Court Trin. 10 Jac. in communi Banco If a man brings an Action of Trespass in 3 Towns and mentions but 2 Towns where the Trespass was committed the whole is discontinued 16 E. 4. 11. So 9 E. 4. 51. A man brought an Action of Debt and demanded by his Writ 10 l. 6 s. 8 d. and his Declaration was but of 10 l. and his Writ did abate An Action of Trespass was brought in the Court of Common-Pleas oâ— several things one of which was discontinued and by Warberton Justice the whole Action was thereby discontinued adjudged in Sir Fran Pawmes Case If two are bound jointly and severally and an Action of Debt is brought against them both and it was discontinued against one of them it shall abate against both 7 H. 4. Fitzh Tit. Breif 279. 5 E. 4. 107. But by Hobart Chief Justice a man may put more in the Writ than in the Declaration but not more in the Declaration than in the Writ Hill 12. Ja. Pl. 4 in C. B. In Audita quaerela scire facias or Attaint by 2 the Nonsuit of one shall not be Nonsuit of both and his Release shall only Barr himself and the reason is because they are compell'd by the Law to joyn in the Action and the cause of Action accrues not by their deed but by Act in Law and for that the Law is favourable to them So that if one will not sue the other may sue by himself But if a debt be due to two by reason of Contract or by Obligation or two Jointenants have cause to have an Action of Trespass in this case the Nonsuit of the one or the Release of one shall Barr the other because it
two persons having several Interests in Lands acknowledg the note of a Fine before a Judg and then one of them dyes The Conusee may for all that proceed with his Fine against the other alone for the death of the other is no impediment for the Conusans of every one is against himself and shall work for so much as he can pass A man and his Wife acknowledged a note of a Fine before Commissioners the 26 th of March by Dedimus potestatem and the wife dyed 27 th of the same month and the next day being the 28 th Composition was made in the Alâ—enation-Office upon a Writ of Covenant Retornable in Hillary Term before and the Kings Silver was entred as of the same Hillary Term and so the Fine was past and ingrossed And in Easter Term the Heir of the Wife moves against the Fine But upon debate it was agreed the Fine should stand Tenant in Tail Levies a Fine with Proclamations and 5 years pass in his Life-time Yet this shall not Barr his Issue A man of full age and his Wife being but 19 Levy a the Fine of Inheritance of the Wife whereby an Estate is conveyed to the Husband and Wife in Tail and the Remainder to the right Heirs of the wife and many exceptions taken against the proceedings by the Heir to the Wifes inheritance viz. I. S. as that the said Feme was not of full age at the time of the Fine Levied and other undue means committed in getting out the Son Yet by the whole Court the Fine was held good Law for Facta valent multa que fieri prohibentur If there be Tenant for Life the Remander in Fee to an Infant and they both Levy a Fine and afterwards as to the Infant the Fine is Reversed yet the Conusee shall have the Land for the Life of the Tenant for each may pass and give what he lawfully may If there be two Jointenants and one of them suffer a Recovery declaring the uses of the whole this shall bind but only a Moiety unless the consent of the other Jointenant can be proved Heir IF an Heir be sued upon a Bond and Lands are proved to descend unto him from his Ancestor you must have a special Writ to enquire what those lands are worth to be delivered to the Plaintiff at a reasonable extent and price and if the Heir confess the Action and shew what Lands come to him by descent Then his Body and all other his Lands and Goods and Chattels are free from that Execution but if he deny the Action and plead Riens per descent or it go by default against him then Execution shall be against Body Goods or other Lands And the Declaration shall be in the Debet and Detinet as though it were his proper Debt Outlawries and Outlaws OVtlawry was pleaded in Barr and day given before when the Defendant reversed it the Defendant shall not be condemned for Failer of Record but Respondouster Green against Gascogne vide Title failer of Record Yel 36. Outlawry in the Kings Bench reversed by Error in the same Court but that is for Error in Fact not in Law as if no Outlawry lay in the Case and if Process of Outlawry lie in an Action upon the Case for turning a Water-Course vide P. 10. H. 7. pl. 15. Dy. 195. b. 196. Original in Debt called the Defendant Nuper de Lond. Exig called him de Lond. is erroneous for it must pursue the Original without Variance and the Original was against Lancelot the Exigent was against Lancelot ill 3 Cro. 49. vid. 50 95. 104. 116. 172. Error of a Judgment in Debt and Outlaw'd 2. on it against 2. where the Sheriff return'd quod non habent bona out catalla quod summon ' potuer it should have been per quod c. 2. it should be nec eorum aliquis het ' 3. the Original is against Lancelot A. and the Exigent is against Lancelot A. 4. 't is said in Hastings and it should be in Hustingis de Com. plac revocetur Lancelot vers ' Jones 3. Cro. 50. An Outlawry was reversed because it was against Lewellin with a single l and now the mean Process against Llewellin with a double Ll and it was against two and returned quod non sunt inventi and not nec eorum aliquis Llewellin against Watkins vide M. 2. R. 3 4 13. pl. 16. 3 Cro. 85. 104. 49. 50. 116. 198. 240. 248. 205. M. 21. H. 7. pl. 37. Exigent names no place where the Sheriff is to have the Body and that adjudged Error to reverse the Outlawry For the Sheriff cannot tell in what County to carry him Cesar against Stone 3 Cro. 104. Outlawry reversed because the Party was Indicted in Com. Somerset and supposed to be of London and the Capias awarded to the Sheriff of Somerset where it ought to go to the County where he lives Rorset's Case 3 Cro. 179. vid. Dy. 295. b. vid. M. 1 E. 4. pl. 2. One Outlawed of Felony assigned his Term and then reversed the Outlawry the Grantee shall maintain Trespass for the Profits taken in the mean time between the Assignment and the Reversal of the Outlawry For though it was then the King 's yet it is now as if no Outlawry had been at all Ognell's Case 3 Cro. 270. vide 218. Accord Outlawry is not reversed but by pleading without Writ of Error per tot Cur. though there be apparent Faults in it 3 Cro. 274. vide Co. 1. Inst 259. b. One is Outlawed and has his Term sold and then reversed the Outlawry he shall be restored to the Term it self not the Money Otherwise if sold on a Fieri Facias c. quod vide plus Title Exec. Eyre against Woodfare 3 Cro. 778. Co. 5. Rep. 90. b. 1. Acc. pl. 285. In Debt against an Executor the Defendant pleads that the Testator was Outlawed and doubted if a good Plea because the Testator may have some Goods not forfeited by Outlawry as simple Contract c. but on the other side such special Ass shall not be intended to Com. next he has nothing Wooley against Brade 3 Cro. 575. 851. Outlawry reversed because the Writ was Teste Edmund Anderson so wanting a Title had no Teste which is the Warrant of it Growdy and Juham 3 Cro. 592. Judgment against two in Debt C. and B and Capias only against one and he Outlawed whereupon was brought Error and reversed it because the Capins should have gone against both Also 't was not per Judiâ— ' Coron ' Beverly against Beverly 3 Cro. 648. Debt against the Sheriff on an Escape where the Case was that the Party was Outlawed after Judgment reversed it by Error within the Year and because he assigned not any Error the Plaintiff took out a Capias utlegatum and the Sheriff took him and let him go and resolved for the Plaintiff and in Co. 1. Report of this Case the difference is taken of an Outlawry
a Scire Facias to present for he cannot present but is to prosecute the Execution of the Judgment sed he is not privy to it Beverleys Case Mo. pl. 378. If one forfeit a Presentation fallen by Outlawry and the King presents and he reverses the Outlawry he shall have a Scire Facias and outs the King's Clerk For by the Reversal he is restored to all that he lost as Principal not Accessaries therefore if the Advowson were appendant and it becomes void whilst the Mannor is in the King's Hand for Outlawry and the King presents he shall not avoid it tho' he reverse by Error nor Rent-Copy-holders put in by the King and if it were an Advowson in Gross and becomes void whilst in the King's Hands and the King presents it seems he shall avoid it after Reversal because the Advowson is the Principal thing and the Presentment but the usage of it Beverly against Cornwall Mo. pl. 421. 3 Cro. 44. The Sheriff ret ' ad Com' Lanc ' tent ' ibidem c. where it should be ad Com' Lanc ' tent ' apud Lanc ' or other place cert ' and for that the Outlawry was reversed though dict' many Presidents that passed subsilenter ' Co. 4. rep 95. a. My Lord Co. says the better Opinion of Books is and so is his that Debts by simple Contract or for which one may wave Law are forfeited by Outlawry and with him his Heirs agree the Judges Pop. And. and others 1 Inst 128. b. he says Debts c. which are cetain are forfeited not Damage c. uncert ' but so 10 22. t is said in Debt on a Contract Outlawry in Plaintiff Abatement because the Defendant not forfeited but on a Bond 't is pleaded in Bar because the Defendant forfeited Co. 4. rep 93. a. 95. a. My Lord Cook says that at Common Law if the Party was Outlawed he was at an end of his Suit and put to his New Original yet he granted no Capias lay in Debt at Common Law so it seems Outlawry lay where no Cap ' lay at Common Law Garner's Case Co. 5. rep 58. a. One Outlawed in Debt after Judgment dies after the General Pardon wherein 't is provided none take Advant ' of the Party that is Outlawed after Judgment without satisfying the Plaintiff and having the Pardon allowed in Scire Facias yet resolved First here the Outlawry was pardoned quoad the King and may make Executors and take Advantage of the Pardon Secondly Here being no Capias ad satisfac ' which he against the Executors nor no Scire Facias therefore the Executors satisfying the Party may plead it without Scire facias Sir Edward Fetton's Case Co. 6. rep 79 80. Outlawry reversed because the Exigent required the Sheriff to Arrest ita quod habeat Corpus in Cro. Trin. and St. is of no signification Dr. Drurie's Case Co. 8. rep 141. a. One Arrested that had Priviledge sues a Supersedeas and after is Outlawed there is a Nullity in all Proceedings and the Outlawry declared void without suing any Writ of Error Co. 8. rep 143. b. Outlawry by Asst ' being avoided by Plea 't is held by Cro. that it s no Determination of the Original but he might have proceeded in the Original suing another but the first Original should have excused within the Statute of Limitations Sir Thomas Finch against Lamb. Citer Just sembl con 1 Cro. 214 215. Exigent against three Men and two Women ret ' non comperuer ' ideo per Judic ' Com' utlegat ' existant ill and reversed because not said nec eorum aliquis comperuit 2. The Women ought to have been waviati Middleton's Case 2 Cro. 358. It seems one cannot assign for Error that he was beyond Sea at the time of the Outlawry pronounced but time of the Exigent For if after Exigent one fly he cannot assign for Error that he was beyond Sea and if he do the Attorney General may reply that he departed after the Exigit Carter's Case 2 Cro. 464. Partition IF two have one Mannor in Common before Partition the one is said to have dimidium Manerii but after Partition he is said to have medietatem Manerii And so after Partition if one of them be ousted by Force the Indictment shall say medietatem not dimidium Manerii Priviledge ONe of the Clerks of the Chancery lost his Priviledge by suing out a Supersedeas in the Common Pleas For by that Writ he submitted to the Court there and then his Priviledge shall not be allowed there Parsâ—n IF a Parson that hath a Benefice be made Bishop of the same Diocese and he acccepts of the Bishoprick the Parsonage thereby becomes void for that he cannot Visit himself So that a Man cannot have two Benefices with Cure of Souls Simul Semel but the first is void by Acceptation of the Second Tith The Tith of those things which proceed from the Earth as Hay Corn Apples and such like ought to be severed upon the Ground or place where they grow but not so of Sheep Pigs c. because they are of another Nature And if a Man have Sheep in two Parishes the Parsons of both Parishes shall have Tith of them Willows Horn-bane and Sallows are Titheable but Timber-Trees as Oak Ash Elme c. are not nor the Loppings of them contra if they be fell'd or lopp'd before the Growth of Twenty Years per totam Curiam Hill 8. Jacobi in Communi Banco Plea If a Parson makes a Parol Agreement of his Tithes for his Life and afterwards grants the same to another who sues for the Tithes Concord is no Plea in this Case but by Warberton Justice a Parson may grant his Glebe Corn before it be Sowed and good for a Year Trin. 10. Jacobi in C. B. If a Parson gives 10 l. to the Patron to present him to the next Avoidance the Church being full it is Simony So if the other give it to such intent Mich. 14 Jacobi in Communi Banco But if the Parson who is in by Simony dies if the King shall present quaere et vide ibid ' in Quare impedit inter Winscomb et Episcopum Winton ' et alios Of Pleas and Pleading A Bond was made and delivered as the Act and Deed of A. to B. for the use of C. which Bond B. offered to C. but C. refused to accept the same from B. yet B. left the same with C. to take and the Bond being sued A. pleads the whole Matter and so not his Deed And upon a Demurrer Judgment and Quaer ' If the Condition of an Obligation be to pay 20 l. 7. Maii and the Obligor pleads solvit ad diem although he paid the said 20 l. to the Obligee the 8th of April before it 's a good Plea to say he paid it the 7th of May For if it be paid before it 's paid at the day in the Condition mentioned and the Intent and Substance of the Condition is observed
that the Lapse shall incur within a Month if upon a Disturbance the Lapse be suffered he shall recover Damages within the Equity of Westm ' 2. though it says per tempus semestre and yet here 't is but one Month. 2 Inst 362. The two years Damages or Imprisonment are given whereby the party loses his presentation by the Disturbance or might lose it by the six Months passing but if the Church remain void after the six Months so as he may have his Turn he may pray a Writ to the Bishop and take's half years damage for two years and loses his Turn 2 Inst 363. Westm ' 2. Cap. 5. gives the Quare Impedit de Prebendis Capellis Vicariiis Hospital c. yet de Capella a Writ was before 2 Inst 363. If one Parcener usurp the Turn of the other it puts not the other out of possession but he should have his Turn when it happens and this extends to their Assigns so if one Joynt-tenant presents alone it puts not his Companion out of possession Ib. 365. 1 Inst 186. b. Tr. 1. 243. a. In a Quare impedit the Ordinary must shew the Cause of Refusal specially and directly that the Court by Advice of Learned men may judge whether sufficient Causes of refusal may be in respect of the person as Bastardy Villany Outlawry Excommengement Laity under Age c. in respect of Inability as unlearned c. and if the Refusal before Ecclesiastical Causes as Heresie Schism Want of Learning c. he must give notice to the Patron if Temporal as Felony Homicide or other temporal Crimes or the Party be disabled by Statute or Temporal Law notice need not be unless so provided by the Statutes and the Ordinaries Refusal concludes not the party but he may deny it and then the Court shall be certified by the Metropolitan or if temporal it may be traversed and tryed by Issue and if the party refused be dead it shall be tryed per Patriam least there should be a Failure of Justice because the King cannot examine him 2 Inst 632. 5. rep Speccot's Case Dy. 254. b. 291. b. 6. rep Green's Case 4 rep Holland's Case Dy. 327. 328. 58. Yel 7. If an Alien be presented to a Living the Bishop ought not to admit but may lawfully refuse him 4 Inst 438. One that has Judgment to recover in Quare Impedit is sued to be outlawed Quaere how the King shall have it Whether the King shall have it either by Scir Fac ' against the Plaintiff or Incumbent that is presented by Lapse Beverly against Arch-bishop of Canterbury Ow. 53. Dy. 26. a. 129. 130. 269. a. 283. A Mannor whereto Advowson is appendant the Church is void a Grant of the Mannor which the Advowson passes not the Avoidance neither in the King nor in the case of a common Person for 't is a Chattel vested Dy. 300. a. Next Avoidance is granted to A. and B. and becomes void and then B. releases to A. totum Jus c. and A. being disturbed brings a Quare Impedit in his own Name for by the Release Nichil operatur therefore his Companion shall joyn with him Ow. 65. 32. 1 Aud. pl. 241. Quare Impedit it lyes of a disturbance of a Presentation and Nomination to an Archdeaconry Ow. 99. Sale against Epm ' Litchfield Several have an Advowson to present by Turns and one presents c. if his Clerk be deprived yet it shall go for his Turn unless the presentations c. were all void as 't is for not reading the Act or as in Windsor's Case where one prosecuted upon the Deprivation of another and the Deprivation taken off and the Parson restored by future Sentence and the Advowson is granted over after the Church void by Deprivation quod non est lex For one Grantee cannot release to his Companion Co. Inst 276. b. Ow. 131. Lees vers ' Epm ' Coventry 5 rep Windsor's Case Assize of D. Darrein presentment against several one makes Default if they do not plead in Abatement The Assize shall not be awarded because it cannot be taken by parcels therefore a Re-summons shall be awarded against him that makes Default and the like to the Jury Hutt 3. By an Usurpation upon a Grantee or Lessee for Years the true Patron is out of Possession and the Usurper in possession of the whole Fee so that against him the Writ of Right lies but by Westm ' 25 he in Reversion may have a Quare Impedit whent he Church is void and re-continue it Hutt 66. Hob. 240 322. 1 Inst 249. a. The King having no Right presents one by Lapse the Church is not void as to Spiritual matters to wit to have Tithes c. for to that purpose he is Incumbent but as to hinder the true Patron of his Presentment he is not but the Church void Hutt 66. Hob. 302. He that recovers in a Quare Impedit presents his Clerk and has him admitted without any Writ to the Bishop 't is as good as if he had like one that entered after Judgment without habere facias possessionem Hutt 66. The King presents having no Title the Patron gives another a presentation and then recovered against the King 's Presentee then the presentation was exhibited to the Bishop Issue being if the Church were void when the Patron presented held it was For he presented when the presentation was exhibited and that was after the Judgment and so it had been if it had been exhibited before the Bishop Then the Patron recovers and then exhibited to the Bishop again 't is a good Presentation For the Patron could not revoke or give a new presentation for he had passed over his Title by that Hutt 66. In a Quare Impedit the Plaintiff made his Title from the Colledge of c. and was seized and presented and that after the Plaintiff's Ancestor was seized and presented and that he was attainted of Treason and the Colledge usurped on the King and that afterwards the Attainder was reversed and the Church became void and so it belonged to him to present And the Defendant demurred and had Judgment without making any Title Dy. 24. b. The Church being void the Patron grants proximam praesentationem c. the next Avoidance passes not being a thing in Action but the Grantee shall have the next after 2 Cro. 91. if the Church voids by the Incumbents taking a Bishoprick or Plurality the Grantee must take that Avoidance and cannot have the next Dy. 26 a. 31. Ow. 131. 53. Dy. 121 130 282 283 269. a. 1 And. pl. 32. If Co-parceners agree to present by turns the Composition is exempted by presentment by every one in their Turn and in Quare Impedit afterwards brought he need not mention the Composition because exempted Dy. 29. a. F. N. B. 33. l. One seised of an Advowson grants proximam Advocationem to one and then granted proximam Advocationem to another Fitzherbert held the second Grant void
of a Recognizance entred by A. and B. returned Terre-tenants come in and plead that C. hath three Acres of A. Land not summoned c. whereof he was seized in Fee Issue that A. was not seized of three Acres Verdict find that he and E. were joyntly seized and infeoffed C. per Popham and Gaudy 't is against the Defendant for now though the moyety of these Lands are subject to the Extent yet upon the special Plea which is false for A. was not seized alone of them in Fee as the Plea alledges he cannot abate the Writ Fenner con ' Dame Needam against Buning Vide 3 Cro. 524. 52. Scire facias against two for Damages recovered in Assize by three one Defendant pleads that one of the Plaintiffs supposed by the Plaintiff to be dead at the time of the Scire Facias was alive and the other pleaded that one of the Plaintiffs now supposed alive is dead ill for they must joyn in Dilatories though objected they might have severed in their Pleas to the first Vide p. 26 H. 8. pl. 7. One imparls the other demands the view in a Precipe quod reddat quaere of that M. 7. H. 7. pl. 8. m. 10. H. 7. pl. 6. m. 12. H. 7. fo 3. Scire Facias to have Restitution of Money or Reversal of Judgment the Defendant pleads Payment not good against a Record without matter of Record or specialty and 't was long before it was agreed that levyed by the Sheriff in a Scire Facias was a good Plea but at last agreed because grounded on the Scire Facias which he cannot withstand Vrse against Harrison sed vide 2 Cro. 29. Ognel against Randal Per Popham bare payment without Writing is no Plea to barr an Execution by Fieri Facias of Scire Facias vide H. 4. 58. 59. In Debt on a Judgment leavyed Fieri Facias and paid to the Plaintiff no Plea because the Sheriff is to bring the Money into Court not to deliver it to the Plaintiff other if the Lands were extended by Elegit 1 Cro. 239. Scire Facias as Cousin and Heir to D. viz. Fitz A. c. Plea that I had no such Son good and he needs not shew who was the Plaintiff's Mother as if it had been pleaded the Plaintiff was not the Son of A. for then the Birth of A was confessed he must when he takes one Mother from him give him another but here the Birth of the Plaintiff is not at all mentioned admitted or granted Vide talem 11 H. 456. b. 74 75. H. 4. 38. 9. E. 3. 30. 31. Plea that he had no such Son not admitted but he for to plead whose Son he was 8 H. 4. 21. a. 9 E. 3. 30 31. Scire Facias on a Recovery against the Heir and Terre-tenants the Sheriff an Heir and four more Terre-tenants the Heir Nil dicit the other four plead that two of them are Joynt-Tenants of part with J. S. not named and resolved that the Joynt-tenancy is a good Plea in this Action but not for all but for that part wherein the Joynt-tenancy is but because all joyned where but two were Joynt-tennants the Plea was ill for all four Holland against Donitree c. 3 Cro. 739. Scire Facias on a Recognizance Defendant pleads an Acquittance Plantiff replies 't is razed in such and such material places and demands Judgment of the Writ per Curiam this being but a matter tryable by the Court is but a Plea in Abatement whereon a respond ' Ouster shall be and lies not peremptory sic de Margine dict in all In all our Books Matters tryable by the Court go only in Abatement and are not peremptory which seems must be intended either of matters of Fact or with some restraint for every Plea in Law is tryable by the Court 5 E. 3. 32 b. Scire Facias on a Judgment against an Executor he pleads a Judgment to J. S. of 100 l. another to himself of 100 l. and that he has but 100 l. to satisfie J. S. and says not ultra to satisfie himself ill for he may pay himself if he have not ultra to pay J. S. and himself he is not bound to pay the Plaintiff Feltham against Executors of Tourston Tr. 8. Car. 2. in Scaccario In Scire Facias on a Recognizance for the Plaintiff 't is sufficient to assign breach that he beat one contra Pacem without saying vi armis aliter in Battery Hutchins against Perryman M. 14. Jac. B. R. 3. Bulstr ' 220. In Scire Facias of a Judgment against an Executor he pleads Plene administravit Jour de brief ill for he might have paid Bonds before so should he have pleaded Riens tempore mortis nec unquam postea but the Plaintiff taking Issue waved the benefit of the ill Plea Harcourt against Wrenham Mo. pl. 11. 78. Sheriff Bailiff c. ALattitat was delivered to the Under-Sheriff to be executed the Defendant being in Company with the Under-Sheriff and the Under-Sheriff lets the Defendant go and returns non est invent ' Whereupon the Plaintiff brings his Action of the Case against the Under-Sheriff setting forth the whole Frand and Falseness of the Under-Sheriff and Judgment by default But upon Motion in Court in Arrest of Judgment the Action did not lye for the Sheriff is the person alone to answer in Court for all Misdemeanors of the Under-Sheriff and Bailiffs Upon a Fieri Facias if the Sheriff return that he hath levyed the Money and do not pay it to the Plaintiff at the Return of the Writ the Plaintiff may have a Scire Facias against the Sheriff to shew cause wherefore the Sum levyed should not be levied of the Goods of the Sheriff The Sheriff cannot break open any man's House or Close upon a Fieri Facias executing and much less the Landlord shall not break open doors to distrein for Rent but where the King is concern'd as upon an Utlary there the Sheriff may justifie the breaking open the doors if he be resited but he must acquaint them in the House with the Cause of his coming before he force them open If a man be in the hands of the Under-Sheriff in Execution for Debt and the Debtee tell the Sheriff that the Prisoner hath satisfied him if the Sheriff release not the Prisoner it is false Imprisonment A Bailiff having a Warrant to attach the Goods of a Person to answer at the Couâ—ty Court doth attach the Goods accâ—rdingly and after delivers them to the Defendant and takes Bond of him to appear at the day or redeliver the Goods to the Bailiff this is not within the Statute of 23 H. 6. A Bailiff of a Liberty cannot execute a Capias Vtlegatum and if the party be in the hands of the Bailiff the Sheriff may take him for it is a Non Omittas in it self Per Curiam Hill 13. Ja. in C. B. Observations upon the Statute of 29 Car. 2. Regis for prevention of
ab Actione praecludi ill being specially demurred on it ought to be petit Judic ' et dampna sua sibi adjudicari Lady Broughton against Holly Tr. 21 Car. 2. B. R. Trespass for Battery Defendant pleads son Assault demesn Plaintiff replies the Defendant would have rid over him and he molliter assaulted the Defendant in defence of his person and so the Battery was of his own Assault qui est idem insultus In the Barr the Defendant demurrs and Judgment for him for the Replication molliter assaulted ill it should have been molliter manus imposuit Jones against Trysillian Tr. 21 Car. 2 B. R. Trespass for taking his Cattel Defendant justifies damage feasant in his Free-hold Plaintiff replies and claims Common to a Messuage c. Defendant rejoyns that he set sufficient Common for all the Cattel levant and couchant in the Messuage Plaintiff demurrs and objected he should have averred sufficient Common to the Messuage for all levant c. for at that time he might not have so many levant as he had right of Common for but adjudged the Rejoynder good Leech vers ' Mickley H. 21 22 C. 2. B. R. Trespass Defendant justifies as Owner of an House and says That long before the Trespass he was et adhuc seisit ' existit and doth not say necnon tempore Transgression ' praedict ' yet per Hob. Winch and Hutton good Grise against Lee Winch 16 17. Trespass for Battery of A. and B. his Servant per quod servitium amisit Defendant justifies because A. and B. would have erected a Building to the Nusance of his Lights and on demurrer adjudged ill because he says not as Servants or by command of the Plaintiff And then he answers the quod servitum amisit which is the Gist of his Action Norris against Baker H. 13 Jac. Bridg. 47. Trespass for entring and breaking his Close and driving his Cattel Defendant justifies as to the Entry and driving the Cattel Issue of it and Verdict but Judgment against him because he proved not the Breach as well as the Entry Praunce against Tuckle P. 8 Jac. B. R. Rot. 138. 1 Bull. 164. Trespass str May Defendant Justifies 7 May quae est eadem c. and on demurrer adjudged a good Plea without a Traverse and if he had Justif ' of the same time he need not say quae est eadem but at another time he must Vasterope against Taylor H. 8 Jac. Rot. 1337. Trespass for Assaulting Wounding Taking and Imprisoning the Defendant quoad the Assault and Wounding pleads Not Guilty and as to the Taking and Imprisoning justifies and on Demâ—rrer ill because he justifies not the Assault and there could be no taking without the Assault and the quoad captionem and Imprisonment does not imply and include the Arrest Wilson against Dodderidge Hill 12 Jac. B. R. 2 Bulstrod 335. Trespass Defendant makes Title by Descent from J. S. to himself as Heir Plaintiff demurrs generally resolved then of the not saying how Heir but forme and amendable Duke of New-Castle against Wright M. 18. Car. 2. B. R. Trespass for breaking six Closes Not guilty to two pedibus ambulando for the rest pedibus ambulando he justifies for a way upon which Issue For the Trespass cum Averiis he pleads want of Inclosure The Plaintiff saith the Inclosure was good and the Defendants Cattel unruly absque hoc that they were out of Repair upon which the Defendant demurrs and for cause shews that the matter of Inducement is idle Opinion of the Court was that 't was good and the Traverse necessary upon that Inducement that an Inducement is not material a man may have many if the Issue offered be single resolved the Replication good Parnell against Row Anno 15 Car. 2. in B. R. Trespass Quare clausum fregit cuniculos suos ad valentiam c. Verdict for the Plaintiff moved in Arrest of Judgment that it ought not to be ad valentiam of a living thing but precii 2. That it ought not to be cuniculos suos resolved by the Court 1. Ad valentiam was but matter of Form 2. That it shall be intended that it appeared upon the Evidence that they were domestick Coneys and that the Jury were directed by the Judge Also that the Jury gave not any greater Damages in Respect of Property alledged by the Plaintiff in his Count. Judgment for the Plaintiff per totam Curiam Sir Orlando Bridgman also declared that the Opinion in 1 Cro. 15 Car. Child against Greenhill that of Deer in a Park or Coneys in a Warren a man might say suos is not Law and contrary to Coke lib. 7. Case of Swans Saywell against Thorpe 16 Car. 2. in C. B. Trespass quare coepit c. 100 Oves Judgment for the Plaintiff Damages 2 d. after which upon another Action for the Conversion it was resolved that the damages were only for driving them away and not for the Conversion 1 Cro 36. Lacon against Bernard He that hath the possession of an Hawk may have an Action of Trespass for striking and killing her 1 Cro. 18. Sir Fran. Vincent's Case Trespass a man after he is arrested upon a Latitat tenders Amends according to 21 Jacobi resolved it comes too late 1 Cro. Wats against Baker 264. Trespass lies of Trespass done in an Hamlet Yelv. Lapworth against Wast fo 77. Trespass the Plaintiff lays it in an Acre bounded c. with Abuttels the Jury found it to be in Dimidio Acrae infrascript ' 't is good also if the Jury had found it to be half an Acre whereas it was assigned an Acre 't were well enough Yelv. Winkworth against Man 114. But in an Ejectione firmae 't were incertain and void Yelv. ibid. 2 Cro. 183. 2. Wager of Law IN Debt for an Amerciament in a Court-Baron 't is said one cannot wage Law But two or three Presidents are there cited where in such Cases Wager has been Mo. Pl. 430. In Debt by an Attorney for his Fees the Defendant cannot wage Law But for Monies laid out by him as a Solicitor he may Rolls versus Jermin Mo. Pl. 500. Tenetur that the Defendant cannot wage Law in Account for the profits of Lands Popworth versus Archee Mo. Pl. 670. A wager of Law may be done by eight ten or twelve hands As the Court shall appoint The Party is to swear directly that he oweth or detayneth nothing The Compurgators that they beleive that he oweth or detaineth nothing Term. Ley. 341. Cooke sayes Debts by simple Contract are forseited by Outlary though it puts by the party his Wager of Law and so he sayes is the latter opinion of the Books and of the Judges now And he sayes in every Quo minus by the Kings Debtor it puts the Defendant by his Wager of Law for the benefit of the King though not party à fortiori where the King is adjudged party Slades Case Co. 4. Rep. 93. a. 95. a b. 9 Rep. 88. a. 89. b.
and afterwards the Defendant said of him He is a forsworn Rogue in taking an Oath at the Sessions House an Action lyes for these words although it was objected in Arrest of Judgment that if he swore falsely before an Inquest of Office it is not within the Statute of 5 Eliz. for admit it were not yet they all agreed that for such forswearing at the common Law he may be indicted and therefore if it be out of the Statute yet an Action lyes for this Slander Mich. 13. Car. Pruer against Moadman If a man saith of an other He is a Perjurer he swore once for me and the second time hath perjur'd himself with J. S. a Stranger Action lyes Mich. 9. Car. in Camera Scaccarii Adjudg'd in Writ of Error If a man saith of J. S. I will prove J. S. forsworn and that ten men can justifie and I could prove him perjur'd if I would The Action lyes not for the first words but it lyes for the latter for it is a great Slander to be reputed that it is in the power of any man to prove him perjur'd Pasch 5. Jac. B. R. Whitacre against Loverden per Cur. If a man saith to another I did not know that Mr. W. was your Brother he hath forfworn himself and I will prove him perjur'd or else I will bear his Charges Action lyes for these words although they are spoken conditionally to beaâ— his Charges if he did not prove him perjur'd Mich. 37. 38 Eliz. Woodroffs Case adjudged If a man saith of an other That he was perjur'd and he would prove him so by two Witnesses Action lyes for these words although he doth not say in what Court he was perjur'd or how Trin. 39. Eliz. B. R. Rayners case adjudged If a man saith to an other Thou wast perjur'd in a Court of Tottenham Action lyes for it shall be intended a sufficient Court to hold Plea Pasch 40. El. B. R. If a man saith to another Thou art a forsworn Knave and wast indicted by twelve men and hast compounded for it Action lyes for all being laid together it appears that he intended a Perjury in a Court of Record Mich. 1. Car. Gilbertin against Row adjudged in Arrest of Judgment If a man saith to another Thou art a forsworn Knave and I will prove thee forsworn in the Ecclesiastical Court Action lyes for these words for the Ecclesiastical Court is a Court known Pasch 40. Eliz. B. R. Shaw's Case adjudged To say to a man Thou art a Whore master or to a Woman Thou art a Whore no Action lyes because that it is merely spiritual without any temporal loss Trin. 11. Jac. B. R. Matthew against Croze per Curium 2 Cro. 323. To say of marryed man He hath had two Bastards thirty six years agone and he should pay for keeping of them no Action lyes altho he aver that by force of those words there was Contention between him and his Wife and he was in danger to be divorc'd for there is not any temporal Loss and the Offence was pardon'd by many general Pardons it being 36 years before Pasch 16. Jac. B. R. Randal against Beal adjudged in Arrest of Judgment He had a Bastard-child by Jennings his Wife of Northampton by speaking of which words the Plaintiff saith in his Declaration that he refused to marry with A. S. whereas it ought to be that A. S. refused to marry with him The Action lyes not Mich. 11. Car. B. R. Carters Case per Cur ' If a man saith to a Feme Covert Thou bold Cullobine-bastard-bearing Whore thou didst throw thy Bastard into the Dock at White Chappel no Action lyes for these words altho it may be intended that she had a Bastard by the said Cullobine who in truth was her husband before Marriage inasmuch as there appears not to be any temporal damage by it by loss of any Marriage but only a Punishment by the Statute for having a Bastard which is not sufficient cause to maintain the Action Hill 10. Car. B. R. Cullobine ux ' against Vinor adjudged in Arrest of Judgment In an Action upon the Case if the plaintiff declare that whereas divers persons conabantur desiderabant to marry their Cosins and Friends to him the defendant being a woman on purpose to scandalize the Plaintiff and to hinder him from marrying with any Woman preferr'd a scandalous Libel against the Plaintiff in the Spiritual Court thereby charging him that he under colour of being a Suitor to her in the way of Marriage resorted often to her in the Night and lay with her and begot a Child of her body and after published and affirmed the same matter before divedrs persons falsly and maliciously whereby the plaintiff was so much scandalized that all honest persons having the fear of God before them aliquem mulierem de filiaâ—us aut consanguineis suis in legitimo Matrimonio cum quaerente copulari jungi semper postea hucusque omnino recusaverunt adhuc recusant And upon Not guilty pleaded the Jury found a special Verdict scil that the defendant preferred the said Famosum Scandalosum Libellum c. and that she afterwards at the Sessions of the Peace being examined who was the Father of the said Child begotten of her body said and affirmed that the Plaintiff was and that she did affirm it falso injuriose of the Plaintiff and that by reason thereof the Plaintiff was much scandaliz'd in his name and Fame and that all honest persons having the Fear of God before them Aliquam mulierem de filiabus consa guineis suis in legitimo matrimonio cum quaerente copulari jungi semper postea hucusque rccusaverunt adhuc recusant The Action in this case lyes not upon this special Verdict because here doth not appear any malicious Prosecution and here there is not alledged or found any loss of any particular Marriage or that he had any Communication of any particular Marriage and this general matter That all honest persons refuse by reason thereof to marry their Daughters or Cosins to him is too general Mich. 11. Car. B. R. intâ—r Norman and Simons per Cur. Adjudged in the Exchequer Chamber and the Judgment given è contra in B. R. reversed accordingly If a man saith of another that hath Land by Discent that he is base born no Action lyes for these words taken in mitiori sensu are not actionable Mich. 3. Jac. in B. R. per Curiam If a man saith of the Son and Heir apparent of J. S. that he is a Bastard no Action lyes because he hath no prejudice by it yet Mich. 3. Jac. in B. R. per Curiam If a man saith to a woman Thou hadst a Bastard no Action lyes because it doth not appear thereby that he intended that the Bastard was chargeable to the Parish in which Case a corporal punishment is to be inflicted by the Statute Hill 5. Câ—r B. R. Lightfoot against Pâ—got Rot.
or conversation are also Excommunicated Co. Lit. 134. If a Bishop be defendant an Excommunication by the same Bishop shall not disable the plaintiff and if no other matter be shewn it shall be intended for the same cause Co. Lit. ib. The Writ shall not abate for Excommunication in the Plaintiff or Demandant But the Judgment shall be that the Tenant or Defendant shall go quit without day because when the Demandant or Plaintiff hath purchased Letters of Absolution and they are shewed to the Court he may have a Resummons or Reattachment upon his Original according to the nature of his Writ Lit. lib. 2. ca. 11. Sect. 42. If an Alien brings an Action personal or mixt in his own right the Defendant may plead it in Abatement in disability of his person or in bar to the Action with this difference that in Actions personal or Trespass for breaking his house the defendant ought to aver that the plaintiff is an Alien born at such a place under the Allegiance of such a Prince who is Enemy to our Soveraign Lord the King for an Alien Friend as he may Traffick and have a House for a habitation so he may have an Action personal and Trespass for breaking his house as he may have a Writ of Error for necessity And the Opinion of the Lord Coke in his Commentary upon Littleton is That if an Alien Friend brings an Action it ought to be pleaded in disability of his person and not in barr to the Writ or Action but if he be an Alien Enemy the Defendant may conclude to the Action And therefore Mr. Theloal in his Digest of Writs well observeth That an Exception taken to a Writ propter defectum Nationis vel potius defectum subjectionis vel Ligeancie is peremptory and that the Action cannot be revived by Peace or League subsequent and that the King may grant Licence to Aliens to implead and likewise that such Aliens as come into the Realm by the Kings Licence or Safe Conduct may use personal actions by Writ though they be not made Denizens and that Denizens lawfully made by the Kings Grant and such Aliens born as are within the express words of the Statute of 25 E. 3. may use actions real by Original Writ Co. Lit. 129. a. b. 130. b. Co. 7. 1. Theloal Digest de Breifs Lib. 1. ca. 6. 32 H. 6. 23. An Alien may be Administrator and have Leases for years as well as personal Chattels and Debts Cro. Eliz. 683. Cro. Car. 8. 9. One brings an Action as Executor Utlary in the plaintiff is no Plea because he sues in auter droit but it is otherwise of Excommunication 21 E. 4. 49. 34 H. 6. 14. 14 H. 6. 14. If the defendant plead that the plaintiff is an Alien born and conclude to the person yet it seems he may demand the View 3 H. 6. 55. For the Pleading of Matters of Record in Abatement observe That in Formedon for a Mannor another Formedon depending for 20 s. Rent out of that Mannor is a good Plea 3 H. 7. 3. That where in Trespass the defendant pleaded that the plaintiff had brought Replevin against the Mayor and Commonalty of A. for the same cause and that he was one of the Commonalty die Captionis c. Necnon die impetrationis Brevis and it was there agreed That in Trespass a Replevin depending for the same Cause is a good Plea if there be not more Defendants in the Replevin than in the Trespass 8 H. 7. 27. A Quare Impedit is brought against the Bishop and another as Incumbent the Defendants plead that the plaintiff hath brought another Quare Impedit against the said Bishop for the same Presentation which was then depending undetermined and demands Judgment of the Writ and it was adjudged a good Plea But the plaintiff might have brought divers Quare Impedits against divers Defendants Hobart 138. 9. So in an Assise of Darrein Presentment it is a good Plea to say That there is a Quare Impedit depending for the same Presentation Hobart 184. But where an Assise is brought of Lands in one County an Assise for the same Lands in another County and Judgment thereupon cannot be pleaded So of a Recovery in Ancient Demesne because it cannot be intended that the Lands recovered in the Assise or in Ancient Demesne are the same Lands 4 H. 6. 24. Rast Entr. 65. In Formedon in le Diseender it is no Plea to say that the Plaintiff at another time brought a Formedon in the Remainder of the same Lands except both the Counts be of one and the same Gift 40 E. 3. 31. Where the Heir brought two several Formedons upon one and the same Gift although the last did vary from the first Gift yet it is no Plea in Abatement for he might claim by two Ancestors sub dono 4 E. 3 8. If the Defendant in a personal Action pleads another Action depending at the time of the purchasing the last Writ he ought not to say that it is yet depending for the last Writ is abated in Law notwithstanding he is afterwards non-suited in the first Writ Co. 6. Ferrers Case Where Note the diversity when the writ is general as Covenant Detinue Assise c. and the Certainty is in the Declaration for there if the Plaintiff is nonsuited in the first before he counts or declares the last shall not abate and when the writ is special and the thing demanded is specified therein as in Praecipe quod reddat c. What persons shall be admitted to plead in Abatement and what not Note One Defendant may plead the death of the other before the Writ purchased or that there is no such person in rerum natura 20 H. 6. 30. b. But in Replevin if the Defendant avow upon an Estranger the Plaintiff in the Replevin cannot plead in Abatement of the Avowry 22 E. 4. 35. b. If the Cognizee of a Statute sue execution against one Terretenant only without the other he cannot plead in Abatement but is put to his Audita Quaerela against the other because that the Cognizee is not bound to take Notice of all the Terretenants 16 Eliz. Dyer 331. a. Nota That after a Continuance the Defendant shall not be admitted to plead that the Plaintiff was made Bishop or that the Woman Plaintiff took Husband depending the Writ except that he pleads it after the last continuance but it is otherwise of the death or Coverture of the Plaintiff at the time of the Writ purchased because these Pleas do abate the Writ de Facto 32 H. 6. 10. 11. In a Replevin where the Plaintiff admits the Avowry the Priee shall not plead in Abatement but as Amicus Curiae and not then except it be apparantly known per totam Curiam 34 H. 6 8. In a Praecipe against I. S. the Son of W. Edmond at the retorn of the Grand Cape the Defendant said that his Father was named Esmond and by Thorpe it is a good
c. The same law if an Abbot make a Feoffment in Fee and afterwards is deposed and sometime after is made Abbot now he shall have an Action against his Deed which he himself made when he was Abbot because that now he comes in as Successor and not in the place as he was before The same Law of Warden and Schollars But it would have been otherwise if he had disseised a Parson and made Feoffment in Fee with warranty or without warranty and afterwards is made Parson now if he will use an Action his own Feoffment shall be a Barr against him because that all that he shall recover by this Action is to his own use The same Law if a man disseise a woman and makes a Feoffment in Fee and afterwards he takes the woman to Wife in this case the Husband shall be Barred because that he will have advantage of this Recovery to his own use If a man hath right to have Land where his Entry is tolle and releaseth to the Tenant all manner of Actions and dye his Heir shall have his Action and recover the Land because that by such release no right is extinguished and if the Tenant makes Feoffment in Fee or dyes seised he that made the release shall have his Action against the Heir of the Tenant or his Feoffee against his own release and the cause is because that nothing is released but his Action against the same person and not any right If the Son disseise his Father and make a Feoffment with warranty or without warranty and after his Father dyes he cannot ouste his Feoffee because that it was his own Deed. A man hath good cause of Action sometimes and yet by matter ex post facto and by the Act of a Stranger his Action is destroyed As I am disseisee and he is disseisor and I release to the disseisor Also I bail or lend Goods to one a Stranger takes them the bailor sells them to a Stranger c. Action of Debt upon an obligation brought by an Executor the writ shall be detinet and not debet and for this cause they joyn in the same Action for an Horse delivered by themselves to the same Obligor The same Law if a man recover Lands by default in which I have an Estate for life and he recovers by another writ by default Lands wherein I have an Estate Tail I shall have a Quod ei deforceat because the conclusion of the writ serves me And so a man may joyn two or three things in his Action where the conclusion of his Action is pertinent to the several matters and doth not vary If two or three Acres are given severally in tail and the party discontinue the whole his Heir shall have Formedon for the whole because that the writ is le quel un I. dit S. dona and although the Acres are given severally that is not material forasmuch as the common Writ will serve in this case But if the Acres are given by divers or several men or that the one shall be given to the Heirs Males and the other to the Heirs Females and the third to the Heirs General in this case the Heir shall have several writs and not one writ because that one writ cannot serve for such several Gifts If I deliver Goods to one who is indebted to me and he dyes against his Executors I may have a writ for the Goods and for the Debt because that the writ is against the Executors for the Debt in the Detinet and for the detinue it is in the Detinet and therefore the writ well warrants the count to declare partly for debt and partly for Detinue but such an Action he could not have had against the Testator because that for the debt against him the writ ought to have been in the debet and detinet A Feoffment is made upon condition of payment by the Feoffor he commits Trespass and afterwards enters by force of payment c. yet the Feoffee shall have Trespass because his possession is affirm'd 43 E. 3. Assumpsit If he would relinquish such a debt to pay him 30 l. and sayes he did relinquish it c. and after Verdict for the Plaintiff Judgment stayed because he shews not how he relinquished it and it may be by parol which were void Gregory versus Lovell 3 Cro. 292. Assumpsit in Consideration he would discharge him from an Arrest and sayes that exoneravit ipsum moved in Arrest c. he shews not how he discharged him sed non allocatur for they might be per parol or for a time but in Pleading a discharge of a Rent or bond which must be by Deed and perpetual it must be shewed how King versus Hobs. 2. Cro. 930. 960. Assumpsit the Defendant pleads the discharge of the promise whereof Issue taken and found for the Plaintiff and divers defects in the Declaration moved in Arrest of Judgment but by Wrâ—y all these defects tending to the Assumpsit are cured by the collateral Plea Manwood v. Buston 2. Leond. 203 204. Assumpsit If he would make it appear c. and sayes he made it appear by the Court-Roll Good without saying what the Court Rolls were for the Infinitly So a Bond to save harmless from all Estreates good without shewing what for the same reason Vide 9 E. 4. 15. a. 22 E. 4. 41. a Mo. Pl. 1175. 3 Cro. 149 Pl 3. 919. Pl. 3. 3 Bulst 31. Latch 130. H. 2. H. 7. Pl 22. H. 6. H. 7. Pl. 8. 8. 22 E. 4. 15. ab 28. b. 29. a. Assumed he would assign Goods to pay c. and sayes he assigned and shews not how but per scriptum yet good Note after verdict Forth v. Yates Tr. 30 Car. 2. B R. Assumpsit against an Executor who Pleads solvit to such a one on a Bond of 100 l. and to another 100 l. on a Bond and so to divers others which he was forced to do the Payment being post exhibitionem Bille and Pleads a Recognizance in force not satisfied the Plaintiff Pleads non solvit to such a one 100 l. nor to such a one 100 l. Et si de ceteris hoc petit c. and to the Recognizance that it was satisfied and kept in force of Fraud the Defendant demurred quià replicatio multiplyed and double consisting of two matters where one goes to the whole but Judgment for the Plaintiff for the first objection to one 100 l. to another 100 l. make several Issues though que de hoc And in case of an Executor one may answer to every thing alledged by him H. 21 22. Car. 2. B. R. Jeffreys v. Dod. Assumpsit to permit Land to descend breach laid quod non permisit well being in the negative but in the affirmative it ought to be shewed how disposed though they could not descend H. 9. Jac. B. R. rot 3 Bulstr 18. Assumpsit to perform an Award and sets it forth the Defendant pleads
that they did not Award modo et forma c. Et hoc paratus c. ill there he should have concluded all pais And on general demurrer ibidem where an Award was That one bound with Sureties assigns breach that he did not become bound modo et forma c.. well though the Award bind as to the Surety 't is good as to him A breach assigned that he did not c. and the modo et forma extends not to the Surety but to himself only though it be made modo et forma as Awarded Cooke versus Whorewood H. 22 23. Car. 2. B. R. rot 116. Assumpsit If he would abate Ten Pounds and forbear the 90 l. till Michaelmas to pay it and declares that he abated the 10 l. but shews not how but held ill on demurrer per tot Cur. Thornton v. Kempe 3 Cro. 477. In Conspiracy the Defendant justifies to carry in the Presentment found in a Leet before the justification and though there is no Conspiracy yet he must plead que est eadem Conspiratio P. 27 H. 8. Pl. 6. Conspiracy the Defendant pleads the Plaintiff has another Writ depending for the same the Plaintiff replyes nul tiel record and so 19 H. 6. 57. a Pleads that he removed the other Pleads nul tiel Record of the removal 9 H. 6. 14. a. Amendment IF an Original Writ be defaced it may be Amended at the discretion of the Justices Hill 25 et 26. Car. 2. B. R. The Clerk in the Kings-Bench may amend the Roll until a Recordatur be thereof made either in Writ of Error or by rule of Court Trin. 26 Car 2. in B. R. A Note was brought to a Clerk to make an Obligation who for milite writ generoso upon which the Process issuing the Plaintiffs Counsel came and prayed that this Misprision of the Clerk might be amended and upon mature deliberation all the Court agreed that it should be amended and the Lord Chief Justice said That at the Common Law no Original might be amended in this Court before the Statute of 8 H. 6. ca. 12. Which Statute enables them to amend only Misprision that is when the Clerk takes one word for another or where he writes a Latin word which is not Latin or false Latin as hos breve for hoc breve 9 H. 7. 16. b. or imaginavit for imaginatus fuit Benlowes Reports fo 19. or in a Writ of Partition to say Ostensurus quare non fuit for fuerit or Henricus deigratia c. when dei gratia should not be in the Writ or if it be matter of Form as Praecipe quod solvat for reddat 22 E. 4. in all which Cases last cited there shall be no amendment And the Lord Chief Justice Coke said That if the Defendaâ—t had been sued to the Utlary he would not have amended it but the Principal not being so it was amended See 11 H. 7. 2. 10 H. 7. 25. 11 H. 7. 1. Co. 8. Blackmores Case 156. Mich. 8 Jacobi Regis in Communi Banco If one makes an Obligation and Seal and deliver it and mistakes the day yet by Coke Lord Chief Justice it is good Mich. 8. Ja. â—bi supra If the Teste and the Retorn of a Venire facias be both upon one and the same day it is no Error although the Teste ought to bear date Fourteen days after but shâ—ll be amended and 7 E. 4. a Venire facias was retornable Mense Michaelis whereas it should have been Octabis Michaelis and the Jurors appeared It was agreed by the whole Court That it should be amended and that Error did not lye thereof Co. 8. Blackmores Cases fo 156. After Verdict in Ejectione firmae these Errors were alledged in Arrest of Judgment That where the Declaration was prout praedictus Willielmus which should have been Johannes 2. praedictus defendens similiter ponit se super patriam which ought to have been querens These are not Errors but Misprisions of the Clerk which by the Judgment of the whole Court shall be amended So 11 H. 7. 2. b. per Brian praedictus defendens c. was amended and 10 H. 7. 23. b. per Townsend a Barr was pleaded by the Tenant which concluded with praedictus Johannes is ready to averre c. where it should have been Rogerus It was amended by the Advice of all the Justices and Coke Lord Chief Justice said That Misprisions were amendable at Common-Law in the same Term for during the Term the Record is in pectore Judicis as 1 H. 6. 29 in Brooks Abridgment Title Amendment 32. if Judgment be entred in the King's-Bench or Common-Pleas otherwise then it is in Truth Or if Tales be awarded and marked on the back of the Writ or of a Scrowl and not entred on the Roll All these things may be amended in the Term and the reason of the Book is because that the Record is in the Justices and under their care the same Term and not esteemed to be on the Roll so absolutely but that they may amend the same at their discretions for they do not account it a Record until the next Term And this Amendment is by the Common-Law and not by the Statutes of Amendment of a Syllable or Letter And per Cheine ibid. The Justices of the Common-Pleas after a Writ of Error cannot at all amend the Roll where a Judgment was given the same Term and is mistaken in the Entry because the Roll is not a Record of that Term. And herewith agreeth 5 E. 3. That this was so at the Common-Law until the Statute of 14 E. 3. came which gives Power to amend process in the other Term and after 46 E. 3. the Case was Et praedictus defendens similiter whereas it ought to have been Querens but it was not amended because it was an old Roll and the Statute gives Authority only for New of the same Term they are Entred and then was made the Statute of 26 H. 8. which gives power to amend a Plea Roll but no Omissions can be thereby amended but Misprisions only Mich. 9 Jacobi in Communi Banco Weeks versus Blacksteed Lessee de Cambden A Venire facias in Ejectment is a warded to the Sheriff wherein the Plaintiff is named I. P. the Jury is retorned and give their Verdict by his true name viz P. P. and so is the Postea The Court said If the Record be true and not the Process it may be amended as a Misprision of the Clerk but contra if the Record be false and the Process true but in the principal point the venire facias was void and therefore they would advise upon it Mich. 10. Jacobi in C. B. Peircy versus Milton In Quare impedit the Writ was by the Misprision of the Clerk Bicaria where it ought to have been Vicaria and it was amended After a Writ of Error brought in the Kings Bench Serjeant Hutton moved that the Warrant of Attorney might be
where not Further if the Award be that he shall go to Pauls with an Estranger this is void and vet it is possible but peradventure the Stranger will not go with him Note if the Award be that one of the parties shall deliver to the other the Goods that is in the house of I. S. this is void and yet it is not impossible but because that he might do wrong to I. S. to enter into his house and to convey his Goods from thence But if the Property of the Goods be in the party that is to perform the Arbitrement peradventure it may be otherwise forasmuch as his Entry is lawful Audita Quaerela A Statute is Acknowledged before the Major of Westminster and Recordor of London according to the Statute The Cognizor being within the age of one and twenty viz. 20 years and upwards And after his full age to the 23 d he brings his Audita Quaerela upon this matter and Judgment that he take nothing by the Writ because it could not then be tryed by inspection whether he were within age or not And the form of the Writ in the Registors is to alleadge that he still is within age Audita Quaerela lyes upon Nihil facias but not upon Scâ—re facias 21 E. 3. For vigilantibus et don dormientibus subvenient Leges per Hutton Mich. 11 Jacobi in C. B. The Executor of the Conusee releaseth to the Conusor in a Statute Merchant and afterwards dyes and one takes Administration of the Goods of the Conusee not Administred and hath Execution of the Statute and against him the Conusor brings an Audita Quaerela Trin. 28 Eliz. rotulo 2136 in C. B. Avowry vide Replevin AVowry for an Amerciament in a Court Baron quia presentatum fuit that he was Summoned and came not and alleadges in fact that he was resident c. as he must c. for when t is only presentatum c. and not alledged in fact 't is ill Mo. Pl. 221. In Avowry it was set forth that a Dean and Chapter were seised in Jure Ecclesie and not said seized in Fee and held ill for they might be seized per auter vie and their Title ought to be certainly set forth and this is but that they made a Lease for 99 years per dodrige if it had been that they made a Lease for 200 years it had implyed a Feoffment in Fee Pop. 163. Latch 121. Avowry Avowry for damage feasant and shews a Lease from I. S. seized in Fee the Plaintiff says I. S. was seized in Tayl and conceives the Estate to himself as Heir the Avowal seizes the Land rendring Rent and that he had accepted it Qu. If it be not a departure 1 Jnst 304. It seems a fortifying of the Avowry and so not Sti. 41. Taylors Case Yelv. 134. Wood versus Haukshind i. Cro. 156. 2 Cro. 121. 3 Cro. 404 Dy. 956. 1 Jnst 304 Hob. 271 Dy. 103. 253 b. Yelv. 96 Leon. 32. 156. Avowry on a New Grant of a new Rent-Charge in Fee the Plaintiff pleads that nothing passes by the Deed 't is an ill Plea he should have said that he did not grant by the Deed for a thing not in Esse could not pass though it was raised by the Deed Stewards Case 2 Leond. 13. Avowry by an Executor for Rent reserved by her and her Husband upon a Lease for years derived out of a Lease Exception taken because not shewed when the Husband dyed so it appeared not due in his time but because all belongs to her one way or other Wellwood in Newman Latch 121 Pop. 163. Costs to the Avowant upon 7 H. 8. c. 4 vide Common et Commoners Sect 4. Costs given to the Avowant for Damage-Fesant by 21 H. 8. c. 19. Cro. 1. James vers Tutneg 532. Replevin against 3 the one Avowes and the other 2 makes Conusance and Judgment against the Plaintiff but reversed because that those two did not make Conusance as Bailiffs to another Yelv. Owen vers Williams 108. The Lord hath still his choice to avow as at the Common-Law but if he will take the Benefit of the Statute then the Privity on both sides is removed and the Tenant shall Plead any discharge though he be a meer Stranger for the Charge of the Land is only in question though in that Statute 21 H. 8. there be no literal Provision so to be Hob. Brown vers Goldsmith 108. Avowry for 5 l. and 80 l. nomine poenae no demand of the Rent was alledged which made it unsufficient for the penalty but Retorne adjudged to him for they appeared to the Court to be several Hob. 133 Howel vers Samback If the Donee Alien the Donor cannot Avow upon the Alienee Keilway 130. b. Prescription that if one be chosen Constable at the Leet he must serve himself or find a sufficient man to do it and the Avowant saies that the Plaintiff was chosen and did not find a sufficient man to serve upon which it was demurred and Adjudged That the Avowry was ill Escot vers Stokes 14 Car 2. in B. One who is a Stranger to the Avowry shall not Plead any Plea but hors de son Fee or some other which is Tantamount As Lord and Tenant the Tenant makes a Lease the Termor shall plead no Plea but hors de son Fee because that he is a Stranger to the Avowry and he cannot have a Writ of Mesne because it is a Maxime Where a man cannot be helped by way of Action he shall be aided by way of Reversion He that is a Stranger to the Avowry cannot disclaim for a man cannot disclaim in auter droit An Abbot cannot disclaim nor Tenant in Tail Mich. 9 E. 4. fo 34. Hill 8 H. 5. Disclaimer 11. 26. If a man hath common by Especialty as in Land held of me the Rent is not arrear if I take the Beasts of the Commoner I do him wrong and he shall recover damages for he may Plead rien arrere although that he be a Stranger to the Avowry If the Tenant be in arrearages with his Lord and the Tenant makes a Feoffment in Fee which was notice to the Lord in this case the Lord may choose whether he will take him for his Tenant or not if he will not tender him his arrearages and the reason is if he will accept him for his Tenant generally he shall never be received to avow for the arrearages afterwards But if the Tenant dye so that the Tenancy discends to his Son or that the Tenancy is recover'd or that the Tenant hath forjudg'd the Mesne so that he is become Tenant to the Lord Paramount in all these Cases he shall accept them for his Tenants and make Avowry upon them for all the arrearages and the reason is because they are become Tenants to him against his Will As to Avowries 5 things are to be known 1. AVowry upon my very Tenant where the Lord hath the Rent in Fee simple and the
abjure the Realm for Felony or be outlawed of Felony the Land shall escheat and the Son shall not inherit and yet both are Attainders in Law But every Custom that is against the Common-Law shall be taken strictly Debt DEbt super obligationem in London the Defendant Pleads Delivery as an Escroul in Midd super Conditionem c. et Issint non est factum by the Issint c. the special matter is weighed and amounts to the general Issue to be tryed in London per distre in Midd. et issint Rien luy doit is a waver of the special matter and tender of the general Issue P. 27 H. 8. Pl. 34. Debt against two Executors one Pleads plene administravit the other Pleads non est factum Testatoris and if they sever and have those several Pleas in Barr multum altercatur Choke they may Moyle they may not Danby Executors may sever but if they shall have these several Pleas doubted vide I' 37 H. 6. one Pleads Misnomer the other that he is Administrator doubted if Pleadable and ibidem the Authorites they are cited and vide 21 E. 3. 10 11 12. Defendants plead not Executors cannot plead severally in dilatories but in Barr they may P. 7 E 4. Pl 19 Debt upon Obligation to perform Covenants all being in the Affirmative he Pleads Performance general and by Inglefield and Fitz he ought to shew how he performed each specialty Sed vide Co. 1 Jnst 303. a. b. In Debt upon an Obligation conditioned to discharge the Sheriff Plea That he discharged the Sheriff without shewing how M. 5 E. 4. Pl. 21. Debt super Obligationem conditioned to pay to the Chamberlain of London and his Successors he Pleads Payment to A. Chamberlain and his Successors he must Plead how he came out of his Office and how the Successor came in Else A. shall be intended to continue in M. 4. E 4. Pl. 30. Debt against three Executors who Plead several Pleas and each goes to the whole per Danby Moy'e and Clark the Plaintiff may elect which he will have Tryed first Needham contra the most peremptory shall be Tryed first Hill 8 E. 4. Pl. 3. Debt against Executors they Plead a Judgment against the Testator by A. for 200 l. and another by B. for 100 l. And that they have not Assets but to satisfie the 200 l. per Bryan the Plea is double having Pleaded 2 Judgments and rely upon one 9 Eâ— 4. 12. a. Bond to pay 20 l. when A. comes into England from Venice Plea That A. was not at Venice not good for where part is to be done within part without the Tryal must be within Tr. 19. El. et B. Hales Case Ow. 6. One bound to save another harmless Pleads that he had saved him harmless and shewed not how 't is not good but non fuit damnificat generally is good et Pop. 297. dictum per Jones If the first be generally demurred on the advantage of it is lost for which I think it not Law for in Mansels Case Co 2. the Demurrer is general upon such a Plea and Judged ill et 2 Cro. 165. 363. One Action against several Defendants for one Debt c. they may sever in Barrs but not in Dilatories Hatton 26 Hob. 245. In Debt upon a Lease for years the Defendant pleads non habuit nec occupavit adjudged no Plea other then Tenant at Will by Fitz Herbert Dy. 14. In Debt upon an Obligation with Condition payment is a good Plea with Acquittance as appears Dyer 15 b. 1 Cro. 55. 2 Cro. 59. 360. 558. but payment on a single Bill Obligatory is no plea without Acquittance nor it seems upon an Indenture to pay so much for a forfeiture Dy. 6. a. 51. a. Co 5. rep 43. 2 Cro. 86. 377. 3 Cro. 157. 3 Cro. 455. Debt upon a Statute of Usury and misrecites the Statute of Usury and sayes in the Action the Defendant lent money usuriously and received the principle and so much for Usury and that is Traversed and found against the Defendant and moved to be a Jeofail but it seems both Surplus and he need not shew the Cause of Action in the Writ And shewing the Receipt was more then received for the very lending usuriously is against the Statute though he never received it Where one has special matter and pleads it and concludes with the general Issue It waves not the matter precedent as in Debt to plead unlettered issint non est factum or a special Payment issint Riens â—uy doit or for one to Plead that he was Joyntenant with his Feoffee at the time of the Feoffment et issint Riens passe per le fait 10 E. 4. 3. b. M. 9 E. 4. Pl. 15. et fo 19 b. Debt on a Bond against an Abbot he pleads Predecessors imprisoned the Prior and threatned the Monks to imprison them if they would not seal it double one the Imprisonment of the Prior the other the threatning of the Monks And if both should be traversed and one found for the other against the Plaintiff the Court should not know for whom to give Judgment M. 15. E 4. Pl. 2. In Debt of 100 l. the Administrator pleads Judgment of 200 l. to another So plene administravit and that he had not goods preterquam non attingen ' ad 200 l. the Plaintiff demurrs generally because he shewed no certain summ whereto the goods amounted according to Co 9. Merriel Treshams Case 109 b. Hob. and Winch held performance the substance Hob 133 Moore vers Andrews The King brought an Action of Debt and averdict upon non est factum pleaded and after pardoned the Debt which Debt he at the day in Bank pleaded and was allowed to do it because he could have no Audita Querela or sei facias against the King Co. 3. Jâ—st 135. Debt and shews that he made a Lease for years Rend c. the Lessee was thereby possessed and devised it to the Defendant and he entred and Null possession c. ill first because he shewed not that any was made Executor or that he entred by his Assent nor 2 that virâ—ute legationis he entred and then it might be for another Title Dy 254. b 3. Cro 537. Debt of an Obligation conditioned that he and his Wife should appear he pleads that at the time of the Obligation he was solus and innuptus Rolls held it did not amount to ne unque Loyalment accouple and ruled for Judgment upon Demurrer nisi Causa Yeane vers Skelton H 23 Car. 1. B. R. Sti. 17. Debt to perform an Award made 10 May ready to be delivered the 11 th of May Nul Award pleaded he replyes that the Award was made the 10 th of May to be delivered the same 10 th day of May The Defendant demurred for doubtfulness or departure Resolved not yet being a thing whereof Issue is to be of the Award not of the day of the Award Tyers Case Trin 23. Car.
1. B. R. Sti 4. Debt upon an Obligation he pleads that he pay'd at such a day the Jury find he did not pay at that day the Truth was theâ—e were two dayes of payment and he payd one part the one day and the other at the other day the Court seemed he is condemned by the Verdict and his own Plea P 24. Car 1. B. R. Sti. 93 94. Debt upon Obligation to perform Articles the Defendant pleads Covenants performed Issue and Verdict for the Plaintiff who moved for a new Tryal to prevent Error because no Issue joyned but the Court said it was a good issue but ill plea whereon he might have demurred and ruled the Defendant shews Cause why a Replication should not be Weights Case M 24. Car 1. B. R. Sti. 139 140. In Debt upon a single Bill the Defendant pleads he had paid and the other accepted part since the Action brought ruled a good Plea in Abatement of the Writ not in Barr of the Action as here 't is Hillingworth versus Whetstone P. 1649. B. R. Sti. 112 163 Co. 9 Jnst 303. 2 Cro. 304. 959. H. 10. H. 7. Pl 3. M. 21. E. 4. Pl. 38. Debt for 40. l. against an Executor he pleads that he received but 10 l. and 40 l. was due to him the Plaintiff replies that he is Executor de tort and has more goods Et hoc parat c. where it should be Et hoc petit c. ill and that discontinues the whole Plea Alexander versus Lane In Debt for Rent Lessee pleads that Lessor nil habet c. he replyes quod habet 't is ill not shewing what estate but cured by Verdict if Issue be joyned and found quod habet Hill versus Glassey Yel 227. 2 Cro. 312. Debt upon two Bonds whereof one is not due the Defendant pleads a Release of that and another Plea to the other both found against him and this shewed in Arrest of Judgment yet shall not be stayed for by his pretending a false Release he passed over that Advantage So in Debt by an Executor the Defendant pleads he has a Co-Executor who has released to him and found against him the Plaintiff has Judgment Friths Case 3 Cro. 68 69. 4041. 110. 111. In Debt on an Obligation the Defendant pleads al jour and issue of it puis darr contin he pleads that the money was attached in his hands in London Pel versus Pel 2. Cro. 101. Debt upon two Bonds the Defendant demands Oyer of the Condition one of which was to pay c. after performance of a Will the other was to pay c. within two years after the Devisor's death and performance c. and pleads that the Will was that he should make a Release and alledges the death to be at such a day which is within two years and that he required the Defendant to make a Release and he refused Issue of the death and all found for the Plaintiff moved in Arrest c. one day is not come and damages intire so no Judgment to be but per Cur. 't is only the Allegation of the Defendant that he dyed at such a day which if true the Defendant would have rested on it and not have pleaded a false Plea whereon the Issue is taken and found against him Thurbettle versus Reeve and Tye 3 Cro. 110. 111. 40. 41. 68 69. Debt upon an Obligation the Defendant pleads non est factum 't is found that he Sealed c. and the Seal was torn off after the Plea pleaded but on atthe time of the Plea 't is against the Plaintiff Mirral versus Scebrith 3 Cro. 120 Co. 5 Rep 119. b. Debt for Rent against an Executor he pleads Levy per distress and sans Detinet void find no Levy by distress but that an assignment was made by the Testator and the Rent paid by the Assignee and adjudged for the Defendant for the substance is on the new Detinet and the rest but circumstance S. Tho. Cecil versus Harriot 3 Cro. 140. Debt on a Bond conditioned to save harmless against another Bond of Fifty two pounds And so he saved him harmless but because that he shews not that he was not damnified before ill Denis versus Thomas 3 Cro. 156. In Debt on a Bond by A. and B. the Defendant pleads the Obligation was made to them and B. And that all three have an Action depending against him Judgment is got but because the Bond to three cannot be intended And that the Plea goes in Abatement and he has concluded in Barr ill Isumet Priscot versus Hitchcot 3 Cro. 102. Debt on Obligation conditioned If such Lands be four miles distant c. the Defendant pleads that 't is four thousand paces distant the plea Ruled good for a thousand paces is a mile So it tantamounts the Condition but how a mile or the spaces shall be reckoned per communem viam or strait as a Bird could Fly qu. Mirige versus Eat 3 Cro. 212. 267. Debt super Obligation conditioned to pay 35 l. at Michaelmas and 33 at Lady-day he pleads payment of the 70 l. secundum formam Conditionis good though objected he should have pleaded several payments for the several Conditions do implye it Lox versus Lee 3. Cro 256. In Debt a good plea in Barr replication ill Judgment by nil dicit because the Defendant never rejoyned shall not be reversed for that ill till all be made up herewith agrees Co 5. Rep. 55. a Princ. Boyer versus Jennings 3 Cro. 284. Debt against an Executor the Defendant pleads that pending the Action another brought an Action for a true Debt of the Testator which he confessed and that he has nothing wherewith to satisfie the Judgment the Plaintiff protestando that was a true Debt pro placito replyes that the Recovery was by Covin to deceive him Defendant demurrs and adjudged against him for the Covin is not Issuable but reversed in Error nor could the Recovery be by Covin if the Debt true Greene versus Wilcox 3. Cro 462 463. Obligation conditioned to appear in the Kings-Bench the Defendant pleads that the Court was adjourned to Hartford and that he appeared there ill not saying prout â—atet per Recordum Corbet versus Cooke 3 Cro 466. Debt super Obligation covenanted to appear in the Kings-Bench such a day and there elect two Arbitrators who with two more to be elected by the Plaintiff shall Award c. the Defendant pleads that he appeared there at the day and there elected two the Plaintiff was not there time enough for the Award to be made nor that he had his Arbitrators there Edwards versus Marks 3 Cro 549. Debt upon Obligation conditioned that if he upon request deliver the Plaintiff all the Tallow that shall be made before Michaelmas of all Beasts killed by him or his servants then c. the Defendant pleads generally prout in Condition the plaintiff demurred supposing he ought to set out particularly
Record Foâ— versus Iucks 2 Cro. 13â— In Debt against an Executor he pleads a Judgment in Barr and because he did not plead prout patet per Recordum it was resolved to be ill 2 Cro. 226. Defendant in Debt to perform an Award which was to enfeoff or Release or pay 20 s. pleads performance ill not shewing which for performance of any one is good excuse wherefore he must shew what he hath performed 27 H. 6. I. b. In Debt against an Executor or Administrator he pleads a Judgment and that he hath not Goods preterquam que non c. Co. 9. Rep. 109 110. 'T is held ill on general demurrer not shewing what summ he has but Hob. 133. More versus Andrews 't is held but form and good on general demurrer and Vide Co. Entr. 446. a. 148. Pl. 27. 152. a. 269. a. 617. b. It is oftner pleaded in the general then to plead a particular summ c. here the Court held it but a form and cured by General demurrer Davies versus Davies Tr. 16. Car. 2. B. R. Debt on a Bond conditioned to pay all c. Defendant pleads he paid all without shewing what the Plaintiff replied he received some summs and has not paid the replication good for the knowledg is on the Defendants side what he received therefore to have been set out by him and not by the Plaintiff in the Replication and therefore the Barr ill Woodcock versus Cole Tr. 16. Car. 2. B. R. Debt super Obligation conditioned to deliver such Letters by such a day plea that he delivered them secundum Conditionem ill for being to do a particular thing by a particular day he ought to have pleaded particularly and not generally secundum conditionem Brook versus Deane P. 16 Car. 2. B. R. Rot. 451. Debt upon a Bond at London conditioned that if a ship do not miscarry c. Defendant pleads she miscarryed in Cornwall ill for he cannot plead transitory matter in another County then the Action is laid and so altered the Trial and if he have local matter to plead he must shew it Collings versus Sutton Tr. 16 Car. 2 B. R. rot 1666. 11 H. 4. 50. a. b. Debt and counts that one possessed of a Term granted him a Rent by mean Conveyances is come to the Defendants and shews not how yet ruled good aliter if the Term be pleaded to come to himself or any that he is privy to Note This was after Verdict but no advantage taken of the Verdict Cotes versus Wade m. 18. Card. B. R. Debt for an Escape and begins with the Writ of Execution and Arrest ill not shewing the Judgment quod cum recuperasset c. Jones versus Pope M. 18. Car. 2 B. R. Debt on a Bond conditioned to save against another Bond Defendant pleads that he did save not shewing how the Plaintiff sayes he was sued at Law pro eo quod the money was not paid and pleads not the Writ c. as he ought the Defendant rejoynes he had not notice which is a departure and not material the Plaintiff demurrs Resolved the Barr ill but if not to have it specially assigned for cause Secondly the eo quod affirmative and Traversable as well as if said in facto Thirdly the Replication ill not pleading the Writ c. Fourthly because the rejoyner is a departure and admits it being but ill for incertainty and circumstance has cured it Cather versus Peirce Soutbres and Falker M 18. Card. 2. in Sci. Debt against an Executor who pleas three Judgments in debt had against him and sayes nor pro vero debo and concludes prout patet per seperalia recorda et inde exeeution tato it for both Cases no resolution Palmer verses Lawson M. 18. Car. 2. R. R. Rot. 302. Debt on a Bond to perform an Award Ita quod it be made before 25 March pleads nul Award replication that ante 27 May they made an Award good without saying infra tempus limitat they may traverse nullum c. without traversing the day if not before the day the Jury is to find it Skinner versus Andrews Hill 20. Car. 2. B. R. Rot. 292. Debt against two Executors they plead a Judgment had against one as Administrator who ultra to satisfie hath not Assets et bene Parker versus Amy. Hill 20 21. Car. 2. B. R. Debt on a Bond against an Executor who pleads a Judgment and a Bond the Plaintiff replies the Judgment satisfied and satisfaction given Et hoc paratus est verificare And to the Bond assets ultra Et hoc petit quod inquiratur per Patriam Defendant demurrs and adjudged for the Plaintiff though not said to the first per Recordum for but form and cured by the general demurrer also he has not answered the last issuable Plea Hancock versus Proud M. 21. Card. 2. B. R. Debt on a Bond conditioned to do several things Defendant pleads performed generally and demurr adjudged ill he should have answered to all the particulars expressed in the Action aliter where 't is to perform Covenants Winbleton versus Helderup Trin. 22 Car. B. R. rot 704. Debt on a Bond conditioned to perform Covenants which were within two years to deliver a Mapp of all Land in D. in the possession of A. Lessee of B. and B. pleads performance repl Assigns breach that Lessee did not deliver a Mapp within two years of all the Lands in D. in his Occupation and in the occupation of B. and C. and the replication seems ill first because he does not say Lessee nor his Executors Secondly in his occupation is uncertain what is meant by it Thirdly he ought to shew what Lands were in the possession of B. and C. Q. If the recital not an Estopel to say none were Palmer versus Greenhil Executor of Greenhil Pa. 11 Jac. Rot 688 Bridg. 46. Debt by two Barons and their Femes on an Obligation made to their Femes when sole and say the money was not paid them good and though not said vel licaui eorum for payment to one is payment to both Sparmer versus Stone et ux ' vide Pa. 77 et Latch 49 and Pop. 161 ibm 3. Count jointly and severally in Action against one sufficient to say he paid not but if against all that they nec aliquis eorum Noy 69. Executors sue on a Bond Testat plea non est factum after Verdict for the Plaintiff moved yet he had Judgment Noy 79. A. and B. joyntly and severally bound to stand to an Award betwixt them and I. S. Arbitrators awarded A. to pay B. 3 s. B. to pay 10 s. to I. S. in debt on the Bond in Plea for A. to say he had performed the Award without shewing how and how B. had performed it for he is bound to him also Bendlo 5. Debt on a Contract Defendant pleads payment in a Forraign County and on demurrer adjudged ill he might have pleaded in the County and so
was their fault to take such a joint Estate or that the Obligor was bound to them jointly 35 H. 6. 23. a. In Replevin Verdict is given for the Avowant and the plea is discontinued afterwards by the death of the King or otherwise and the Avowant sues a Scire facias against the Plaintiff in this case the plaintiff may plead a Release of the Avowant after Verdict of all Actions or he may plead other matter to discharge himself 5 E. 4. 19. In Trespass the Defendant pleads two pleas and the Plaintiff demurrs to one and doth not plead over to the other it is a discontinuance as it appears by two Presidents in the Books of Entries and Holcrofts Case Co Lib 4. where it is pleaded accordingly In Precipe quòd reddat the Tenant disclaims the Judgment shall be that the Demandant nihil capiat per breve and if the Tenant will make a Feoffment in Fee the Demandant may enter upon him and if the Tenant will discontinue the Demandant may say that he hath nothing in the Land but by disseisin which he made to I. S. and put him from the disclaimer because that by the disclaimer he hath nothing but his Right and the Entry of the disseisee is lawful upon him because that he hath nothing until by that discontinuance he perfects the Recovery In Replevin the Defendant makes Conusans as Bailiff to an Abbot upon an Estranger as upon his very Tenant The Plaintiff prays aid of this Stranger because he let for years they join in aid and process is continued until his Term at which time the Term ends they both disclaim to hold of the Abbot the Court awarded that the Plaintiff sue forth a Writ of Inquiry of Damages 29 H. 6. No man can disclaim against a Termor because that if his Lessor will not bring his Writ of Right upon disclaimer he hath no Remedy 9 E. 4. Husband and Wife cannot disclaim in Avowry for if they do the Lands of the Wife shall be lost by it 10 E. 4. per Cur ' In Replevin the Defendant avows upon Plaintiff and he disclaims to it he shall not be received for you have made a Feoffment of the Lands so that we cannot have a Writ of Right Sur disclaimer held a good plea To which the Plaintiff saith that he was seised of those Lands in Fee without that that he hath made a demise In a Writ of Entry in le quibus of the disseisin of the Demandant or his Ancestor against two one would disclaim and could not because he was in of his own wrong Distress vide Trespass IF a man distrain Household-Goods That will take hurt by wet or weather he ought to impound them in an House within three miles within the same County where they were taken But if he put them in an open place were they perish the distreynor shall not answer for them If a man distreyn a Horse and the Horse leaps out of the Pound and after the distreynor Retakes him and tyes him to a Post and in strugling the Horse strangles himself the Distreyner shall be punished inan Action of Trespass So if a man distrain a Cow he ought not to milk her although it be for the good of the Cow for you must not do good in such a Case without the Owners consent For Peradventure the Owner might come in time and milk her himself and if the Cow perish for want of milking The Distrayner may distrayn again and so be at no damage An Officer of the Sheriff cannot justifie the breaking open of doors to distrayn for the Kings Rent much less a Landlord A man shall not use things distreyned because he hath them but as Pledges in the Law No man shall drive a distress out of the Hundred it was taken in or to any Pound above the space of three miles or into several Pounds whereby the party shall be driven to take out several Replevins None shall drive a distress out of the County Nor shall distrain in the High-way None shall drive distress into a Castle or Hold to withhold them from the Owner upon his Replevin If a man come to distrain and the party seeing his purpose drives the Cattle off the Land or put the goods out of the house to the intent he shall not take them upon the ground for a distress Then I may lawfully pursue and if I take the same upon the High-way or upon the ground the taking is lawful as if I had taken it upon the ground or house out of which the rent issues to whomsoever the property of the goods or Cattel do belong A man cannot distrain for an amerciament in a Court-Baron but for an amerciament in a Court-Leet he may If a man grants a Lease to B. rendring Rent to be paid at four several Quarters and if it be behind and lawfully demanded That then it shall be lawful for the Lessor to distrain c If a man comes to distrain and the Tenant inclose the ground or shuts the doors of the house That the Landlord cannot distrain for his Rent it 's a disseisin For the Landlord may not break the doors or Fences to come at the Distress Also Forstallment That is lying in wait or threatning a Landlord whereby he is disturbed and hindred of the means to come by his Rent is a disseisin of the Rent viz. to hinder the taking of his Rent A man brought Yarn to the house of his Neighbour on Horse-back to the intent to weigh the same by his Neighbours Beam the Landlord comes and distrains the Horse and Yarn for Rent due out of the house to which the Yarn was brought and by the whole Court adjudged an unlawful distress A man cannot distrain for Rent but on the Land or House out of which it becomes due and there he may take what he finds to whom soever the same belongs If a man distrains Beasts without cause and impounds them in a Pound overt it 's not lawful for the Owner to break the Pound but must bring his Replevin If Beasts dye or goods distrained for Rent perish the Landlord may distrain again for the same Rent and the loss of such Beasts so dying shall be loss of the Tenant if it be in a Pound overt If the Landlord be in view of Cattel he intends to distrain for Rent and the Tenant to avoid the Distress drives the Cattel out of the Landlords Fee Yet the Landlord may take them in or out of his Fee And it seems the same Reason if a man comes to a house to distrain for Rent and be in the house and have â—ight of the Goods and the Tenant to hinder the distress shuts up the Roomes The Landlord may force open the doors if the Tenant will not open them upon request If I grant a Rent to I. S. and his Heirs out of my Mannor of D. Et obligo Manerium et omniabona et Catalla mea super Manerium predict existentia
ad distringend ' d'per Ballivum Dni ' Regis The Limitation of this distress to the Kings Bailiff is void and it is good to give a power of distress to I. S. the Grantee and his Bailiffs Bacons Elem. of Law 15. Error IF a Writ of Error be brought and allowed And the Plaintiff in the Writ of Error dyes pendente breve Errore the Plaintiff in the Action may sue out a Scire facias against the Executors or Administrators of the Plaintiff in the writ of Error without mentioning the Writ of Error for that it is no Supersedeas but only to privies and not to Strangers When a Writ of Error is allowed Execution upon the former Judgment ought not to be awarded For by the writ of Error the Record it self is Removed and the Court hath nothing whereupon to award Execution Yet supersedeas the safest way If a man Levy a Fine sur Conusance de droit Come Ceo c. And suffer a Recovery of the same Lands and there is Error in them both He cannot bring Error first upon the Fine because by the Recovery his Title of Error is discharged and released in Law inclusively But he must begin with the Error upon the Recovery which he may do because a Fine executed barreth no titles that accrue de puisne tempus after the Fine levied and so restore himself to his Title of Error upon the Fine If a man levyeth a Fine where he hath nothing in the Land which inureth by way of conclusion only and is executory against all purchases and new titles which shall grow to the Conusor afterwards And he purchaseth the Land and suffer a Recovery to the Conusee and in both Fine and Recovery there is Error this Fine is Janus Bifrons and will look forward and Barr him of his Writ of Error brought of the Recovery And therefore it will come to the reason of the first case of the Attainder That he must reply that he hath a Writ also depending of the same Fine and so demand Judgment Execution IN Escape against the Sheriff The Case was That a Prisoner being in Executition the Gaoler lets him out of Prison about his occasions and after the Prisoner returns to the Goal and another Sheriff comes in and then the Prisoner escapes and comes no more It was held That an Action did not lye against the last Sheriff for the Prisoner was utterly discharged of the Execution by the first permissiom of going at large by the Gaoler The Sheriff may not break open the doors of any man to execute a Fieri facias much less a Landlord to distrain by the same reason Judgment in Debt against three and a Capia's ad satis faciendum against the Principal the Sheriff retorns non est inventus upon which issued a Scire facias against the Sureties and before the retorn the Principal came into Court and prayed his Body might be taken in Execution which was done accordingly Mich. 10 Jacobi in C. B. And with this agrees the Course of the Court of King's-Bench and divers Presidents of this Court A Writ of Error was brought 4 November retornable 10 January whereupon the Court was moved for Execution because it seemed to be but for delay in regard the Retorn is so long and with this agrees 4 H. 6. an Execution was granted by the Court Mich. 16 Jac. in C. B. Of Estoppels and Conclusions HE who claims nothing by him that was estopped shall not be estopped As two jointenants are disseised the disseisor lets to the one now he is stopped to say that he hath another Estate than for Life Afterwards he to whom the Land was so let dyes the other Jointenant shall have the Land and he shall not be by that Deed estopped for he claimed nothing by him who was estopped by the Survivor If I am named W. B. and I bring my Action by the name of I. B. and recover by that name afterwards if I will bring my Action against another person by my right name he shall not estop me by that Recovery of the same name for if I had been estop'd I should not have had my Action against the other person but he that is party may estopp me well enough 26 H. 6. 30 H. 6. et 10 E. 4. contr Where he in Reversion or Remainder claims nothing by Tenant for Life he shall not be estopped AS the Father disseiseth the Son and Levies a Fine thereof to a Stranger where Recovery is had against the Father and afterwards the Father dyes the Son enters or he that recovers or he that was party to the Fine between him and the Son brings an Assise and the other pleads the Fine or Recovery by way of Estoppel this is no Plea because that notwithstanding that the Son is privy to him that was estopped yet he claims nothing by him Where there is Lord and Tenant and the Lord lets his Seigniory to one for Life the Tenant for Life of the Seigniory distrains the Tenant and he bring an Action of Trespass against him and he justifies for that he holds of him by ten shillings of Rent and the other traverses it and it is found against the Lord for Term of Life This shall be no Estoppel to him in the Reversion If a man pleads a Plea in which he confesseth a thing that is not material it shall not be an Estoppel As if a man voucheth one as Son and Heir to such a person and when he comes he is bound to warranty by his own Deed yet may say afterwards in an Assise of Mortdancestor that the same person which I vouched before as Son and Heir is a Bastard for the words Son and Heir in his voucher are not material The same Law in a Writ of Trespass brought by one Executor of Goods taken out of his possession Where a writ of Debt is brought by an Executor who counts of a duty due to himself there the word Executor is not material and he shall not be estopped but he may say afterwards that he never was Executor nor ever administred as Executor If a man will plead a Record to estopp him that was privy he ought to shew what end the Action had AS if I bring an Action against you in which Action you plead that at anotheâ—â—ime viz. such a day c. I brought an Action of Trespass against you and the Defendant pleaded Villenage and the Plaintiff confest it he ought to shew further by force of which he was nonsuited and to shew what end the Plea had and demand Judgment if against that he shall be answered Where a man hath Judgment to recover Land by that Judgment he shall be estopped to claim any other Title than he hath by the Recovery AS if a man recover by Writ of Right Sur disclamer if the Tenant ceaseth afterwards he shall not have a Cessavit to recover the Land though he sues not out Execution for he shall be estopped to claim
after Judgment where the Plaintiff hath not over-stayed his Time viz. the Year but many have Habeas Corpus or Fieri Facias without Scire Facias If the Prisoner be taken by Capias utlegatum he shall be in Execution for the Party without the Prayer of the Party or Accord of the Court if he will but if it be after the Year not without Prayer 't is the Course upon Outlawry after Judgment if Error be brought to award a Capias utlegatum if he does not assign Error but if it be before Judgment and the Defendant brought in the Plaintiff must declare against him de Novo and if one Outlawed after Judgment bring Error and comes to assign Error he shall be committed to the Marshalsey and find Security to reverse the Outlawry and answer the party Lishton against Garpores 3 Cro. 706 707 850. Co. 5. rep 88. 89. vid. 1 Leon. 51. 263. stat 1 H. 7. pl. 6. Moâ— pl. 772. 817. One recovers in Quare impedit against the Kings Presentee and is Outlawed the King shall have a Scire Facias to have the Presentment for the Church was immediately revested in him before any Writ to the Bishop and though the King be not Party to the Judgment he shall maintain the Scire Facias being Intitled by Act in Law but the Scire Facias must mention the whole Record of the Outlawry And so in Debt on a Bond and Judgment to recover the King shall have a Scire Facias Beverley against Cornwall 1 Leo. 63 64. In Debt on a Bond the Defendant pleads that the Plaintiff was Outlawed by the name of J. S. of D. the Plaintiff replied that at that time he dwelt at S. absque hoc that he dwelt at D. he avoids the Plea of Outlawry for he shall be intended another Person 1 Leo. 87. Upon an Exigent to Lond. it was return'd that he had proclaimed the party de Com' in Com' and for that the Outlawry on Felony was reversed For it should have been de Hustingo in Hustingum Marshes Case 1 Leo. 326. Outlawry of Murder the King seizes Lands and because the Outlawry was ill for the quinto Exact ' and was ad comitat ' omitting meum Wherefore to affirm the King's Title the Attorney General prayed a Certiorari to the Coroner to certifie what County and on such a President shewed granted Fumes Case Latch 210. Where one is Outlawed before the Justices of Assize or Justices of Peace on an Indictment of Felony the same Justice may award a Capias utlegatum For they that have Process of Outlawry have power also to award a Capias utlegat ' per omnes Justic ' Co. 1â— rep 103. Appeal of the Death of her Husband and because some of the Defendants lived in another County a Capias with a Proclamation issued to that County The King dies and Reattachment sued If it be General then a new Capias and Proclamation must go into the Foreign County if Special not for the Statute has been once satisfied Vid. Co. 7. rep 30. a. b. 1 E. 5. 43. a. In Appeal of Robbery the Defendant was Outlawed and Sued a Pardon and Scire Facias thereupon Dicitur he ought to shew a Release of the Appeal before the Scire Facias be granted then the Pardon to he Special not General but the Appellor not appearing at the day of the Scire Facias returned the Pardon was allowed but at another day came the Appellor and prayed Execution but his Default being Recorded could not have it Note sometimes the Pardon is General sometimes Ita quod stet rectus c. M. 2. R. 3. fol. 8. pl. 17. M. 9 H. 7. pl. 1. One Outlawed of Felony ductus ad Barram to say why Execution c. pleaded that he was in Oxford Castle all the time and because he did not say in what County Oxford is nor did not say he was in any Bodies Custody there the Plea adjudged ill H. 11. H. 7. fo 13. pl. 27. Baron and Feme Outlawed in Debt he brought Error and after a special Pardon Ita quod stet rectus a Scire Facias and prays it may be allowed but the Court would not till his Wife came in also that the Plaintiff may declare against both and then it seems he may declare against them in the Kings Bench within the Equity of the Statute of 5 Ed. 3. tho' it say rendre al Court donec le Exigent fiat sher ' it went out of the Co. B. but now 't is in the Kings Bench by Writ of Error P. 1 H. 7. pl. 7. H. 1. H. 7. pl. 19. One taken by Cap ' utleg ' an Appellee of Felony came in and pleaded that it was against J. S. Gentleman and he is but a Yeoman and the plea allowed and a Scire Facias against the Appellor who not coming in he was discharged so 21 H. 7. pl. 16. Outlawry against J. S. de D. he pleaded that he lived at S. good without Error Vide 21 H. 6. 20 and 23 H. 6. 4. a. Outlawry when reversed by plea when by Writ of Error 37 H. 6. 16. vide M. 21. E. 4. pl. 61. 21 E. 4. 37. H. 5. H. 7. pl. 7. M. 6 H. 7. pl. 2. M. 21 H. 7. pl. 27. Co. Ent. 689. 4 E. 4. pl. 15. A. takes the Goods of B. who was Outlawed if the King may seize the Goods of B. vide M 6 H. 7. pl. 4. vers finem and pl. 5. One that reversed an Outlawry had a Writ de bonis restituend ' to the Bayliff of Westminster who returned that he was not Bayliff not good he must answer to the having the Goods and must deliver them tho' gone out of his Possession or shew Cause M. 6 H. 7. pl. 5. b. H. 4. E. 4. pl. 3. An Outlawry was reversed because the Sheriff said ad Comitat ' tent ' such a day in Comitat ' Midd ' and said not Comitat ' meum seems Error of Outlawry because the Exigent was in R. 3. Time and two Proclamations then and the other three in H. 7. So the Exigent abated but being in Felony he must have Scire Facias against all the Lands tho' dicitur he had no Lands For that must appear Judicially and upon Scire Facias though the Outlawry were reversed for the Default of the Exigent he must answer for the Felony otherwise if at Suit of the party he were discharged against him H. 6. H. 7. pl. 7. M. 11. H. 7. pl. 33. M. 7. H. 7. pl. 7. Writ of Error delivered before the Exigent awarded and the Plaintiff Outlawed yet it is not void but voidable by Error and Issue shall be joyned to try Delivery before the Exigent but not by Jury P. 10. H. 7. pl. 25 31. One may avoid an Outlawry as well by saying he was beyond Sea by the King's Command as that he was a Souldier at Calais under such a Captain and shall not shew the Patent if the party appear upon
Scire Facias it shall be tryed in one Case by the Natives in the other by the Certificate of the Captain M. 11. H. 7. pl. 17. P. 21 E. 4. pl. 4. The Sheriff returns the Exigent thus Ad Comitat ' tent ' apud C. in Comitat ' Somerset 5. Exactus non comperuit because 't is not said ad Comitat ' Somerset nor Somerset set in the Margin 'T is held to be ill because it might be the County Court was not held in the County of Somerset but in another County sed adjornatur M. 11. H. 7. pl. 33. H. 6. H. 7. pl. 7. One taken upon a Capias utlegat ' by the Name of J. S. Gentleman says he is a Yeoman and was c. Scire Facias against the Plaintiff and issue that he is and was a Gentleman and the party was bailed the King dies before the Issue tried the party comes in Court temps the next King and is committed for the Bail was determined and the Cap ' utlegat ' also and a new utlegat ' awarded and returned and then he pleaded the same plea again and issue for before he could not all being determined M 1. E. 4. pl. 7. Original against W. B. Cap ' against J. B. and Outlawry shall be reversed by Moyle Danby contra Et sic per Moyle if all the three Cap ' had been against J. B. for then no Cap ' had been against W. B. quod Danby denied M. 15. E. 4. pl. 17. Trespass and Judgment for the Party and Fine for the King and Exigent at the Suit of the King and after two or three Courtiers of the King send a Supersed ' under the Privy Seal they proceed to Outlawry but shall not prevail for though the King have this Fine by reason of the parties Suit and if the party be taken he shall be Imprisoned and not discharged at the Parties Suit if he will yet till he be taken 't is only the King's Suit and the Parties have no Interest in it and if the Defendant be Outlawed after the Supersedeas 't is Error and shall be reversed P. 4. E. 4. pl. 24 36. Tr. 4. E. 4. pl. 4. M. 4. E. 4. pl. 14. H. 4. E. 4. pl. 3. vid. Co. 5. rep 88 89. The Sheriff returns the Copy of the Exigent and not the Writ it self with Proclamation c. he shall be Amerced for the Imbezlement of the Writ and if the Party render himself to the Chief Justice in Vacation time and get a Supersedeas whether he shewed it to the Sheriff or not it shall be entered in the Term and the utlegat ' discharg'd 1 Inst 128. and idem ibid. 43. b. If Error be brought of an Outlawry and it appear doubtful a Special Supersedeas shall go to the Sheriff quod capiat securitatem que les biens ne serront illoine vide 9 H. 6 44. a. b. utlegat ' after Supersedeas void and 7 H. 4. 1. a. if void and the party shall be restored to his Goods 7 H. 4 5 b. Supersedeas and Exigent rules at the day and a new Exigent and a Supersedeas the Outlawry after void H. 4. E. 4. pl. 3. Tr. 5. E. 4. pl. 13. le Amerciamt ' 37 H. 6 17. vide 3 H. 4 5. a. 8 H. 4. Cas Prin. 8 H. 4 7. a. 11 H. 4 34. a. Audita Quarela by one in Execution and he offered in Mainprize the other ut amicus Curiae surmised that the Plaintiff is Outlawed wherefore he ought to stay in Prison for the King 's Fine wherefore he was put to reverse the Outlawry or sue a Pardon H. 6. E. 4. pl. 1. The Plaintiff had sued three several Executions against the Defendant and brought Supersedeas for every one but there was granted aâ— Exigent with Precept that if any Supersedeas come to the Sheriff he should not allow it P. 7. E. 4. pl. 20. Error of an Outlawry in Debt after Judgment because no Proclamation went into the County where the party inhabited but being after Judgment resolved it need not but only in Outlawry and Process before App ' but because in all the Proceedings she was named A de B. and in the Exigent she is named nuper de B. and because it was recuperavit versus eum for eam it was reversed Lady Gargrave against Markham 2 Cro. 516. Exigent in London and 't is returned quod ad Husting ' c. and recites a Form which was ad Husting ' de Com' plit ' and that assigned for Error 2. The Exigent is that he non comperuit and 't is returned the same day it bears Teste and that was held Error Archer against Dalby 2 Cro. 660. Outlawry reversed because the Exigent supposes that Robert the Plaintiff did sue the said Robert whereas the Plaintiff's name was Thomas and Defendant being ready in Court it was reversed immediately Jonson against Kite One enters a Judgment and then is Outlawed in a personal Action then makes a Feoffment of the Lands and he that has the Judgment extends the Lands in the Hands of the Feoffee and well For by this Outlawry the King has but a pernancy of the Profits of which he is prevented by the Feoffment before Seisure not if after Seisure and if by Feoffment after Inquisition found before it be returned ibidem Opinio if the Seisure be Virtute Officii Tenant after puts the King out not if seized Virtute Windsor against Savel Outlawry against two reversed because it 's entred ideo Vtlegat ' sunt and not uterque eorum Vtlegat ' P. 15 Caroli Secundi B. R. One Outlawed after Judgment comes and pleads Misnomer and has Fieri Facias against the party and he returned Mortâ— Another Scire Facias is awarded after against the Executors and Tryal of Misnomer in this Case shall not be by Averment taken for the King but the Executors shall be made parties because it Trenches to the whole Duty but upon mort ' ret ' no Scire Facias goes against the Executors but the Misnomer is tried between the King and the Defendant 21 H. 6 21. a. 22 H. 6 7. a. In detinue of Charters and other Writings As to the other Writings the King waged Law and then as to the Charters he pleaded in Bar by Att ' nolens volens the pl. For of them concerning the Freehold no Process of Outlawry lies but Distress infinite and 8 H. 6. 23 30. Vtlegat ' lies not in Detinue for Charters and other Goods for the Charters draw the other Goods to them 21 H. 6. 42. a. 30 H. 4. b. Upon a Cap ' utlegat ' before Judgment the Sheriff may break open an House but the Plaintiff sending a Process in another Man's Name feigned an Outlawry where his Writ was but a Latitat 't is an abuse of Process and he Fined 50 l. Hob. 263. Waterhouse against Saltmarsh If one that is Outlawed for Treason Peer or Peasant be out of the Realm at the time of the Outlawry yet he cannot
and discharged Three are bound in one Bond and every of them joyntly in the whole the Obligee afterwards gets Judgment against one of them and brings his Action against the other This Recovery is no Barr for it is no Satisfaction of the Debt but an Execution is a good plea in this Matter Obligation dated 8th of December 78. and doth not say the Year of our Lord God nor the Year of the King's Reign the Date is void and the Obligation good without Date and the Plaintiff may count how the Bond was delivered to him any day when he pleases Reg. 1. Acts and Statutes in pleading need not be recited wholly only the particular Branch that concerns the Matter in Hand because every Branch is an Act of it self Secus of a Record for that is grounded upon an Original and Judgment and ought therefore to be entirely recited when pleaded in Bar. If Tenant in Tail of a Manor whereunto a Villain is Reguardant discontinue and die and the Right of the Intail descend to the Villain himself who brings Formedon and the Discontinuee pleadeth Villanage This is no Plea because the Devesting of the Manor which is the Intention of the Suit doth include this plea because it determineth the Villanage Reg. 2. Pleadings must be certain that the Adverse Party may know whereunto to answer or else he were at a Mischief which Mischief is remedied by Demurrer If tenant in Ancient Demeasne be disseized by the Lord whereby the Seigniory is suspended and the Disseizee bringeth his Assize in the Court of the Lord. Frank Fee is no plea because the Suit is brought to undo the Disseison and so to revive the Seigniory in Ancient Demesne If a Man be Attainted and Executed and the Heir bring a Writ of Error upon the Attainder and the Corruption of Blood by the same Attainder be pleaded to interupt the conveying in of the same Writ This is nâ— plea for then he were without Remedy ever to reverse the Attainder If Tenant in Tayl discontinue for Life rendring a Rent and the Issue brings a Formedon and the Warranty of his Ancestor with Assets be pleaded against him and the Assetts is laid to be no other but his Reversion with the Rent This is no plea because the Formedon which is brought to undo the Discontinuance doth inclusively undo this new Reversion in Fee with the Rent thereunto annexed If a Man be attainted of two several Attainders and there is Error in them both there is no reason but that there should be a Remedy open for the Heir to reverse those Attainders being Erroneous as well if there were twenty as one And therefore if in a Writ of Error brought by the Heir of one of them the Attainder should be a plea peremptorily And so again if in a Writ of Error brought of the other the former should be a plea these were to exclude him utterly of his Right and therefore it should be a good Replication to say That he hath a Writ of Error depending of that also And so the Court shall proceed but no Judgment shall be given until both Pleas be dismissed and if either Plea be found without Error there shall be no Reversal either of the one or the other and if he discontinue either Writ then shall it be no longer a plea And so of several Outlawries in a Personal Action If Tenant in Tayl of two Acres make two several Discontinuances to several persons for Life rendring Rent and bringeth a Formedon of both and in the Formedon brought of W. Acre the Reversion and Rent reserved upon B. Acre and so contrary it seems to be a good Replication that he hath a Formedon also upon that depending whereunto the Tenant hath pleaded the Descent of the Reversion of W. Acre and so neither shall be a Barr And yet there is no doubt but if in a Formedon the Warranty of Tenant in Tayl with Assetts be pleaded it is no Replication for the Issue to say that a Precipe dependeth by J. S. to evict the Assetts An Attorney may plead not informed to an Action if his Client doth not give him order to plead otherwise For this will save the Attorney Damages in a Writ of Deceit if it should be brought against him In an Action of the Case if the Defendant plead to issue upon one part and Demurrer to the other part the Demurrer ought to be argued first because the Jury at the Tryal may give Intire Damages for the whole Scire Facias against Manucaptor ' they plead that after Judgment against the Principal viz. 6th die anno the Principal brought a Writ of Error whereby the Record was removed into the Exchequer and that pendente br ' de Errore the Principal rendred himself to the Marshal and there died and this he is ready to prove c. This Plea is nought because the Rendition ought to be tried by the Record Secondly The plea is double and imports two Issues the one the Rendring and the other the Death 3. The bringing the Writ of Error is a Supersedeas to the Execution and the Execution being suspended during the Error undetermined and depending the Bail was not sufficient Authority to bring them in So that his Rendition is in vain and nothing worth and the Death is only answerable which if true is a Discharge of the Bail Reg. 3. In all Imperfections of Pleading whether it be in Ambiguity of Words and double Intendments or want of Certainty and Averments the plea shall be strictly and strongly taken against him that pleads it For Ambiguity of Words If in a Writ of Entry upon Disseisin the Tenant pleads Joynt-Tenancy with J. S. of the Guift and Feoffment of J. D. Judgment del brief the Demandant says That long before J. D. any thing had the Defendant himself was seized in Fee Quousque predict ' id super possessionem ejus intravit and made a joynt Feoffment whereupon he the Demandant re-enter'd and was seized until by the Defendant alone he was disseized This is no Plea because the word intravit may be understood either of a Lawful Entry or of a tortious and the hardest against him shall be taken which is that it was a lawful Entry therefore he should have alleadged precisely that J. D. disseisivit Reg. 4. So upon Ambiguities that grow by References if an Action of Debt be brought against J. F. and J. B. Sheriffs of London upon an Escape and the Plaintiff doth declare upon an Execution by Force of a Recovery in the Prison of Ludgate sub Custodia J. S. and J. D. then Sheriffs in 1 H. 8. and that he so continued sub Custodia J. B. and J. G. in 2 H. 8. and so continued in Custodia J. F. and J. P. in 3 H. 8. and then was suffered to escape J. F. and J. P. plead that before the Escape at such a day Anno superius in narratione specificat ' the said J. S. and J. D.
adtunc Vicecomites suffered him to This is noo good Plea because there be three Years specified in the Declaration and it shall be hardest taken that it was 2 or 3 H. 8. when they were out of Office and yet it is nearly induced by the adtunc Vicecomites which should leave the Intendment to be of that Year in which the Declaration supposeth them to be Sheriffs but that sufficeth not but the Year must be alleadged in Fait For it may be mislaid by the Plaintiff And therefore the Defendants Meaning to discharge themselves by a former Escape which was not in their time must alleadge it precisely Dyer fo 66. Reg. 5. For uncertainty of Intendment if a Warranty Collateral be pleaded in Bar and the Plaintiff by Replication to avoid the Warranty saith he entred upon the Possession of the Defendant non Constat whether this Entry was in the Life time of the Ancestor or after the Warranty descended and therefore it shall be taken in the strictest Sence that it was after the Warranty descended if it be not otherwise averred 3 H. 7. 2 3 Plo. 46. a. For Improperty of Words If a man plead that his Ancestor died by Protestation serzed and that J. S. abated c. this is no Plea for there cannot be an Abatement unless there be a Dying seized alleadged in Fait and an Abatement shall not be improperly taken for Disseisin in pleading For Words make Pleas 38 H. 6. a. b. 39 H. 6. 5 6. Reg. 6. For Repugnancy in pleading if a Man in Avowry declare that he was seized in his Demesne as of Fee of 10 Acres and being so seized did demise the said 10 Acres to J. S. habend ' the Moiety for twenty one years from the Date of the Deed the other Moiety from the Surrender Expiration or other Determination of the Estate of J. D. qui tenet predict ' medietat ' ad terminum vitae suae Reddend 40 s. Rent This Declaration is insufficient because that the Seisin that he hath alledged in himself in his Demesme as of Fee in the whole and the Estate for Life of the Moyety is repugnant and it shall not be Cured by taking the last which is expressed to controul the former which is but general and formal but the plea is naught and yet the matter in Law had been good to have Intituled him to distrain for the whole Rent Reg. 7. A Bar may be good to a Common Intent tho' not to every Intent As if Debt be brought against Five Executors and Three of them make Default and two appear and plead in Barâ— a Recovery had against them two of 300 l. and nothing in their hands over and above that Summ If this Barr should be taken strongest against them it should be intended that they might have abated the first Suit because the other three were not named and so the Recovery not â—uly had against them but according to the Rule the Barr is good For that by Common Intendment it will be supposed that the two did only administer And so the Action well considered rather than to imagine that they would have lost the Benefit and Advantage of abating the first Writ Reg. 8. In pleading a Man shall not disclose that which is against himself and therefore if it be matter that is to be set forth on th' other side Then the plea shall not be taken in the hardest Sence but in the most Beneficial and to be left unto the contrary part to be alledged And therefore if a Man be bound in an Obligation that if the Wife of the Obligee does Decease before the Feast of St. John the Baptist which shall be in the Year of our Lord God 1598 without Issue of her Body by her Husband lawfully begotten then living that then the Bond shall be void And in Debt brought upon this Obligation the Defendant pleads that the Woman died before the said Feast without Issue of her Body then living If this Plea should be taken strongest against the Defendant then should it be taken that the Feme had Issue at the time of her Death but this Issue died before the Feast But this shall not be so understood because it makes against the Defendant and it is to be brought in on the Plaintiff's side and that without Traverse Dyer 16 17. Non dimisit to an Action of Debt upon a Lease in Writing was adjudged an ill Plea and a Repleader awarded thereupon by the Court Mich. 44 and 45 Eliz. Rot. 158. in Banco Reginae If J. S. Covenant to make me an Assurance I paying the Costs and Charges for making thereof he shall not barr my Action of Covenant by saying he was ready to do it unless he bring the Writings Ingrossed and ready to Seal and I refuse to pay the Charges accordingly Debt against an Executor who pleads three Judgments of an 100 l. a piece and that he had paid 40 l. in Satisfaction of two of the Judgments and that he hath not nor had c. praeterquam c. the said 40 l. and 20 l. more which is not sufficient to satisfie the other Judgment upon which the Plaintiff demurred and adjudged for the Defendant for it s but in effect a plene administravit specially Administrator durante minore etate if he wasts the Goods of the Infant he shall be punished as an Executor in his own wrong If an Administrator brings an Action of Debt and averrs in his Declaration how that Administration was granted to him at London and the Letters of Administration bear Date in another place and County the Plaint shall abate Upon a Scire Facias against two Executors the Sheriff returns nulla bona against both and Devastavit to the Value of the Debt against one of them whereupon another Scire Facias issued forth and Judgment was obtained only against him thereupon by Default and after that a Fieri Facias de bonis propriis against him alone If there be two Executors and the one of them confess the Action and the other lets it go by Default or pleads non est factum or plene administravit Judgment shall be against both de bonis Testatoris Divers Executors are but in the Nature of one Person For they all represent the Person of their Testator And if the Action had been brought against him in his Life he should have made but one Answer If Debt and Damages be recovered against one and before Execution he dies upon a Scire Facias against his Executor or Administrator you shall recover only de bonis testatoris and not de bonis propriis because the Prayer of the Scire Facias is only de bonis Testatoris and the Court will not exceed the Prayer of your own Writ Reg. 9. The Defendant may plead an Outlawry in disability of the Plaintiff before Imparlance but after Imparlance he cannot plead in disability of the Person but he may plead it in Barr of the Action 32 H. 6 33.
35 H. 6 36. In a Writ brought by one as Son and Heir to J. S. after Imparlance the Tenant cannot plead to the Writ that he is a Bastard or that he is not Heir but he may well plead it in Barr of the Action 22 E. 4 35. An Outlawry is a good Plea in Barr of an Action of Debt For by the Outlawry of the Plaintiff the Debt if it grow due by Specialty is vested in the King but secus of an Action of Debt upon Contract For in that Case the Debtor might wage his Law against the Debtee who is Outlawed 16 E. 4 4. By 10 H. 7. it seemeth that an Outlawry goeth rather in Barr of the Action than to the Writ for there it is said that where a Man cannot plead to the Writ but by shewing of a matter in Bar there he may shew it and conclude to the Writ For in an Action of Debt a Man may plead Outlawry in the Plaintiff and conclude to the person and yet the matter goeth in Bar and he may plead it also in Bar and conclude to the Action 10 H. 7 11. After a Voucher is counter-pleaded and the Tenant put to another Answer he may notwithstanding plead that the Demandant is Outlawed but after Voucher the Tenant cannot plead to the Form of the Writ 21 E. 4 64. 5 E. 3 223. If a Man pleadeth that the Plaintiff is an Alien born or a Villain or an Outlawed Person it is left to his Choice whether he will conclude these special Matters to the Writ or to the Action 32 H. 6 27. If the Husband and Wife bring an Assize and a Feoffment or Release of the Husband or the Wife or of some Ancestor of one of them be pleaded in Bar both of them shall be barred 21 R. 2. Judgment 263. An Exception taken to a Writ propter defectum Nationis vel potiùs defectum Subjectionis ligeantiae is peremptory and the Action cannot be revived by Peace or League subsequent Theloal Digest ' de Briefs Lib. 1. Ca. 6. The King may grant Licence to Aliens to implead and that such Aliens as come into the Realm by the King's License and safe Conduct may use Personal Actions by Writ though they be not made Denizens And Denizens lawfully made by the King's Grant and such Aliens born which are within the express words of the Statute of 25 E. 3. may use Actions Real by Original Writ Theoloal ubi supra If a Man be Excommunicated and he sueth an Action Real or Personal the Tenant or Defendant may plead that the Plaintiff is Excommunicated And thereupon he ought to shew the Bishop's Letters under his Seal testifying the Excommunication and then he may demand Judgment whether he ought to be answered But if the Demandant or Plaintiff cannot deny this the Writ shall not abate but the Judgment shall be that the Tenant or Defendant eat inde sine die because when the Demandant or Plaintiff hath purchased Letters of Absolution and they are shewed to the Court he may have a Re-summons or Re-attachment upon his Original according to the Nature of his Writ Lit. Lib. 2. Ca. 11. Sect. 42. An Action upon the Case was brought and the Plaintiff set forth that a Jury was Impannelled and Sworn and that one of the Jurors was challenged for that there were not 12 Jurors Talis de Circumstantibus was awarded and another Juror Impannelled and so legitimo modo acquietatus fuit but this was held Erroneous per totam Curiam For it doth not appear that he was legitimo modo acquietatus because he doth not say that this other Juror was sworn Mich. 8. Ja. in C. B. Reg. 10. If a Man plead a General Act of Parliament and mis-recite the same yet it shall not prejudice him because the Judges ought to take notice of it per totam Curiam and nul tiel Record ' cannot be pleaded against a General Act of Parliament although it cannot be found per Coke Chief Justice ubi supra Reg. 11. Note by all the Justices for a general Rule where a thing alleadged doth confess and avoid my Plea I may Traverse it 7 H. 6. 13 Eliz. Dyer A Copy-holder pleaded that per Licentiam Dominorum Manerii adtunc existentium he made a Lease for Years to J. S. and rul'd to be an ill plea because he hath not shewn what Estate the Lords have in the Mannor For they may be only Tenants at Will and so cannot give License to make a Lease for Years although they have Power to grant Estates by Copy A Man brought an Action of Trespass for his Horse taken The Defendant said that the Plaintiff gave him License to take his Horse and farther said that he was within Age at the time of the License c. Afterwards the Defendant said that he was not seised long time before that the Infant any thing had c. and so possessed until J. S. took and gave to the Infant This is a good Departure because that he doth not maintain his Barr sc his License 5 H. 7. Assise the Tenant pleads that his Tenant died without Heir he shall not be received to say that he committed Felony for which he was attainted because that it is new Matter and not pursuant An Obligation did bear Date the first day of May and was delivered the. 20 th day afterwards the Obligee releaseth the Second day of May which Release was delivered the same day This Release is no Barr quod nota If the Obligee brings an Action and declares upon a Bond bearing Date the first day c. and doth not say that it was afterwards delivered the 20 th day the Defendant shall barr him by the Release which was made after the first day and the Plaintiff shall not reply and shew the first Delivery of the Bond the 20 th day for that is a Departure and because that he might have alleadged it it at the Commencement By Keeble where the Defendant in Trespass fortifies his Bar and there is no other Matter but pursuant to the Barr and goes before the Barr in Conveyance of his Title This is no Departure but where the Barr is before the Matter shewn in his Rejoynder this is a Departure As in Assise the Defendant pleads the Dying seised of his Father and gives Color c. The Plaintiff pleads the Feoffment of the Defendant after that Descent the Defendant rejoyns and saith that Feoffment was upon Condition which Condition was broken and so he did re-enter Now this is a Departure for the Barr was before the Feoffment But if the Tenant in Assisse saith that J. S. was seised and enfeoffed him and gives Colour c. and the Plaintiff saith that J. S. disseised him and enfeoffed the Defendant upon whom he re-enter'd and was seized until c. if the Tenant rejoyn that after the Disseisin he releas'd to the said J. S. and then he enfeoffed him This is no Departure and yet he might have
pleaded it at first Also if the Plaintiff plead a Feoffment upon Condition to J. S. and that the Condition is broken and that thereupon he entred the Defendant may say that he released to J. S. after the Condition broken and then he enfeoffed him A Man pleads a Feoffment in Barr in Assize of the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff saith that he Let to him for Life and afterwards he made a Feoffment by which he entered the Tenant may well say that after the Lease and before the Feoffment the Plaintiff releas'd to him This is no Departure because that it is pursuant and yet it might have been said at first 1 E. 4. Quare Impedit against a Bishop he pleads that he claims nothing but as Ordinary and demands Judgment c. The Plaintiff replies that such a day he presented to him such a person whom he refused to which the Bishop rejoyns that the Church was void and shews how and that thereupon he collated by Laps Judgment c. This is no Departure 35 H. 6. In Assize the Defendant pleads a Lease of the Plaintiff for Years which is yet in being the Plaintiff shews the Alienation of the Tenant the Tenant saith that the Plaintiff released to him after the Lease This is a Departure by Marten 3 H. 6. Precipe quod reddat the Tenant pleads that J. S. was seized of the same Lands and that they were devised to him in Fee by Force whereof he entred and gives Colour c. The Plaintiff saith that J. S. was seized and that he died seized and that the Lands descended to him as Son and Heir and that he entred cum hoc that he will averr that the said J. S. was within the Age of 21 Years at the time of the Devise The Tenant rejoyns that the Custom is that every Infant of the Age of 15 Years may Devise and that he was of the Age of 15 Years at the time of the Devise The Court was of Opinion that it was a Departure 37 H. 6. In Assize the Tenant pleaded the Dying seized by Protestation of his Father The Plaintiff said that J. S. was seized and enfeoffed him and so seized c. To which the Tenant replied that his Father by Protestation died seized and that J. S. did abate and enfeoff the Plaintiff and that the Tenant as Heir to his Father entered and was seized by Fortescue This is no Departure because the Tenant hath maintained his Barr and hath only added new Matter to maintain it 37 H. 6. If a Man plead a Gift in Tayl in Barr and the Demandant reply ne dona pas if he shew a Recovery in Value it is no Departure In Assise the Tenant pleaded hors de son Fee the Plaintiff shewed that the Tenant held of him issint de son fee and the Defendant shewed a Release of all Right This is a Departure because this plea was a Barr 5 H. 7. In Formedon the Tenant pleaded ne dona pas the Demandant shewed a Recovery in Value issint dona The Tenant shall not plead a new Barr because that that would be a Departure quod nota 21 H. 6. Reg. 12. In all Pleadings where you claim as Legatee you must surmise the Consent of the Executor as cui quidem dimissioni idem J. S. consentivit After Verdict the Plaintiff dies viz. before the day in Bank in Error brought this is assigned for Error and the Plaintiff per Attornatum suum pleads that he was alive 't was tried and found that he was dead Argued by Mr. Allen That there was no Tryal proper for the Cause for that the Issue was joyned by a Stranger and that there ought to be a Scire Facias against the Executors or Administrators of the Plaintiff and that the Writ of Error is discontinued But per totam Curiam the Tryal is good and the Judgment revers'd for that Error in fait Mich 14 Car. 2. in B. R. Dove vers ' Dinkey Quare Impedit IN Quare Impedit to present by Turns to an Advowson in Gross Three Judges were of Opinion that the Commencement how it came presentable by turns must be shewed But two Judges were of a contrary Opinion Leek against Coventry 3 Cro. 111. A Viccarage and none presented to it for one hundred and sixty Years Resolved that all Viccarages are taken out of the Parsonage and are not remitted to them by Non-usage without some Act. Robinson against Beadle 3 Cro. 873. Quare Impedit by the King against A. he pleads that the King made a Lease for Years to J. S. and during the Term J. S. presented him c. And it was moved that he being Incumbent could not traverse the King's Title without making one for himself but shew that he came in by Usurpation during the Lease but in the Writ it was excepted that the Patron and Ordinary are not named but only the Incumbent which they ought to be in all Cases but that of Collation but because the Defendant shews that he came in during the Term in which Term the King could have no Right it was adjudged for the Defendant Regina versus Middleton vide Co. 7. rep 26 27. 25 H. 6. 62. a. 3 H. 4. 2 3 11. Writ against the Incumbent only adjudged ill and abated by 46 E. 3. vide 7 E. 3 11. 7 H. 4 26. Writ against the Incumbent only good 1 Leon. 44 45 46. vide 47. E. 3. 10 11. Quare Impedtt and Counts of an Advowson appendant that 't is become void and he presented J. S. The Defendant pleads that 't is in Gross and Let to him and that he presented J. S. absque hoc that 't is appendant the Traverse is good but where the Count is of an Advowson in gross c. and the Defendant pleads that 't is appendant there the Presentment is traversable not that it appendant For the Presentment makes it in gross Seignior Buckhurst against Epm. Winton 1 Leon. 154. In a Quare Impedit by Tenant for Life Exception was taken because he counted of a Presentment only in himself and laid not any in his Lessor but adjudged good For the Lessor may lay a Presentment on his Lessee therefore 't is good for the Lessee Palmes versus Epm. Peterborough 1 Leon. 230. Co. 5. rep 57. b. 3 Cro. 518. vid. M. 7 E. 4. pl. 22. con 8 H. 5. 4 Accord Quare Impedit against the Bishop and J. S. and Judgment they joyn in a Writ of Deceit and avoid the Judgment for Non Summons and of that a Writ of Error brought and assigned that they could not joyn and Adjourned Guilliams against Blower sed vide 3 Cro. 65. They joyn in a Writ of Error on a Judgment in a Quare Impedit 1 Leon. 293. One that had a Benefice was presented to another and then purchased a Dispensation it came too late and so the first was void and if that be such as that it avoids the last quaere Vnderhill against Savage 1
14 H. 7. pl. 1. If the Ordinary refuse a Clerk for disability he is to give Notice to the Patron if he be a Lay-man but not if he be a Spiritual Man P. 14 H. 7. pl. 3. In a Quare Impedit by the King the Ordinary pleads that such a one presented his Clerk to him and he came to him as he was taking Horse and bid him come again in three days and he never came and so permitted a Lapse Resolved the Ordinary not bound immediately to examine the Clerk but may take convenient time to do it in for it may be at the present time he is busied in aliis agend ' and though he pleads that he presented whereas his Collation yet it seems well enough P. 14 H. 7. pl. 4. Tr. 15 H. 7. pl. 2. That the Clerk has one or two Benefices already is no cause of Refusal For 't is a Priviledge to the Clerk and the Bishop is not to meddle in it but Villein is a cause of Refusal whereof Notice must be given be the Clerk Lay or Spiritual Tr. 14 H. 7. pl. 2. Grantee of the next Avoidance brought a Quare Impedit against the Patron and Ordinary and recovers but pendente lite the Parson resigned and another is admitted This the Bishop returns on the Writ unto him Scire Fac ' Issue against the new Incumbent objected it lies not for he was to have only the next not the second Avoidance but resolved that the Church quoad him remains always void Note Co. 6. rep 52. that the Bishop ought to admit the Clerk on the Writ and then the Tryal of Right shall be between him and the Clerk admitted pendente lite and no Scire Fac ' to be sued but 2 Cro. 93. is contrary to that vide Dyer 260. Hob. 201 320. H. 2 H. 7. pl. 7. He that pleads presentation by a Corporation needs not to plead it by Deed because it may be without Deed For a presentation is but as a Letter Commendatory In Quare Impedit 't is enough to say his Clerk was Instituted and Admitted without Induction but in a Writ of right Induction is necessary because he must lay the Esplees in taking the Tythes Tr. 26 H. 8. pl. 7. Two Joynt-tenants brought a Quare Impedit one will not prosecute he shall be summoned and severed but if he come and make another Title all is gone for they must joyn in the Title Trin. 26 H. 8. pl. 22. Quare Impedit by three Joyn-tenants and make Title by a Grant to them and J. S. And J. S. presented and the Church is void so it belongs to their Presentment so they make Title of the presentment of one Joynt-tenant quod nota vide Co. 1 Inst 186. b. Accord M. â—1 E. 4. pl. 28. Mo. pl. 14. P. 27 H. 8. pl. 28. Quare Impedit and counts that A. was seized and presented and gave in Tayl to the Ancestors of the Plaintiff who presented c. And the Declaration adjudged not double laying one presentment in the Donor another in the Donee 18 E. 3. 15. a. ad idem no more than if the Heir counts in a Quare Impedit of a presentment by the Ancestors and another by his Guardian Quaere if one lays a Presentment in the Feoffer and another in the Feoffee P. 4 E. 4. pl. 3. M. 7 E. 4. pl. 21. 11 E. 4. 10. b. Co. 5. rep 98. a. 14 H. 6. 15. b. 1 H. 5. 16. 40. E. 30. 10. b. Quare Impedit and counts that he presented the Defendant and he deprived c. the Defendant pleads that the Church was full of him by 6 Months before No plea without traversing the Resignation but what a Traverse 't is see 5 E. 4. 3. b. and 12 H. 4. 11. He needs not say 't was full by 6 Months before for if he had his presentment before or pending the Writ it shall abate and he shall not have an Action for his Presentment where he has had the Fruit of it before P. 4 E. 4. pl. 37. If two present severally the Ordinary is not bound to award his Jure Patronatus without Prayer of the party H. 8 E. 4. pl. 6. In Annuity the Defendant pleads that he was presented by the King and prays in Aid of him and the Ordinary Oyer demanded of the presentment Resp ' It belongs to the Ordinary Danby There is a difference between the Bishop's Collatee and the King 's Presentee Trin. 9 E. 4. pl. 14. Composition that if the Patron of a sine Cura present not within a Month the Ordinary shall if the Patron be disturbed so as the Month past he shall recover Damages for the two Years For afterwards he hath lost his presentment though the Ordinary has not presented and so 't is not like a Lapse at six Months at the Common Law M. 13 E. 4. pl. 5. One to name the other to present he that names the Nomination shall have the Quare Impedit but if it be to name two whereof the other is to present one the Presentor is Patron because of his Election Quaere if he that has the Nomination name one and revoke can afterwards name another And it seems he may H. 14 E. 4. pl. 2. Mo. pl. 147. Quare Impedit the Incumbent pleads that the Church is full and has been 6 Months before the Writ Judgment del ' brev ' if no plea Nor to the Action by an Incumbent nor no other but him against whom a Writ of Right of Advowson lies H. 16 E. 4. pl. 6. vide 48 E. 3. 19. b. 22 H. 6. 14. The Plaintiff hath Judgment in Quare Impedit and a Writ to the Bishop and before the Clerk is admitted a Stranger brought a Quare Impedit against the Plaintiff and has a ne Admittas to the Bishop doubted which Writ he is to obey and by Littleton and Vavasor the first because it is an Execution of a Judgment Fairfax contra the last is a Supersedeas P. 18 E. 4. pl. 36. Quare Impedit the Plaintiff is Non Suit after appearance the Defendant makes Title and has a Writ to the Bishop H. 19 E. 4. pl. 12. One may in some cases maintain a Quare Impedit without alleading any presentment As one erects a New Church and presents to it and is disturbed yet the Quare Impedit lies per Billing ' per omnes Justic ' he that recovers in a Writ of Right of Advowson shall maintain a Quare Impedit without alleadging any presentment so if enacted by Parliament that one shall have such an Advowson For if a Church lapse the Ordinary shall collate and maintain Quare Impedit without alleadging presentment 21 E. 4. 3. a. b. and 17 E. 3. 13. b. 14. b. Quare Impedit by the King counts that A. was seized of a Mannor and Advowson Appendant and Attainted of Treason and Office found that the King presented c. the Defendant makes Title to himself in Gross absque hoc that
the King presented and by some held that the party may traverse the Kings Title in this Action not traverse in Chancery and the Presentment not the Appendancy traversable unless where they claim from the same person but at last almost all were of Opinion that the Traverse of the Kings Title here and not in Chancery is void but vide Co. 9. rep 95. b. 96. a. the presentment is traversable here M. 20 E. 4. pl. 11 17. P. 21 E. 4. pl. 15. Quare Impedit the Defendant pleads ne disturba pas The Plaintiff presently prays a Writ to the Bishop and has it and so is the 5 H. 7. 22. a. M. 21 E. 4. pl. 42. A. B. and C. Joynt-tenants of an Advowson they present C. by a strange name to the Church and he is admitted c. by the Bishop and is held a good presentment sed vide 10 H. 8. 14 a. Corporation present their Head and 't is held a void presentation see Mo. 45. accord ' al principal case and P. 17 H. 8. pl. 28. M. 21 E. 4. pl. 48. Three Patrons of an Advowson agree to present by Turns if one usurps one the other presents in her Turn yet it puts her not out of Possession but if one be in Ward to the King and he usurps in Right of one of the Parceners it puts the other out of possession because he not privy to the Partition per Choke and Bryan sed Catesby contra because in Right of the Parcener P. 22 E. 4. pl. 3. Void or not Void is tryable at Common Law but Full or not Full by Certificate of the Bishop and so is 40 E. 3. 20. b. 11 H. 7. 18. a. M. 22 E. 4. pl. 3. Quare Impedit against A. as Patron and B. as Incumbent the Defendant pleads that C. presented him not named no plea For here the Plaintiff has named one Disturber and he shall not force him to name another and vide 9 H. 6. 30 31. a Disturber must be named but contrary of an Incumbent For that is at the Plaintiffs pleasure H. 22 E. 4. pl. 7. In Quare Impedit Title was made by Acceptance of a second Benefice contrary to the 21 H. 8. and Issue taken of the Jurisdiction And so it seems Admission and Institution makes not the Avoidance till Induction Mo. pl. 45. Hob. 166. Owner of an Advowson grants that whenever the Church is void J. S. shall nominate and he will present each shall maintain a Quare Impedit and if he that has the Nomination presents he that should present shall have a Quare Impedit and è contra and a Rent Charge granted must be confirmed by both but Aid shall be prayed only of him that has the Nomination for 't is in the Right Mo. pl. 147. vide H. 14 E. 4. pl. 2. Mo. pl. 1258. vide Mo. pl. 11 78. Quare Impedit against Parson Patron and Ordinary who make default the Plaintiff is forced to make Title and then has a Writ to the Bishop and another to enquire of the four points and recover Damages against them all because by the Default all supposed Disturbers Mo. pl. 214. Barroness retains Chaplains her Marriage after is no discharge of their Detainer unless the Husband actually discharge them but Attainder either in Man or Woman is a Discharge Rex vers ' Epm ' Peterborough Mo. pl. 924. Resolved the Advowson of the Viccaridge is properly appendant to the Rectory but may be to the Mannor as if the Mannor and Rectory were both in a Hand before Appropriation and at the Appropriation the Lord reserved the Advowson of the Viccaridge but that must be shewed either by the Appropriation or usual Continuance which is an Evidence of it Sir George Shirley against Vnderhil Mo. pl. 1258 Quare Impedit against the Bishop and another who demurred Judgment for the Plaintiff et Epus ' in Mia and Writ to enquire 7 E 3. 30. a. Writ to enquire of Damages on Demurrer and Judgment et Epus ' in Mia ' And that assigned for Error because he is twice amercied Resolved none for First The last is but a Recital of the first Secondly The first however is good at Common Law and the Plaintiff may take it at Common Law without Damages if he will wherefore 't is affirmed Specot's Case Co. 5. rep 58. b. 59. a. Quare Impedit and the Writ was Ad Ecclesiam and the Count was de Advocatione duarum partium and well For the Writ must be General but the Count must be according to his Title Windsor's Case vide Co. Ent. 489. a. 3 Cro. 687 688. Co. 10. rep 13. b. 1 Inst 17. b. 18. a. vide 2 Anderson pl. 16. Writ quod permittat presentare ad duas partes Ecclesiae and Counts of the Advowson that duae partes bene aliter if the Count had been de duabus partibus Co. 5. rep 102. A Tenant for Life Remainder to B. presents his Clerk c. and after sues him to Deprivation for not reading the Articles A. dies and two years after the King presents by Lapse and then the Clerk of A. dies and B. presents Resolved first That the Patron is not bound to take notice of the Deprivation though at his Suit but 't is to be given by the Ordinary to the Patron and not only a General but publick Notice Secondly Though the Church be so void for not Reading as a Parishoner may plead it against the Parson in Debt for the Tithes yet the Patron is not to take Notice before it be given Thirdly The King mistakes his Title his presentation is void Fourthly The Institution and Induction c. thereon had are void and the Church remains so void to that Hob. 203. Dr. Griffith's Case B. R. 14 Car. 1. Fifthly If a Common Parson usurp upon the King and his Clerk be inducted the King is put to his Quare Impedit but a double or treble Usurpation gives only the possession not the Right from them Sixthly Without presentation the Patron cannot be put out of Possession For Collation may put one that has Right to collate out of possession but not one that has Right to present And so 't is agreed after fo 50. in Boswell's Case And note if the Presentation be in the time of War though the Admission Institution and Induction be in Time of Peace all is void Green's Case 2 Cro 385. Quare Impedit against the Bishop and Clerk omitting the Patron Resolved it shall abate For the Patron only at Common Law could plead and must be named in every case unless where the King presents who cannot be sued and unless it be in such a case as the Patrons Right is not concluded but only the presentment recovered and if it be brought against the Clerk and Patron and the Patron does plead to the Writ it shall not abate nor shall it if brought by Baron and Feme or two Parceners or Joynt-tenants and the Feme and one Parcener
or Joynt-tenant dies Hall vers ' Epm ' Bath and Martin Co. 7. rep 25 26 27. Quare Impedit the Defendant pleads that he had been in 6 Months and traverses the Avoidance Issue of it Jury find for the Plaintiff and enquire of the three points First That the Church was full of J. S. a Stranger Secondly That 't is of Eighty pounds value Thirdly That the Action was brought within six Months after the Avoidance and Judgment quaer ' and Writ to the Bishop to admit his Clerk nominated The Plaintiff by J. S. pending the Writ and resolved in Error on it first at Common Law if an Usurper presented and had his Clerk admitted and instituted the plenarty shall be tried by Certificate because no Induction the Patron had lost his presentation pro hac vice for the Clerk could not be removed and was put to his Writ of Right for the Advowson but at Common Law the King might remove the Incumbent of an Usurper by a Quare Impedit for nullum tempus occurrit Regi but could not present No removing him without Quare Impedit if inducted Then comes the Statute and excuses the Infant and Feme Covert that they should not be bound by an Usurper but after the Disability removed they may have the same Action the last Ancestor might have had Eadem Lex if Tenant in Tail in Dower by Courtesie or for Life suffer an Usurpation he in Reversion claiming by Descent has the same remedy So in case of Usurpation in time of Vacancy of a Bishop c. But the Statute revests not the Right but gives a possessory Action to recover the presentation thereof Where one usurped on an Infant who at Age Aliened the Mannor his Alienee could have no Action for the next Avoidance because the Advowson passed not nor had himself any Remedy after but where Tenant for years brought Quare Impedit and was barred yet it barred not the Right of him that had the Freehold Secondly it makes plenarty no Barr in Quare Impedit or Assise de darrein Presentment if brought within half a year after the Avoidance though not so soon ended Thirdly It gives Damages Infants c. by purchase are not within the first and the Issue of Tayl is within the Equity of the first Branch because Tayl made the same Parl. which divided the Estate and takes away his Writ of Right at Common Law the three points were not enquirable but now they are ex officio at the Common Law No Plaintiff recovers Damage nor the King now because not within the Statute which was made to help them that lost the presentment Si tempus semestr ' transivit which the King did not yet the Declaration for the King ever counts for Damages at the Common Law if the Defendant present pend ' the Writ his Estate was to be removed So if a Stranger usurp pend ' the Writ and in all cases he that came in pending the Writ if not by good Title though by presentment from the King and since the Statute no Incumbent made before the Writ shall be removed by it unless named in it and in the case at Bar resolved the Incumbent that came in pendente lite is to be removed viz. the Writ is to be to the Bishop to admit the Plaintiffs Clerk and he cannot return plenarty and then the parties shall try it between themselves viz. if he that came in pend ' lite had good title he shall stay else be removed but in Cro. rep of this case 2 part 33. 't is held the Bishop ought to return plenarty and thereon Sci ' Fa ' go against the Incumbent and therein to shew his Right Boswell's Case but 1 Cro. 423. Writ to the Bishop for the Plaintiff and to remove the Incumbent inducted Co. 6. Rep. 49 50 51 52. If the Plaintiff be Nonsuit or discontinue 't is Peremptory and a Barr in another Quare Impedit First because the Defendant on Title is to have a Writ to the Bishop but if it be abated for false Latine or Insufficiency found by the Clark's Fault within six Months he shall have a Note so if the Plaintiff or Defendant be misnamed and the Plaintiff confess it for it may be the Clerk's Fault but if he take on him the Order of Knighthood 't is peremptory Sir Hugh Portman's Case Co. 7. rep 27. b. Quare impedit ad Medietat ' Ecclesiae good When there are two Patrons and two Parsons in one and the same Church yet it seems he may have it also ad Ecclesiam but when there is but one Parson though the Patronage be in two several hands it must be ad Ecclesiam and in a Writ of Right of Advowson When the Church is divided amongst Parceners the Writ of Right shall be ad Medietatem Advocationis but where two several Persons are to present two several Parsons to one Church each whereof is to have the half the Writ must be Advocationem Medietatis for the Advowson is entire but the possession several which make the Difference between the Quare impedit and the Writ of Right of Advowson Richard Smith's Case Co. 12. rep 136. vide Co. 5. rep 102. 1 Inst 17. b. 18. a. vide 33 H. 6. 11. 6. Quare Impedit The Defendant pleads that he is Persona Impersonata good without saying that he was so the day of the Writ purchas'd for it shall be intended to relate to the Writ and if he was not so at the time of the Plea 't is good and has made the Writ good Lady Chichesley against Thompson 1 Cro. 75. Assise de Darrein presentment in Wales The Jury fine the Church 80. l. value and Tempus semestre modo praeterit but say not how long since yet good and forty pounds Damages given the Court of Grand-sessions Writ to the Arch-bishop to admit c. and Quia Episcopus est pars doubted if they may but it seems now they may since the Court of Grand Sâ—ssions is one of the King's Courts but when they were in the Marches they could not Vrse against Epm ' St. David c. 1 Cro. 249. Quare Impedit The Defendant pleads that he was admitted instituted and inducted c. and the Plaintiff traverseth the Admission and Institution and for that was forced to reply and traverse the Induction alledged for that must be where 't is alledged because it alters the Tryal and makes it be per pais then it was moved after Verdict the Bishop was dead and that the Plaintiff might have his Judgment against the rest and so he had it Stevens against Facon 1 Cro. 276. Quare Impedit and counts that A. was seized and presented D. who died and he presented the Plaintiff the Defendant pleads that long before A. was seized Qu. Elizabeth was seized and presented him and he was admitted and instituted Plaintiff traversed that the Plaintiff was admitted c. upon the Queen's Presentment and Good without traversing the Queen's Seisin
Sir John Dryden c. against Yates c. 1 Cro. 423. The way to stop Strangers from Presentment Pendente brevi is to sue a Ne Admittas and then the Plaintiff may remove him by a Quare incumbravit else he is put to his Scir ' Fac ' and if the person present Pendente brevi he shall barr the Plaintiff in a Scir ' Fac ' per Popham and not denyed 2 Cro. 93. The King grants the Mannor the Church Appendant being then void the presentation passes not except by special Words Phane's Case 2 Cro. 198. One sued in the Deligates to avoid an Induction supposing the Institution void was prohibited for Induction being a temporal Act and tryable at Common Law is not avoided but by Quare Impedit but this Prohibition not to be granted having Hutton's Quare Impedit because of his own shewing it should abate it but he must make his Surmise in the Deligates without mentioning that Quare Impedit Hob. 15. Hutton's Case Prohibition to the Incumbent that pending the Quare Impedit felled Timber upon the Gleeb Hob. 36. Kent against Drury Where one brings a Quare Impedit and his Title arises merely by Usurpation he must not declare generally that he was seised in Fee for that was false and so he might be tryed by the Defendant's traverse of the Seisin but he must lay his Case as 't is that A. was seised and the Church voided and he presented and now the Church being void he presents again Hob. 103. Digby against Fitzherbert Quare Impedit against the Bishop of Exeter and A. and B. they plead that he has another Quare Impedit depending against the Bishop and A. and aver it to be the same Plaintiff the same Avoidance and Disturbance c. and demand Judgment The Plaintiff says that after the first Writ he presented C. to the Bishop and he refused which is the Disturbance whereupon he new declared the Defendant demurrs whereupon the Writ abates for he shall not have two Suits at once and here was a Disturbance laid in the first Action so the new Disturbance mends not the Plaintiff's Case so if he had new brought an Assise of Darein Presentment the Quare Impedit depending had been a Barr. St. Andrew against Epm ' Ebor. Hob. 184. Noy 18. 9 H. 6. 68. 73. 22. E. 3. 4. Hob. 137. E. Bedford against E. Exeter c. Dy. 93. a Hut 3. 4. Before the Stat. 25. E. 3. Stat. 3. Cap. 7. No Incumbent could counter-plead the Title of the Plaintiff because that was Title to the Patronage and with that he had nothing to do but to avoid the Patron 's Confession of the Action Counter-plea was given by that Stat. but as Amicus Cur ' he may shew false Latine in the Writ c. for that is no pleading and the general Issue every one might plead for thereupon the Plaintiff may pray a Writ to the Bishop p. 3. H. 7. pl. 1. ad ult ' Hob. 61. 62. Co. 7. Rep. 26. 2. If he that has one Benefice in Cure take another if it be not inducted the Patron may at his pleasure take the Church to be void or not void for 't is not within the Stat. 21. H. 8. till Induction Hob. 166. Winchcomb's Case Mo. pl. 45. In Quare Impedit where one of the Defendants pleads himself inducted at the King's presentment and after surmised that he was not Inducted and prayed a Writ from the King to the Bishop and because without Induction the Defendant could not plead and the King could not be made a Defendant therefore a Writ was made for the King with a special Entry in the Judgment that the Defendant was not inducted Hob. 193. Winchcomb against Dobson Presentment pend ' the Quare Impedit does not abate the Writ F. N. B. 35. b. but if the Church be full the day of the Writ brought it abates because 't is false which says quae vacat ' c. Hob. 194. Winchcomb against Pulliston Quare Impedit the Defendant and Ordinary agree in a plea of presentment by lapse the Plaintiff replies that he presented his Clerk and the Ordinary refused him and collated the other Defendant the Plaintiff demurrs for doubleness of the plea because he says he did not present which is an Affirmative against the Ordinary's Negative He says farther that the Ordinary refused and collated but the plea held good For he must lay a Refusal to make good the Disturbance and shewing the Collation is but Aggravation and Surplussage and the only material part of his Replication was that he had presented a Clerk Hob. 197 c. Brickhead against Archbishop of York Quare Impedit laying distress General the Ordinary and Defendant make Title by Collation for Lapse The Plaintiff replies shewing that he presented and the Ordinary refused 29 May whereas his Writ bore date the ninth of May Judgment must be against him for though the count was General yet the Replication applies it to a more particular Disturbance since his Writ brought So of his own shewing he had then no cause of Action and the Court must judge upon the whole Record Ibidem Quare Impedit the Ordinary pleads nothing but his ordinary plea as Ordinary he shall not be amercied making no Disturbance but the Plaintiff shall have Judgment against him pro falso Clamore but if the Ordinary cast an Essoin 't is a Disturbance Ibid. If the Patron bring a Quare Impedit before any Disturbance and after surcease his time per Hob. the Ordinary shall not be debarred of his Lapse Ibid. A. brought a Quare Impedit against B. pend ' the Writ a Stranger gets in C. his Clerk and then A. has a Writ and his Clerk admitted thereupon yet if C. have better Right he shall retain the Benefice Hob. 320. Dy. 364. ibid. 201. 2 Cro. 93. b. 6 rep 52. a. vide H. 21 H. 7. pl. 7. The Church is void A. and B. severally pretend Right present their Clerk the Ordinary refuses both A. brought Quare Impedit against the Ordinary and B. and his Clerk the six Months Incur The Ordinary collates by Lapse A. recovers he shall remove the Ordinary's Clerk Hob. 214. No Infants nor Woman's Release by the Statute Westm ' 2. 5. against Usurpations made against them during Infancy or Coverture but for such Advowsons as they have as Heirs and not as Purchasers or Successors of single Corporations are relievable within the Equity of this Statute an Heir out of the Ward as well as within and an Heir in Soccage upon a double Usurpation before he comes to the Age of 21 Years not if the Guardian surrender to him or Institute in ventre sa mere and the Purchaser may be within the Statute as if the King grant the Advowson and one usurps For he is in loco Haered ' and per Hob. an Heir of him in Remainder as well of him in Reversion vide 2 Inst 359. and so it is of Tenant in Tayl but
if the Heir himself of full Age make a Lease and the Lessee suffers Usurpation that is out of the Statute For the Lease must not be made by the Heir himself but his Ancestor So if a Bishop suffer an Usurpation being in Succession his Successor shall not have a Quare Impedit but if it were in time of Vacation he shall and the King upon this Statute may present at the next Avoidance H. 239. Lord Stanhop aginst Bishop of Lincoln 2 Inst 358 360. 1 Inst 16. a F. N. B. 31 a. Collation being by right or wrong gains no Patronage doing it in the Patrons Right Hob. 154. Co 6. rep 29. Green's Case and 50 Boswell's Case 1 Leon. 226. Mo. pl. 222. Hob. 124 b. 122. A Church being void the King within a Month reciting ad nostram presentationem spectam ' jure prerogativae presents one who is admitted c. and dies the King presents again the true Patron brings a Quare Impedit Resolved the King's Presentation is void as 't is in Green's Case Co. 6 rep where the King presents as by Writ of his own Title where he had Right of Lapse and the Patron had not only Right of Quare Impedit but might have presented upon him at any time and by the Bishop's receiving his Clerk the other is ipso facto out For it was but as an undue Collation of the Bishop and no Uâ—urpation in the King Hob 301. Grandy vers ' Epm ' Cant. Dy. 327. One had a Grant of Outlaws Goods in the Rape of Bramber and that had a Grant of the next Avoidance of the Church within the Rape was Outlawed and the Church became void the Grantee shall have it For it hath such a Locallity within the Rape that the Lord of the Liberty shall have it wheresoever the Grantee of the Voidance or his Deed is which the other needs not shew coming in the Post Hob. 132 Hollam against Shelley Before the Statute 25 E. 3. The Incumbent or Ordinary could not counterplead the Plaintiffs Title yet if the Quare Impedit were brought against the Incumbent and Ordinary the Incumbent must plead in Abatement that the Patron is alive not named c. Hob. 316. Ellis against Bishop of York No Incumbent is enabled to counterplead by 25 E. 3. 27. till he be possessed that is till he be inducted and if he resign he could not counterplead for that was given to maintain his possession which by the Resignation is gone Hob. 319 193. Dyer 1. b. 293. a. H. 2 H. 7. pl. 15. If any one of the several pleas of the several Defendants in a Quare Impedit against a Patron he shall be barr'd against all therefore name no more Defendants than necessary No not the Ordinary if the Church be once filled Quare Impedit against two the Incumbent sets up one Title the Patron another Neither Estops the other and because it appears not which is true both are to be admitted Hob. 320. Co. Ent. 491 492. pl. 10. In making Title in Quare Impedit lay the presentation of the last Incumbent and name him yet 't is not material whether the Clerk were the same that is named so it be of the same Patron Hob. 321. Lord of a Mannor whereto an Advowson is Appendant grants the three next Avoidances and usurps upon the Grantee at the first this puts the Grantee out of possession of all the three Avoidances and he has the whole Advowson again Appendant to the Mannor so that being Attainted and the King grants the Mannor adeo plene as the Grantor viz. the Parson attainted habuit it passes the Mannor with the intire Advowson Appendant and not as the three Avoidances were in Gross and the rest of the Advowsons Appendant to the Mannor for then that in Gross would not pass for the King's Grant Hob. 321 202 323. Elves against Bishop of York Process at Common Law was Summons Attachment and Distress infinite but by Marlbridge cap. 12. if he came not at the Grand Distress Judgment and a Writ to the Bishop although Nichil be returned on every Process Distress against two one makes Default the Plaintiff shall have a Writ to the Bishop by the Common Law but if the Defendant appear at the Distress and make Default afterwards no Judgment but a new distress must be 2 Inst 124 125. F. N. B. 39. The common Essoyne de malo veniendi is allowed in Quare Impedit not de servitio Regis c. 2 Inst 125. None ought to present the King 's or any Judge's Clerk to a Livery in Controversie on pain that the Clerk shall lose the Church and his Service to it for a year 2 Inst 212. It was ordained at the Council of Lyons that Lapse be given against a Patron after six Months but this bound not the King nor Subject till it was here allowed and in many Cases it 's restrained by Act of Parliament as in some to give notice c. As it 's said it was by the Council of Lateran 2 Inst 273. 368. In Ass de Darrâ—in presentment or a Writ of Right of Advowson none can have Title without alledging Seisin in himself but in a Quare Impedit one may have Title of the Seisin of him by whom he claims and in a Writ of Right he may declare of his Ancestors Seisin but a Purchaser can only have it of his own and before Westm ' the second if Tenant in Tail or for Life had suffered an Usurpation they had been without Remedy 2 Inst 356. 358. If the Heir within Age be in Ward he shall not have a Quare Impedit till he come of Age but if out of Ward he shall immediately have such Quare Impedit as the Ancestors by Possession might have had though the Ancestor actually had it not 2 Inst 359. Plenarty hanging the Writ was no Plea but Plenarty before the Writ brought was a good plea in Quare Impedit at Common Law but by West 2. 5. 't is none unless it be by the space of six Months before the Writ brought 1 Inst 360. No Plenarty is barr to the King whether he presents in his own Right or in a Subjects but 't is in case of the Queen though she claims by the King's Endowment Vide 43 E. 3. 14. 47 E. 3. 4. 21. 8 E. 3. 38. b. 1 E. 3. 3. 15. Co. 1 Inst 119. b. 344. a. 'T is said no Plenarty is against the King till Induction that it seems a hindring from presenting but Induction is no barr of his Quare Impedit 2 Inst 361. When several persons claiming an undivided Interest in the Advowson agreed by fine c. to present by Turns if one usurps the other's Turn he is not put to a Quare Impedit but shall have a Scir ' Fac ' out of the fine and therein a Plenarty by six Months is no barr 2 Inst 362. F. N. B. 34. l. Dy. 259. If upon the Foundation of a Chantry the Composition be
because he cannot have the next Avoidance and so is the second part of Croke 691. Shelley's Case and that if one grants a third Avoidance and the Woman recovers that in Dower the Grantee shall have the fourth Co. 1. Inst agrees with three Cro. grantee of proximam Advocationem cannot have the second where one is granted before Dy. 35. a. b. 1 Inst 378. b. 379. a. 3. Cro. 790. 791. One had the Nomination of a Church to an Abbot and the Abbot to present the Church being in the King's hands he presented without nominating the Party may have a Quare Impedit against the Incumbent without naming the King for it lies not against the King and he that had the Nomination had the Patronage Vide Mo. pl. 147. Vide 14. H. 4. 11. He that has the Nomination brings the Writ Quod permittat nominari the Writ abated for it should have been nominare 1 H. 5. 1. b. Dy. 48. a. 1 Cro. Daviston against Yates F. N. B. 33. b. 14 H. 4. 11. Two Parceners the younger in Ward the Guardian marries the eldest and presents in both their Names the Church voids again and whether the elder Sister shall present as in her Turn for the younger quaere Dy. 55. a. The Jury finds the Church full of a Stranger presented by one not party to the Writ and that ex officio yet good Dy. 77. a. Co. 6. rep 52. a. In Quare Impedit one made Title to a fourth part of the Church in Grosle and that he presented and shewed that others were seised of the other three parts as appendant to certain Mannors and they presented and their Clerk dyed and so it belongs to him to present Dy. 78. b. Quare Impedit by the King the Bishop makes Title to a Stranger and he permitted a Lapse then the ordinary presented the Clerk pleads that he is Parson Imparsonee of the Presentment in causa forma preallegata It seems that the Plea by the Bishop that he presented c. is good enough though indeed he collated but the Clerk's Plea is per totam Curiam uncertain and void for in causa preallegata cannot refer to any thing in his own Plea because nothing alledged and to the Ordinary in cannot because to the Ordinary he is a Stranger not a Servant p. 14. H. 7. Pl. 4. Tr. 15. H. 7. Pl. 12. Quare Impedit by a Corporation the Defendant pleads that they are incorporated by another name and demands Judgment so where the Plaintiff goes but to the Right by Fitzherbert 't is ill sans doubt p. 26. H. 8. Pl. 3. a. In Quare Impedit he counts of an Avoidance by Deprivation and shews not how it became void or for what cause and that assigned for Error for it might be for Simmony or some such Cause that gives a Title to the King sed non alloc ' and Judgment was affirmed Episcopus Glouc ' against Veake 3 Cro. 678. Quare Impedit the Bishop claims nothing but as Ordinary the Writ good if a Writ against him immediate quaere the Plaintiff says he presented A. whom he refused he says he presented to the Church because litig ' if a Departure semble 't is for he intended to have pleaded it at first Tr. 5. H. 7. Pl. 3. In a Quare Impedit the Plaintiff claims by a grant of a next Avoidance by A. the Defendant says that A. was Tenant in Tail held of D. by Knights Service and describes the manner whereto c. and then usurped upon the Description and dyed his Heir within Age and the Lord granted the Ward to him adjudged the Plea not double tho the Usurper had Writ Remitter which was one thing and though the Grantee of the Ward should have the first present against the Grantor of the next Avoidance which is no more than a Lease for years which the Guardian shall avoid for his time and he have it after the Ward comes of Age for with pleading both he could not shew his Title Tr. 5. H. 7. pl. 3. Quare impedit and makes Title as appendant and that A. as Ancestor presents B. c. the Defendant protests 't is not appendant says that he presented D. c. The Plaintiff says that at the time he presented D. it was in Lease to E. the Defendant rejoyns that before the Lease his Ancestor presented I. 't is a Departure for he might at first have laid the Presentment in I. p. 10. H. 7. pl. 6. Tr. 11. H. 7. pl. 15. p. 27. H. 8. pl. 11. Quare Impedit for the King the Defendant pleads the Statute 25 E. 3. 1. That the King shall not present to any living in Auter droit but such as fall in his own time and if he do the Court is not to hold plea Judgment Si Curia cognoscere vult per Thurning This is a plea to the Action not merely to the Jurisdiction For pleas for the Jurisdiction of one Court give Jurisdiction to another which this does not 11 H. 4. 8. a. Quare Impedit and Counts of an Advowson appendant and makes Title to a Gift in Tayl the Defendant pleads the Donee in Tayl was seized of it in Gross and granted per Curiam illam admit it once Appendant and not shew how it after came to be in Gross 44 E. 3. 15. b. Quare Impedit to present to a Church in Somersetshire the Defendant pleads that the Land whereto the Plaintiff supposed it to be reputed parcel of the Mannor of S. in Devonshire Issue of both Counties tryed it Bend ' 26. Release IF Money be due upon Recognizance and the Counsor pay part and the Counsee give him a Release if the Release mentions not the Recognizance it shall release so much as paid only For the Recognizance is entire and being destroyed in part is destroyed in the whole If a man be bound to pay an 100 l. to another on such a day and he tender the same at the day he is not bound to pay the same on any other day unless the Obligee will give him an Acquittance or Release Replevin IN a Replevin the Defendant avoyed to distrein for Rent Charge granted in Tayl the Plaintiff says that an Ancestor of the Defendant whose Heir he is was seized of the Lands discharged of the Rent and gave to him with Warranty No Assetts descended adjudged an illlegal plea First because he pleads Warranty from an Ancestor and shewed not what whether lineal or collateral Nor Secondly because he pleads that he was seized of the Lands discharged of c. and shewed not how viz. by Union or otherwise H. 21 H. 7. pl. 11. Replevin avows Damage feasant barr that the place where his Acre called A. whereof he is seized of 100 l. and has Common in the Residue after Verdict moved the Blank in the Declaration makes all uncertain quid resid ' est sed non alloc ' 't is found there is a Residue and be it what it will he
is to have Common And here no Land is to be recovered so certain enough Sir Anthony Cope agaiust Temple Yel 146 147. Replevin the Defendant avows Forty shillings Rent for two Acres held of him the Plaintiff replies that he holds them and twenty more of him by 12 s. absque hoc that he holds the two last by Twenty shillings and though objected the plea double traversing that the quantity of the Rent And also that he holds the two Acres only adjudged good because otherwise he could not avoid the false Avowry M. 8. H. 7. pl. 1. Replevin and Avowry for that A. was seized in Jure Ecclesiae and leased good without saying that he was Parson supplied by in Jure Ecclesiae but not in Quare Impedit the Plaintiff that so he is a Parson Imparson ' because till then in that cause he cannot plead in Bar. Rolls against Walters Noy 70. If Cattel or Goods be distrained for Rent or otherwise for Damages then the party whose Goods are fo distrained may make Replevin and must prosecute his Replevin as Plaintiff and the Defendant must avow the taking but if by chance the Plaintiff in Replevin become Non-suit or Judgment against him then shall the Defendant have a Retorn ' hend ' averiorum upon which the Plaintiff in Replevin may bring his Writ of Second Deliverance but if he become Non-suit again or Judgment against him then the Defendant shall have Retorn ' hend ' irrepledgeable and keep the Goods for ever If Live Cattel and Dead Things be Replevied by one Writ as they may the Live Beasts or Cattel must be named before the Dead as thus Quendam Equum suum Catella sua quae B. cepit If a Man distrain Beasts or Goods for his Rent and the Tenants tenders Amends before the Distress is taken The taking the Distress is tortious Mesme le Ley pur Damage fesant But tender after the Distress be taken and before the Impounding the Detainer and not the taking is tortious But tender after the impounding neither the taking nor detaining are tortious for the Tender comes too late In Replevin the Plaintiff is Non-suited and the Defendant had a Writ of Retorn ' hahend ' and enquiry de dampnis the Plaintiff brings Second Deliverance This is a Supersedeas to the Retorn ' hend ' but not to the Enquiry By the Common Law when the Goods or Chattels of any person are taken he may have a Writ out of the Chancery commanding the Sheriff to make Replevin of them and this Writ is Viscontiel and in the nature of a Justicies in which the Sheriff may hold plea to any Value and in all Cases but when the Defendant claims Property and when more than one Live Beast is taken then the Form of the Writ is quod replegiari faceret J. S. averia sua and when only one Beast is taken then the Form is quod replegiari faceret J. S. quendam Juvencum suum vel bovem suum c. And when many Dead Chattels are taken then the Writ shall be quod replegiari faceret Bona Catella sua and the Plaintiff must ascertain them in the Declaration But if but one Dead Chattel be taken then the Writ shall be quod replegiari facias J. S. quoddam Plaustrum cum furnitura c. By the Statute of Marlbridge cap. 21. the Sheriff upon Plaint made to him in Court or out of Court ought to make Replevin of the Goods or Chattels taken In Replevin the Sheriff ought to take two sorts of Pledges by the Common Law Pledges de prosequendo and by the Statute Pledges de Retorn ' habend ' Co. Com' 145. b. A Man who hath but only a special Property may bring a Replevin as when Goods are pledg'd to him or Beasts are taken by him to compost his Land and the Writ may be General or Special 41 E. 3. 18. b. 22 H. 7. 14 b. 11 H. 4. 17. If this Plea be before the Sheriff by Writ then it may be removed into the Kings Bench or Common Pleas by pone by the Plaintiff without Cause and by the Defendant with Cause mentioned in the Writ But if it be before the Sheriff by plaint then it may be removed by Recordare issuing out of Chancery by the Plaintiff without shewing cause and by the Defendant if he do shew cause in the said Writ A Replevin lies of such things whereof a man hath but a qualified Property as of things that are ferae naturae and are made tame so long as they have Animum revertendi le Case de Swans in Co. 7. rep So Replevin lies of a Leveret or of a Ferret 2 E 2. Fitz. tit Avowry 182. Also Quare cepit quoddam examen Apium c. Register Original fol. 81. In many cases this Action or Trespass lies at the Election of the Plaintiff but against the Lord Trespass lies not 7 H. 4. 28. b. 6 H. 7. 9. A Replevin lies against one de Averiis capt ' per ipsum simul cum alio Co. Ent. 600. 2 Inst 533. So it lies de averiis capt ' detent ' quousque c. de aliis averiis capt ' adhuc detent ' Rast-Entr 567. 572. And in this Case when the Plaintiff declares that the Defendant yet detains the Cattel and the Defendant appears and makes Default the Plaintiff shall recover all in Damages F. N. B. 69. b. Co. Ent. 610. When the Beasts are chased into another County after they are taken the party may have a Replevin in which of the Counties he pleaseth or in both Idem 65. 6. When the Cattel of several men are taken they shall not joyn in Replevin nor is it a Plea to say that the property is to the Plaintiff and another Co. Com. 145 b. In Replevin the Plaintiff ought to alledge a place certain where the Cattel c. were taken When the Plaintiff is Non-suited before Declaration and he sues Second Deliverance and is Non-suited also again before Declararation the Defendant shall have the Cattel irreplegiable without any Avowry c. Dyer 280. Scire Facias SCire Facias by the King to repeal a Patent the Defendant pleads a Plea whereon the Attorney General demurrs the Defendant joyns in Demurrer and pleads over part of a Statute and Informand ' Curiam Co. 8. rep 12. b. Scire Facias against an Administrator who pleads a special Plene administravit Replic ' quod devastavit and says not who devastavit issue quod praedictus J. S. non devastavit found for the Defendant the Plaintiff moved in Arrest c. 't is not said who devastavit so might be the Executor at Age but per nonnullos the Plaintiff shall not after Issue find a Fault in his own Replication Oxford against Rivet and 1 Cro. 135. Plaintiff after Verdict when no Advantage of his own ill Declaration 1 Cro. 56. 66. vide Co. 7. Rep. 4. 6. 5. rep 39. b. 8. rep 59. a. 1 Cr. 39. Scire Facias
Frauds and Perjuries 1. BY this Act it appears That if a Feoffment be made and Livery and Seisin duly executed although it were before many credible Witness as formerly the Law was yet unless it be put into Writing nothing shall pass thereby but an Estate at Will and in like manner all leases made by word for any longer time than three years or other Estates made or created without Writing are subject to the same Rule that is shall be only Estate at Will that are so made by Words without Writing after the 24 th of June 1677. 2. After the said 24 th of June 1677. No Executor or Administrator shall be charged with any special Promise to answer Damages out of their own Estates but only in Relation to the Testator having Assetts in their hands and that no other person shall be charged with any special promise to pay the Debt of another man or answer for the Default of any other or upon any Agreement of Marriage or for any Agreement for Lands or for any other commodity or thing not to be performed within one Year after the making of any such Agreement unless the same Promise Bargain or Agreement be set down in Writing and signed by the party to be charged therewith or by some other person lawfully authorised by him so to do 3. All Wills and Bequests of Lands Tenements c. after the said 24 th day of June 1677. shall be put into writing and subscribed by the Testator or some person else in his Presence and by his express Directions and attested and subscribed in the presence of three or four Witnesses other wise all such Gifts to be void all such Devises so made and subscribed by the Testatoror his Directions as aforesaid shall be good and stand effâ—ctual in the Law unless the Testator shall at any time cancell the Will or alter it by a subsequent Will 4. All Trusts shall be in Writing and signed by the Party declaring the Trust else to be void except such Trusts as arise by Implication of Law and Lands in Trust for the use of others shall be chargeable with the Judgment and lyable to the Execution sued out against Cestuque use 5. Aman seized of one Estate pur autre vie may devise the same by Will in manner afoâ—esaid and no such devise shall descend to the Heir that so died seized as Lands in Fee-simple should do and such Heir shall be chargeable therewith as a special Occupant and in case of no such special Occupancy then shall the Land descend to the Executors and Administrators 6. From and after the said day every Judgment shall be signed with the day of the Month and the Year in which such Judgment was Signed and the day of the Month and Year are to be entred on the Margin of the Plea-Role and they shall be accounted Judgments but from that day wherein they were so signed and not from the first day of the Term as formerly was used the like Rule for Recognizances 7. No Writ of Fieri facias or Writ of Execution shall after the property of Goods but from the day the Writ was delivered to the Sheriss to execute which day and year the Sheriff is to endoâ—se on the back-side of the Writ 8. No Bargain of Goods above the value of ten pounds shall stand good unless the Buyer take part of the Goods so sold into his Possession or give something in Earnest or that some Note or Memorandum be made thereof in Writing 9. No nuncupative Will whereby an Estate is bequeathed above the value of thirty pounds shall be good unless it shall be proved by three Witnesses at the least nor unless the Testator did bid the parties present bear witness that so was his Will or to such like effect nor unless such a Will was made in the time of the Testator's last Sickness and in his place of Habitation and unless he was surprised and taken sick from Home and that no Testimony shall be received to prove such Will after six Months unless the Testamentory Words were committed to Writing within six Days after the making of such Will 10. No words unless they are committed to Writing and read to the Testator and allowed by him and proved by three Witnesses to be his Will shall alter any Will in Writing concerning any Goods or Chattels or any Device or Bequest therein Trespass IF my Servant without my knowledge puts Beasts into another mans Ground the Servant is Trespasser and not the Master If a man beat my Servant I may have Trespass and my Servant another Action of Trespass diversis respectibus It is good to lay the Action some day after the Trespass committed yet it is not material or traversable if be laid before For it 's but a Circumstance As Trespass done the Fourth of May the Plaintiff alledgeth the First of May it 's sufficient if upon Evidence it be proved that the Trespass was done before the Action brought A Master is punishable for his Servant if he be about his Masters Business An Abbot for his Monk a Captain for his Souldier an Host for his Guess So a Sheriff for his Under-Sheriff and Bayliffs But a Master shall not be Punnished for Trespass of Battery or Entry into Lands or Felony or Murder or such like done by the Servant unless done by his Command If a Servant keeps his Master's Fire so negligent that it burns his Master's and the Neigbours House the Master is chargeable therewith A man is chargable with the Faults of his Family or of his Beasts If a Ship is perishing and the Marriners cast the Goods to save them on the Land next adjoyning yet this is Trespass and punishable by him that holds the Land A Servant may justifie the beating of another in Defence of his Master A Man shall not have his Action of Trespass for Threatning and recover Damage as well as in Assault and Battery The Law does not allow any man to strike in Revenge of Ill words and the reason is because there is no proportion between Words and Blows but he that is struck may strike again In Trespass he that consents and gives aid to the committing of Trespass is a Principal and no Accessary to the same Trespass If Tenant at Will commits voluntarily Waste Trespass lies against him notwithstanding his Possession so that if I deliver my Sheep to another to Fold or Dung his Land or a Horse to Ride or Oxen to Plow his Land If the Bailiff spoil or kill them I have an Action of Trespass against him notwithstanding the Delivery of them or Trover at his Election If a Man desseize me of my Land or dispossess me of my Goods yet I may enter upon the Land or take my Goods although I release to the party Disseizer or Trespasser all Actions yet this Release shall not Bar my Right No Trespass can be excused by Law but it may be justified as upon son assault demesne or
prout ei bene licuit but not to say per infortunium contra voluntatem suam or casualiter or such like is no good pleading to excuse a Trespass or Wrong done One Train-Band Souldier in Skirmishing hurteth another in Discharging his Musquet who brings Trespass and the Defendant justifies and excuses himself as being a Souldier upon his Duty and upon a Demurrer Judgment for the Plaintiff for tho' the Law be that if two men Tilt or Turney in the presence of the King or two Masters of Defence in playing a Prise the one Kills the other this shall be no Felony So if a Lunatick Kill a Man it 's no Felony because Felony must be done Animo Felonice But yet in Trespass where Damages are to be recovered according to Loss or Hurt it 's not so And therefore if a Lunatick hurt a Man he shall be answerable in Trespass wherein no man shall be excused except it may be adjudged utterly without his Fault If there be a Lease of a House for Years and the Lessor Enters to see if Waste be committed or want of Repairs and then he takes away some of the Lessee's Goods against the Will of the Lessee he shall be punished as a Trespasser ab initio So of one that comes into a Tavern and carries away a Cup for though the Entry were lawful in both Cases at the First yet if they do an evil Act after the Entry it makes the Entry and all the rest unlawful And the reason is for that the Law gives liberty to enter for one intent and he useth the same for another ill Intent The same Law is where Goods are seized for Rent or Damage feasantâ— and the Goods are abused A Man may Distrain in an House if the Doors be open otherwise not but a man may distrain per Ostia senestras so that a Distress taken out of a Window is good You cannot present in a Court Leet any thing that is particular Trespass to particular persons but only such things which are a Common Nusance to all neither is such Offence punishable there As if a Freeholder erect a Dove-house it is only Trespass to those whose Corn they eat and not punishable in the Leet Also every Man's Land is supposed to be Inclosed though it lie in the open Field and if Trespass be done the writ is quare Clausum fregit If a Man doth a Lawful Act which proves unlawful it is Dampnum sine injuria As if in Plowing my own Land the Cattel are so unruly that they carry the Plow upon another's Land against my Will this is a good Justification In all Trespasses there must be a voluntary Act of the Trespasser and a Damage to the other party else the Trespass lies not In Trespass for Beating and Assaulting the Wife the Husband shall have the Action aone without mentioning the Wife because whatever Damages are Recovered shall go to the Baron only In all Actions of Trespass vi armis c. there ought to be an express Averment of the Force in the Declaration and ought not to be expressed with a whereas there was such a Force In an Action of Trespass against one with a Simul cum against others if nothing be proved against the other they may be examined as Witnesses in the Cause And if recovery be had against the Defendant named in the Declaration those in the Simul cum can never be sued afterwards for the same Trespass Trespass against three they plead that they had Common and each put in his Cattel to use it and the plea adjudged single and good enough But in Trespass against one and he pleads that A. had Common and to B. and S. C. and he as their Servant acct ' in c. 't were confused and ill but if he pleads that as a Servant to A. he put in such and to B. such c. 't is good enough vide Title Joyntly and Severally Tr. 15. H. 7. pl. 18. In Trespâ—ss the Defendant pleads that the Plaintiff delivered Goods to the Defendant to carry to such a place The Plaintiff replied de Injuria sua c. per nonnull ' no plea For where the Defendant claims under a Gift or Delivery of the Plaintiff the Plaintiff must answer to the Gift or Delivery by himself and not the mean Conveyance which Bryan granted but held that de Injuria c. was a good Traverse that he delivered them M. 16. H. 7. pl. 2. M. 10. H. 7. pl. 15. H. 15. H. 7. pl. 6. Tr. 15. H. 7. pl. 19. Trespass the Defendant justifies for taking a Distress for an Amerciament as Bay liff of a Court Baron good though he shewed no Warrant in Writing for the Precept may be per parol but because he pleaded not that he returned the Precept 't is ill as if the Sheriff returned not the Cap ' he is a Trespasser Trin. 16 H. 7 El. 9. 15. Trespass and Battery against a Constable he pleads that the Plaintiff was beating another and he came to keep the Peace and laid Hands on the Plaintiff and he beat him and so justifies per Ryder Just 't is double For he justifies as Constable and also in his own Defence Kingsmil contra the Beating had not been Lawful but that he first beat the Constable P. 2 H. 7. pl. 5. Trans ' de domo fracto muris â—jusdem domi the Defendant pleads Not Guilty to the breaking of the House and as to the Wall justified ill For the Wall is part of the House so he cannot be Not Guilty of all and justifie for part for that is repugnant pl. 21 H. 7. pl. 7. Trespass of a thing done at D. and after in plea they alleadge another thing in pursuance of the former to be done at D. and though they say not at D. yet intended so and ruled well M. 21. H. 7. pl. 10. Trespass for Digging c. the Defendant justifies as Commoner to dig a Trench to let out Water wherewith it was usually surrounded in the Winter as well for the saving the Lands as the Commons and by some this seems double for either of them was a sufficient Justification of Issue And where one pleads two things either of which is a plea of it self 't is double Tr. 17. H. 8. pl. 1. He that pleads a Fine in Barr in Trespass or in Warranty must conclude Judgment Si Acco ' and not râ—ly on the Estoppel for that goes to the Realty which is not in question in Trespass Tr. 27. H. 8. pl. 19. Trespass against A. for Imprisonment c. he pleads that the Plaintiff had committed Felony and he prays the Constable c. and thereupon they went and arrested him ill because he answers nothing for himself that he by Command of the Constable c. P. 2. E. 4. pl. 20. Trespass the Defendant pleads that his Father was seized and let to A. for Life to enfeoffee c. And A. died and his
Father entred as in his Reversion and it descended to him and objected his plea double on the entry of the Father the dying seized and descent by Billing and Needham but Littleton and Cook contra M. 2. E. 4. pl. 15 Trespass by A. and B. for breaking their Close the Defendant to A. pleads a Title in Barr and to B. not guilty by Danby Mayle Cheke the plea ill for the Barr goes to all and the other makes it double Needham and Ashton contra each Plaintiff ought to have his Answer M. 2. E. 4. pl. 20. Trespass for cutting Subbosc ' and carrying away two Loads of Barley quoad the Barley the Defendant pleads a Lease at Will by one Tenant as Tenant in Common and quoad the Wood a License by him and the Plea not double for a Tenant at Will cannot cut c. without License M. 2. E. 4. pl. 25. In a Precipe the Tenant pleads a Release in Barr and it was in Barr of all the Lands in S. that he bought of J. S. ill not avering that he bought the Lands of J. S. the words being general viz. All the Lands c. not particular of bl Acre c. which will be otherwise M. 2. E. 4. pl. 26 Trespass on the Stat. R. 2. the Defendant pleads a Guift of the Land by Act of Parliament whereby he was seized temps ' H. 6. and the Plaintiff entred upon him temps E. 4. and he entred Choke Justice and Littleton held it double for the Gift and Seizin is one barr and the Entry of the Plaintiff and the Re-entry of the Defendant is another but Ardern Justice and Lason contra for 't is all pursuant Et ibidem by Choke and Needham Justice when the Defendant pleads that the Plaintiff entred so long after the Statute and says not by what Colour it shall be intended more strongly against himself and intended by Title Ardern Justic ' cont ' no Title shall be intended till the Plaintiff shews it Trin. 3. E. 4. pl. 1. Trespass for taking a bag of Money the Defendant pleads that the Plaintiff was indebted to him and says not how and delivered it him in payment the Plaintiff replies De injuria c. And per Littleton no Plea where the Defendant justifies by an Act of the Plaintiff himself Vide Trin. 20. E. 4. pl. 1. m. 9. E. 4. pl. 25. 12 E. 4. 10. 6 H. 19. E. 4. pl. 15. Trespass against the Lord vi armis he admits it and pleads a Distr ' for Services and the Issue of Views Arrear found for the Defendant yet no Judgment for the Court is not to admit him to recover against a Negative Statute other if it were affirmative and Election to proceed either way p. 10. E. 4. pl. 10. Trespass by J. S. for taking an Horse the Defendant pleads that J. S. de D. was possessed and gave him the Horse c. the Plaintiff replies that he is not the same person in the Barr and Dem ' and tho objected this ill in matter of Fact and Dem ' for matter in Law and it cannot be tryed by Court and Jury the Plea ruled good for by joyning in Dem ' 'tis confess'd he is the same Person and he might have taken Issue of it H. 13. E. 4. pl. 4. Trespass against three they all plead Not Guilty as to part and quoad resid plead a guift of the Goods and Issue and at Ni. pr. 2. make default the third pleads a Concord Prius Darr ' contin ' prayed to try the Issue against the two by Default because no contin ' can be made of it because they absent and if not tryed now 't will be discontinued Objected that goes but to part and there is now a Plea that goes to all which is to be tryed first for if that be against the Plaintiff though he should have Verdict on the other he can have no Judgment but for the Inconvemency and for that this Plea to the whole comes after the ven ' fa ' and the other was before therefore 't was tryed but if both had been before the ven ' fa ' it could not have been and they found for the Plaintiff and they had Judgment with a Cessat Executio till the other tried for the Concord was laid in another County so the Plaintiff released to him and took Execution tho' the Judgment on the First Plea Tr. 15 E. 4. pl. 11 3. vide 4 E. 3. 42. Trespass the Defendant justified for Tithes severed the Plaintiff replies de son tort objected no plea no more than when in Trespass the Defendant makes Title and pleads son Franktenement or a Lease for years by Bryan and so it seems tho' Piggot says there he claims there the Occupation of the Land not so here P. 16 E. 4. pl. 9. 2 Cro. 224 225. Trespass Not Guilty and Issue the Defendant puis darr ' contin ' pleads a Release dated before the last Contin ' but delivered after the Plaintiff replies that was delivered the same day 't was dated Judgment against him for he did confess he did release so satisfied and no matter when but he might have pleaded that he did not deliver it puis darr ' Contin ' or that it was not his Deed puis ' darr ' contin by 78 H. 6. and 39. H. 6. 8 9. Tr. 16 E. 4. pl. 2. Trespass the Defendant pleads that the Plaintiff let to him for Years per Cur ' he must shew what Estate he had as that he was seized in Fee c. and let but by Kidwelly when one pleads a Lease from a Stranger 't is necessary to plead it so not when he pleads the Lease to the Lessor himself M. 22 E. 4. pl. 217. Trespass for Assault and Battery and Threatning c. de son Assault demesn Obj. in Error the plea ill not answering the minas but resolved well enough for the minas laid but in aggravation of damages Penruddock against Errington sed vide Hill 16 E. 4. pl. 8. contra M. pl. 983. In Battery the Defendant justifies by Warrant out of a Leet and though they plead not the day of the Leet nor that the House was within the Jurisdiction nor the Warrant yet all these being but Indictments adjudged good Curey's Case M. pl. 11. 47. Trespass for entring the Close and cutting so many Trees quoad all but cutting the Trees and entring the Close pleads Not Guilty et quoad fract ' Claus ' pleads matter in Law and justifies the cutting the Trees but because in the quoad c. nothing was said of the Trees the plea is ill and was amended and made et quoad fract ' claus ' Cutting c. Co. 4. rep 62. a. Trespass and Battery the Defendant pleads that he had a Lease for Years of an House and the Defendant would have put him out c. good without shewing by what Title his Lease or Commencement c. of it because said but as Inducement For whatever Title
he had his possession excused him Scable against Avery 1 Cro. 69. In Trespass Quare clausum fregit in Dale the Defendant justifies in Sale absque hoc that he is Guilty in Dale It seemed to be an ill plea amounting but to the General Issue but Fitz-herbert douts because Dale and Sale may be adjoyning and it may be doubtful in which the Close lies Dyer 19. a. In Trespass in several things in a Park the Defendant made several Justifications and pleaded that quidam J. S. granted c. quidam J. S. granted c. and so began every plea with quidam J. S. which shall be intended several men and it all being about one Office 't is ill for several men could not severally grant him it 3 Cro. 401. quidam J. S. intended the same person that it was mentioned before And so Sti. 329. and 18 E. 3 49 b. and Brid 100. Hat 84. quidam found by Special Verdict doubted if good In Trespass the Defendant pleads a special plea and justifies the Plaintiff replies de Injuria sua propria but did not Traverse absque tali Causa Issue and Verdict for the Plaintiff Judgment staid and Repleader awarded For here is no Negative but an Affirmative of the first Declaration but no denying the Defendant's plea by the Impa ' Jennings versus Lee M. 24. Ca. 1. B. R. Sti. 150 151. In Trespass the Defendant justifies his Entry by Vertue of a Lease for Years and adjudged no good plea amounting but to the General Issue Jaynes Case 1651. in B. R. so 2 Cro. in Trover the Defendant pleads Sale in Market Overt not good in Trover The Defendant pleads that A. was possessed of Goods and sold them to the Defendant and retained them in his Hands and sold them to the Plaintiff and they cme to the Defendant's Hands and he converted ill amounting but to the General Issue and leave no Color for the Plaintiff's Action whereupon a Writ of Enquiry was awarded and not ruled for that the Defendant pleaded Not Guilty Sti. 355. 2 Cro. 165 319. Hob. 187. 1 Cro. 112. 2 Cro. 146 147. 169 435 532. 555. In Trespass the Defendant pleads the Statute of Limittions the Plaintiff replied that he sued an Original within six Years Et hoc pet ' quod c. an ill Conclusion For thereupon he lies upon the Defendant and binds him to an Issue which he cannot pass over but he should have ordered his Plea Et hoc paratus c. Whitehead versus Buckland Hill 1651. B. R. Sti. 401 402. Yel 138. Trespass for taking and Imprisoning him such a day the Defendant justifies by Warrant on a Capias ad Satisfaciend ' the Plaintiff shews that after the Writ issued and before executed he paid the Money to the Sheriff who gave him a Supersedeas to all Bayliffs c. and the Defendant Arrested him whereupon he shewed him the Supersedeas â—ho yet detained him an Hour The Defendant says he was not Letter'd and took that time to advise Whereon 't is demurred and adjudged for the Defendant not on the Matter in Law but the plea for the Declaration charges him with a taking and imprisoning and the Replication with a detaining only so a Departure Stringer against Fanlake 3 Cro. 404. Trespass for breaking two Gates and three Pearches of Hedging the Defendant prescribes to go in Preambulation that way in Easter Week and given the Plaintiff two Gates and three Pearches of hedging he broke them and upon Demurrer adjudged the Plea ill because he says not praedictas and the two Gates and the three Pearches may be other than those laid in the Declaration Gooday against Mitchel 2 Cro. 441. In Trespass against several that entred to take the Corn whereto one of them had Right upon the Determination of a Lease depending on a Lease for Life ended the Defendant pleads Not Guilty and all the matter found specially though their Entry were lawful as in the Right of one yet it being by a License in Law which must have been pleaded and is not to be given â—â— Evidence or by a special Verdict for that Cause Judgment was against them for their entring though against the Plaintiff as to the taking the Corn. Sir Henry Knivet against Powle c. 2 Cro. 463. 464. In Trespass the Defendant justifies Damage feasant the Paintiff made a new Assignment the Defendant justifies there for an Herriot the Plaintiff demurred supposing it a Departure but adjudged not for by the new Assignment the Barr is out of doors and that in the Replication is as of a new thing and could not be pleaded otherwise for it may be he took one on Damage feasant and the place mentioned in the Barr and another for an Herriot in the Replication Odyham against Smith 3 Cro. 589 590. Trespass for taking an Hide the Defendant justifies because the Mayor c. of London is seized of a House called Leaden-Hall and 't was there Damage feasant for he by c. The Plaintiff replies that Leaden-Hall is an ancient Market on Fridays and he bought it there and had it on his Back to carry away and though objected the Replication not good because he concludes not que est eadem c. because he varies from the manner of the Caption and by his Plea takes from the Plaintiff his Authority yet resoplved good without it agreeing with him in the time and place of the Caption Sawer against Wilkinson 3 Cro. 627 628. In Trepass one as Bailiff pleads quod presentat ' existit that such an one surcharged the Common and for that was amerced therefore distrained 't is good without saying in facto that he did surcharge the Common for he is to take notice of no more than what is done in Court Volleston against Alimond 3 Cro. 748. 386. com 1. Leon. 292. 2 Cro. 582. Trespass for taking two Hides the Defendant justifies for a Distress the Plaintiff replyed that he tanned them the Defendant rejoyned they could not keep else he did it to save them ill and a Departure Duncomb against Reeve and Green 2 Cro. 783. Trespass the Defendant pleads that he is Clericus seisitus de Rectoria in Jure Ecclesiae and prescribes that he and all his Predecessors Parsons of that Church have had a way and so he says not that he was Parson and so it was objected he had not enabled himself to make a Prescription yet saying he is seized Jure Ecclesiae it tant ' amounts and is good Dom. Sandr against Pender 3 Cro. 8. 98. In Trespass the Defendant justifies because per quandam Indenturam A. bargain'd and sold Land habend ' to B. the Plea ill because not said in the Premises to whom he being c. but 't is the habend ' and the Granter and Grantee must be named in the Premises but because the Plaintiff replyed Quod bene verum that A. granted to B. that is a Confession to whom the Grant was and mends it
Bustard against Collyer 3 Cro. 899. Trespass the Defendant prescribes for Estovers at all times except fawning times the Plaintiff made an ill Replication the Defendant demurrs though the Bar was ill the Defendant not shewing that at the time that he cut c. was not fawning time yet he having demurred on the Plaintiff's Replication the Court would not to the Bar but no Judgment of the Plaintiff's ill Replication Russel against Booker 2 Leon. 209. 210. Trespass for Battery the Defendant justifies Molliter manus imponendo in defence of the Possession of his House the Plaintiff replyes de Injuria sua absque c. Verdict for the Plaintiff and Judgment Replication good for the principal is the Battery Hall against Gerrard Latch 128. 3 Cr. 225. Laâ—ch 221. 273. Trespass the Defendant pleads the Plaintiff is a Recusant convict whom the Statute 3 Jac. 5. makes excom ' Judgment de billa because it wants Et hoc paratus c. per Recordum also the Conclusion is unapt for the Plea for the Plea is in Disability the Conclusion is barr but it seems the Conclusion is but form and used by general Demurrer And vide the form of several Conclusions Inde si Cur ' vult cognoscere 2. Al' person ' sit serra respond ' 3. Al' briefe Judgment ate ' Br. 4. Al' accon ' del briefe 5. In barr ' Com' apprest Bracton de excepc ' and differ Quando le ple al' br ' of perempt ' quando neme If the pleading to the Writ be tryable and tryed per pais is peremptory to the Defendant other if Demurrer upon respond ' but if the Plea be tryable by Certificate of the Ordinary 't is never peremptory and if the Plea to the Writ be to the Action of the Writ it seems peremptory so Plea to the Action of the Writ and Conclusion to the Writ peremptory if demurred one pleaded to the Action of Avowry he shall not resort to plead in Abatement after Imparlance one pleads Outlawry in the Plaintiff allowed Dr. Cudman against Grendon Vide 40 E. 3. 9 pl. Abatement Avowry and Conclusion the barr Latch 177 178 179. Co. 11. rep 52 a. and 1 Cro. 117. Trespass the Defendant justifies as Executor the Plaintiff says that the Defendant was annulled upon Appeal to the Court of Rome and so not Executor if the Conclusion good diverse of opinion semble as well as where one pleads a Divorse in the Spiritual Court and so not his Wife M. 2. R. 3. fo 22. pl. 51. In Trespass for Misprision the Defendant pleads that Robery had been done and that he being a Watch-man and the Plaintiff coming through the Town in the Night he stopped him to see what he was doubted if not double for he might stop him generally either under Suspition or particularly as a Night-Walker being a Watchman H. 4. H. 7. pl. 2. Trespass against two Defendants they Justifie Et hoc paratus ut Justific ' exceptionis taken because it should have been Et hoc parat ' sunt 1 Cro. 413. 414. Trespass for taking his Apprentice Plea that the Plaintiff discharged him not good for he cannot be Apprentice but by Indenture and then he cannot be discharged but by Deed no more than one Covenant to build me an House in Covenant to plead a Discharge of the Building unless he plead it by Deed 21 H. 6. 31 32. Trespass Defendant pleads a Lease at Will made to him by Vertue whereof he entred and was possessed and held good without shewing of what Estate he was possessed Idem in pleading a Feoffment c. For it may be doubtful in Law as if made by an Infant c. Therefore more safe to plead the Matter and to omit the Conclusion how he was seized and leave it to the Court 35 H. 6 63. b. Trespass the Defendant pleads that the Plaintiff had nothing but in Common with J. S. c. per Cur ' he ought to shew how Tenant in Common viz. the Feoffment c. if of a Joynt Tenancy personar c. but not after the Plaintiff stands not on it but says he was sole seized and some thinks the Law is he pleaded a Tenancy in Common of the adverse side but if he had pleaded on his own side then I agree I must shew how 3 H. 6 56. Trespass for Fishing in his several Fishings the Defendant pleads 't is not Freehold and by some the plea is good till the Plaintiff make a particular Title to the Fishing Idem in Case of Warren but per Yel and not denied but not so for Common because when one demands Common it must be intended in alieno solo But when one demands Fishing or Warren it may be intended in his own Soyl And so for the Defendant to plead un ' Fr ' Tent ' a good plea prima Facie till the other makes a Title but per Fortescue with a Traverse of Fishing c. 't is good else not no Resolution vide Title Forrest per tout And Title Fishing per tout plus de cest ' matter and vide 21 H. 6. 21 b. and the Plaintiff makes Title 18 H. 6. 29 30. Trespass Quare lib ' Warr ' fregit et Cuniculos cepit the Defendant pleads that the Plaintiff was seized and let to A. he by Command of A. took the Conyes Judgment le sans Title Mre ' and after waves that and pleads ut auter Judgment si Acco ' per Danby on plea because the Warren passed not by the Lease of the Land and one may have Warren in his own Freehold Note he may plead Title under the Plaintiff himself and Note the General Issue and Note after he pleads the Freehold in a Stranger who let ut supra and that he by Command of A. c. absque hoc pt ' the Plaintiff has any Warren there Jenny that is doubt the Freehold in a Stranger and traverse of the Warren and thereon he Demurrs L. 5 E. 4 54. Trespass for cutting Trees Defendant makes Title to the Lord in Right of his Ward and that he cut prout sibi bene licuit Danby Chief Justice and the Conclusion ill For it appears waste and unlawful Marle mal Opinion ut mihi videtur 't is Lawful quoad the Plaintiff and good For before the Statute of Waste Lessor or Ward had no Remedy against the Lessee or Guardian by Trespass and now 't is punishable only by Waste not in Trespass but it may be an Estoppel in Waste therefore better to plead he cut them for a Repair prout sibi bene licuit L. 5 E. 4 64 89. b. Trespass for taking beating and impounding his Cow Defendant quoad ven ' vi armis and pleads Not Guilty and quoad the taking and impounding justifies for a Distress ill not answering the Beating Copeley against Piercy Trin. 19 Car. 6. B. R. Trespass for taking Cattel Defendant justifies Plaintiff replies and avoided it hoc c. unde petit Judicium si
House c. he cannot but on a Lease of Goods or Chattels he may No Ley gager in Debt for dyet of a Pentioner P. 9. E. 4. Pl. 1. H. 15. E. 4. Pl. 2. Co. 9 R. 87. 6. 19 H. 6. 10. a. Debt on a Contract the Defendant pleads the Contract was made with him and Br. and abates the Writ yet in another Action he may wage Law though herein he confessed the Contract for he may have pleaded it after per Littleton and not denyed ibidem by him In Debt against Baron and Feme on a contract by the Feme dum sola both shall wage though he a Stranger to the Contract for by the Marriage he hath made himself lyable to it And to this last agrees M. 15. E. 4. Pl. 4 Sed vide 33 H. 6. 43. b. If she make default at the day 't is the Default of both and binds the Husband 9 E. 4. 2. 4. b. Debt and Counts of a Retainer to shape and make such Cloaths In this case the Defendant may wage his Law and in similiter not against a Labourer compel to wage by the Statute 1 H. 6. 23. b. Not wage in debt by a Servant for his Wages H. 16. E. 4. Pl. 3. Mo. Pl. 971. Co. 9. R. 88. a. b. Detinue of a chain of Gold of four ounces weight of the value of twenty pounds though the Defendant have and detain them yet if it be but two ounces weight he may wage Law as if it were a black Horse and the Suit for a white one but if the Count were of a thing certain in the quant or qual as six yards of cloath tho he mistake the Price as ten Shillings for eighteen Shillings yet the Defendant cannot safely wage law Count of a Contract for 500 l. It was for 500 l. to be paid in Jewels Defendant waged law 39 H. 6. 34 35. 3 H. 6. 49. b. Count of a Contract for 40. l. plead that it was for 20 l. and wage law for the rest P. 22. E. 4. Pl. 8. 9. Mo. Pl. 1. 48. Vide 39 H. 6. 34. 35. Debt by a Keeper of the Tower for Manger and Boyer for one committed there for Treason Defendant cannot wage law Et dict for debt by a Priest for his Salary Defendant may wage law 28 H. 6. 4. b. In Account of Receipt per auter maines no Wager lyes because the Receipt is the cause of the Action and that 's notorious al pais being per auter mains but in Detinue on a Delivery per auter mains Wager lyes because not the Livery but the Deteiner which is in a manner the cause of Action but in next Case 't is the Usage which makes the law of Wager therefore in debt it lyes in Trespass it lyes not 33 H. 6. 9. a. Debt on a Judgment in Court-Baron the Defendant pleads Nul tiel Judgment 't is no Record therefore tryable per Pais Defendant not wage Law 34 H. 6. 49. No Wager lyes in debt or Arrearages of Account before Auditors but that was not at the Common Law but is given by the Statute of Westminster 2 Ca. 11. But though the Statute gives it only in Case where the Lord sues for the Arrearages against the Receiver yet it seems by Needham and Prisot the Wager lyes not where the Bailiff or Receiver sues the Lord for Surplus on the Account 38 H. 6. 5. 6. Debt for Wages and on a Reteyner to serve in all Occupations the Master wages law because it may extend to other things besides Husbandry which the Reporter holds to be otherwise for the Service and Wages being entire and no Wager for part he thinks there should be none for the rest for Magis dignum trahit ad se minus 38 H. 6. 13. 14. Party wages Law and day given to make it either of the Parties at that day may be excused by Essoin but if either make default it is adjudged against him or if the Defendant do not bring twelve sufficient men 't is a default as if any of them prove Execution Attachment c. Et ibidem if in Replevin the Plaintiff say that the Defendant kept himself out of the way that he could not tender Amends and bring his Suit of it Defendant may wage law of it but if he bring no Suit he need not wage for against one single Voice he need not wage whereby since moy semble he means Proof and so Selden upon Fortescue expounds it vid. Brit. 60. a. Debt and Counts upon a Lease for three years of certain Sheep the Defendant wages law per Cur ' he may though not in a Lease of Land Vid. 9. E. 4. 1. b. 1. H. 6. 1. a. b. No Wager in Law lyes in debt by a Servant for his Wages sed quaere for that seems such a Servant only as is retained according to the Statute 3 H. 6. 33 B. 34. a. Debt and Counts of Reteyner to scald his Hogs and foul by the Year taking 100 s. The Defendant may wage his Law and so he may upon a Retainer to serve him at Plough a year and to find Ploughs c. for these not Reteyners according to the Statute and so of a Reteyner to be his Counsel for a year c. 3 H. 6. 42. One waged law and brought twelve with him one whereof was challenged for that he was under Age and he was tryed by Inspection of Court to be of full Age whereupon the Party made his Law and went quit 8 H. 6. 15. b. Debt of a Box of Writings and Charters and Counts of one Charter in Special To which the Defendant pleaded non detinet and to the rest wages Law bon for if one Count of a box of Charters and shew not in Special he may wage Law as to all for unless one Charter be certainly set out the Box and all counted Chattels Vid. 14. H. 6. 1. a. Detinue of Goods and Chattels defendant wages Law quoad the Goods and pleads to the Charters 44 or 4 E. 3. 41 b. and 19 H. 6. 9. b. Debt Defendant having answered in Court that he bought c. to the use of the King waged Law and was admitted for notwithstanding he acknowledged the debt it being a Contract and he might have paid or pleaded it in pais the Wager allowed simile 11 H. 4. 28 and 3 H. 4. 40. 7 H. 4. 7. a. Account by the Husband or an Abbot and counts of Receipt per manus de Son feme or de Son Comoine good and needs not count of a Receipt by his own hand yet 't is as a Receipt by his own hand and the Defendant may wage Law And so vice versa in Account against Baron or Abbot Count of Receipt per manus del Feme oâ— Cemoine le Defendant and so is 2 H. 5. 2. b. vid. 47 E. 3. 16. 13 E. 4. 8. a. Debt against two one makes default the other wages law and at the day makes it The whole Writ is
abated Et quer ' nil capiat against both entred where by the Acceptance of the Law quoad one the whole Writ is abated Vide 41. E. 3. 26. or 2. b. Precipe quod reddat against two one makes default after Joynt-wager the other joyns and makes the Law And it is accepted though the defendant opposed it the defendant recovered some of the other Moyety Note here both waged joyntly at first vide 48 E. 3. 13. b. Cessavit against two who waged law one comes to make it Seizin is prayed of the others Moyety that made default for if the Law of the one be accepted at first per Wishingham all the Writ abates But here when he prays Seizin of the entire for the default of one it was denyed and upon the whole it seems if one make default Seizin of his part must be pr. first else by acceptance of the others Law the Writ abates And if Seizin be granted of the Moyety it seems it is conditional for if the other makes his Law the whole Writ abates tamen quere and vide 3 E. 4. 21. a. 12. E. 4. 1. b. 5 E. 3. 9 B. and quere in personal Actions not to be done in such case for there no Seizin of part can be prayed 40 E. 3. 35. b. vid. 40 E. 3. 40. 41. Debt against a Bailiff for Arrearages on Account obj He cannot wage c. because in the Realty but resolved he may and so may he by 13 H. 7. 3. 6. If he had accounted and was found in Arrearages before one Auditor 43 E. 3. 1. 6. Attaint on a Prohibition Plea that he sued out Sugg ' to Prohibition and therefore he wages Law doubted if Ley gager lyes by Belknap it does because the first Suit but for debt in which Ley gager lyes 44 E. 3. 32. a. The Servant retains one as Attorney for his Master the Master makes the Servant Executor and dyes In debt by the Attorney against the Executor he cannot wage Law though the Master might for the Servant is bound by his own deed of Retainer though he be sued as Executor c. And per Finchden Baron may wage Law if a Feme contract and an Abbot if his Monks And so Bro. Tit. Ley gager 46 E. 3. 10. Debt against a Bailiff for Arrearages found before Auditors assigned in pais by the Master the defendant wages his Law Et bene per Cur ' though Brookes and Bridges say the Law is otherwise at this day quere since 't is not before Auditors assigned by Court Et hic dicitur quod one may wage Law for a Sum recovered in a a Court-Baron because no Court of Record yet 't is found by the Suiter and so 't is said 13 H. 7. 3. 6. Per Cousby 'T is also here said one may wage Law in debt for a Sum recovered in Trespass but in Trespass Ley gager lyes not 49 E. 3. 2. 3. Debt in the detinue only for rent Corn as 't is agreed it must be not being Money and though 't was upon a Lease â—o years yet being in the Detinet only the desendant is admitted to wage Law 50 E. 3. 16. a. b. Debt against J. D. who appeared by Attorney and ley gaged and at the day J. D. Junior comes to make the Law Plaintiss says his Suit is against J. D. the elder per optimam opinionem J. D. Junior shall be discharged and the Plaintiff shall have Judgment against the elder by default and the Plaintiff be no longer delay'd And so 't is adjudged 9 E. 3. 20. b. 5. E. 4. 23. 26. 114. Annuity defendant pleads a Refusal to give him advise upon Request plaintiff offers to wage his Law that he did not request him denyed because he cannot wage Law de alieno from then he offers to wage Law that he did not refuse then per Herle that admits that he did request and shews no performance on request and if he requested he did or did not perform and when he sued not if he did perform it must be intended he did not qu. of law gager in such cases if it lye at all 5 E. 3. 55. b. In a Plea of Land the defendant defendant wages law of Non-summons and offers to make it instanter and per Herle and not denyed he may Ley gager and make it instant 7 E. 3. 24. a. Account by an Executor and counts of a Receipt per manus Testatoris was per auter maines then his that sues tamen quaere In Debt and Account by Executor 't is said defendant may wage his Law Et sic semble hic 7 E. 3. 61. An Abbot is permitted to wage law of Non Sum ' per Attornatum quere If a common person may do so also though he must make it in person 8 E. 3. 20. a. Prohibition of a Suit in Trespass contra pacem the Sheriff comes and says he is sued not contra prohibitionem on the attachment and tenders Law denyed for in Trespass contra pacem it lyes not no more than in Count of a Receipt per auter maines non allocatur and that Law was received and in 29. E. 3. 47. b. Debt lyes and grant of a delivery of goods by the Testator per auter maines defendant wages Law So 30. E. 3. 24. 29. E. 3. 34. b. In account the defendant before Auditors says he paid the Money to the plaintiff the plaintiff would have waged law That he did not receive it but the other alledging that he had pass'd it per auter maines non allocatur Vide 30 E. 3. b. a. Ley gaged that he did not receive a Statute Wine and Cloath in Satisfaction of a Debt and doubted if it lye quoad the Statute but the Clark said it is usual 29 E. 3. 46. b. Debt against two who wage Law one makes default the other his Law Nil capiat per breve and the reâ—son seems that he having charged the two joyntly and the debt disproved quoad one the Writ is satisfied in toto yet eodem folio 6. in a Precipe of Land against two one makes Ley of non sum the Writ abates quoad him and Seizin of Land against the other that makes default Note the first Action is in the personal and entire the last in the realty and several 38 E. 3. 33. a. One wages Law and at the day failed and the Roll marked and Costs taxed yet on motion sedente Curia the same day he was admitted and made his Law eodem in libro Pa. 44. Ley gager lyes not in debt for Releif Noy 42. Defendant had day to make his Law and at the day made Affidavit that he was pressed to serve the King and could not come and they prayed farther and denyed for peremptory but the defendant pleaded al pais per advisamentum Curiae and consent Ashford against Greenvile M. 1. Ca. 1. sed vide in Bulstr 186. He cannot wave his Law and plead al pais without consent 3 Bulstr 263.
makes a Feoffment on Condition VVast is done and he enters for the Condition Lessor shall have wast fo if Lessee of a Bishop commits wast in time of Vacancy the Successor shall have the Action so if Tenant for Life be disseised and wast is done and the Tenant re-enters Lessor shall have wast yet he had no Reversion Note 't is no plea for Lessee in wast to say generally that Lessor had no Reversion c. but must shew how he lost it But in wast by Assignee of the Reversion such Plea general is good vid. 39 E. 3. 19. 20. Wast by Successor of a Bishop or wast done in the Predecessors time quaere sc bon for laid ad exheredationem Ecclesiae Co. 1. Inst 356. a. vid. 1. H. 4. 26. Opinion that Successor of an Abbot or Prior shall have wast for wast done in the Predecessors time or if a Bishop Parson c. that can make Executors Vid. 71 E. 3. 53. b. 43 E 3. 8. 49 E. 3. 26. Successor of an Abbot not chargable for wast of a Predecessor In wast if the Plaintiff's Reversion determine either before or pendant the Suit his Action is gone but if it be pendente the Suit it must be so specified Ewer against Moyle Yel 141. In Wast the Plaintiff declares Quod cùm seisitus fuit and let for years the Defendant had wasted and though not said of what Estate seised so it might be for Life yet being ad exheredationem and that alledging of Seizin but Surplus held by most good enough Sir Walter Astoâ— against Sweten hall 3 Cro. 47. Wast assigned in the house where it appears the Plaintiff has but two parts of the Reversion yet good he cannot assign it otherways Wast inquired of by the Sheriff where it was confessed by Nihil dicit yet no Error Warnford against Haydock 3 Cro. 290. Wast against a Husband Tenant for life in right of his Wife dead not being in the Tenet or Tenuit ill also the Writ is Quod fecit vastum and being in her right it should have been fecerunt vastum But by Co. 1. Inst this Wast is dispunishable by her death otherwise if it had been a term for years Co. 1. Inst 54. P. Note the Estate was made to the use of the Wife for Life yet Action lyes Sackervil against Bagnell Con. to Dr. and Student Co. 3. Cro. 356. 357. In wast the plaintiff prayed a writ of Etrepement against the Tenant and his Servants and at last a Warrant against both though doubted at first if it lye in this Action though it do in Writ of Entry c. Anderne against Anderne 3 Cro. 393. F. N. B. 61. In a Writ of Entry sur disseisin done to himself the plaintiff prayed a writ of Etrepement doubted if allowable because in that Action he is to recover Damages but because Non constat whether the Tenant be able to satisfie him if he pull down his Houses granted Wright against Pearcy 3 Cro. 484. 774. Tenant in cutting three hundred Oaks Defendant as to two hundred justifies that the House was ruinous and he cut and employed them in repairs and for the other hundred he cut them to have them ready to repair Tempore opportuno adjudged an ill Plea on Demurrer for so every Lessee might â—ut where there is no Necessity Grey against Stanfeild 3 Cro. 593. vid. 498. 499. Waâ—t the writ was general and that the woman held c. ex dimissione A. her former Husband and counted that A. enfeoffed B. to the intent a Rocovery be had against him to the use of A. for Life Remainder to the woman for Life which was done accordingly and for this Judgment against the Plaintiff for the writ ought to have been recited for the Husband could not let to the Wife but she is in by the Husband and so has the Estate from the Feoffee Green feild against Dennis 3 Cro. 722. A. le ts to B. B. assigns to C. and D. D. assigns to E. except the Trees then 't is enacted by Parliament that the Heir of the Body of A. shall have the Land A. being dead leaving three Daughters who took Husbands one of them dyes the other two and their Husbands quitt the Tenant by the Curtesie brings wast against C. and E. in the Term the Term being ended adjudged first the Writ good notwithstanding the setling the Estate by the Statute without shewing the special Title and secondly without joyning the Tenant by the Curtesie because he not intitled to the Damages non locum vastat And thirdly the Writ supposes quod tenuerunt which implies a Joynt-tenancy now they appear Tenants in Common good because the Land at first one and entire but if wast can be committed in the Trees excepted by the Lessee not agreed but in Co. 5. Rep. adjudged it does and the Exception void Sir Roger Leuknor against Freed 1 Leon. 48. 3. Cro. 17. Co. 6. Rep. 12. b. Lessee for Life and he in Reversion make a Lease wast is committed they shall joyn and Tenant for Life recover Locum vastatum and he in Reversion the damages Lessee for Life Sans Impeachment c. Wast is committed by a Stranger the Lessee in Trespass shall recover no Damages for the Trees cut but only for the Entry for the property of the Trees remaining in the Lessor 1 Leon. 49. Co. 1. Inst 42. a. p. 27. H. 8. p. 36. Lease of Lands exceptis arboribus grossis super Praemissa crescentibus Trees then little grow great and are cut if wast Semble non per Anderson for they were excepted whereas great and not only what were great at the time of the Lease Garrock versus Cliffe 1 Leon. 61. A. le ts to B. for years and during the Term le ts to C. for years by Indenture to commence presently B. commits wast A. brings a Writ against B. the Defendant cannot plead nul wast nor can he plead that the Lessor had nothing for the Plaintiff will estop him by the Indenture and though the Count be general of a Lease and says not per Indenturam yet a Replication that by Indenture is no departure but a coroborating of the Declaration 1 Leon. 156. Tenant for Life is disseised and Disseisor commits wast he in Reversion shall maintain an Action of wast against Tenant for Life yet note that by the disseisin the Reversion was out of him 1 Leon. 264. If wast be assigned in a whole wood sparsim if the Jury have view of the out-side of the wood 't is good without entring and viewing of every part and so of a house otherwise if the wast were assigned in certain part of the wood or Rooms in the house 1 Leon. 267. Feoffment to the use of himself and wife for Life Remainder to his own Heir he dyes she commits wast the Writ must be general Quas tenet de hereditate c. non ex dimissione for she comes in by the Statute 2 Leon. 222. vid. Co. Entr.
a Chest By which he lost his Marriage with A. D. c. I. S. shall have an Action for these words 2 Cro. 323. Mathews Case Mich. 12. Jac. B. R. Sell against Fairee per Cur. To say to a Woman Thou art a Whore I will marr thy Marriage by which she loseth her Marriage an Action lyes Trin. 22 Jac. B. R. Tonson against Spring adjudged upon Arrest of Judgment In Action upon the Case if the Plaintiff declare that she hath many Wooers to marry her and that the Defendant said of her She is with Child and hath taken Physick for it whereby she came into Disgrace Et perdidit consortium vicinorum suorum c. Although that it be not alledged that she lost any Marriage thereby yet the Action lyes Mich. 21. Jac. B. R. Medhurst against Balam adjudged in Arrest of Judgment If a man saith to an other Thou wast found in Bed with J. S. his Wife by reason of the speaking of which words he lost his Marriage with A. S. c. Although that he might be in Bed with her without any ill done yet because that it sounds in Disgrace and he hath lost his Marriage by it the Action lyes Mich. 8. Car. B. R. Southal against Dawson adjudg'd in Arrest of Judgment If the Plaintiff in an Action of the Case for words declare that the Defendant said of him He had the use of my Wife's Body by Force by reason of which words he was brought before certain Justices c. and examined by them for a Rape committed by him upon the said Woman whereupon to purge himself thereof he expended divers Sums of Money an Action lyes upon this Deelaration for the temporal Dimage he had thereby Mich. 9. Car. B. R. Harris against Smith adjudged upon Writ of Error In Action upon the Case if the plaintiff declares that in London by the Custom a Common Whore ought to be carted and a Bason rung before her And that the Defendant spoke these words of the Plaintiff Thou art a Whore and a common Whore and art a Bawd to thy Mistress and I will have a Bason tinged before thee the Action well lyes upon this Declaration for these Words Trin. 15. Car. B. R. Hassell against Capcot adjudged in Arrest of Judgment In Action upon the Case if the Plaintiff declare that in London there is a Custom that a Bawd ought to be carted and the Defendant said these words of the Plaintiff She is a Bawd and I will have her carted Hill 15 Car. B. R. Riley against Lewes adjudged in Arrest of Judgment If the Plaintiff declares in an Action upon the Case that whereas he was a Parishoner of S. the Defendant being Vicar there to the intent to scandalize the plaintiff and to create an evil opinion of the plaintiff among his Neighbours so that they Abstraherent seipsos à consortio of the plaintiff tanquam ab homine excommunicato nulla fide aut credentia digno and to exclude the Plaintiff injustly from the Church and for a long time to deprive him of the benefit of hearing divine Service in the said Church the Defendant in time of divine Service in the Church in the hearing of the parishioners maliciously pronounced the plaintiff excommunicated Praetextu cujusdam Instrumenti by him received from the Ordinary whereas he never had any such Instrument of Excommunication nor was he excommunicated And also at another time to the same Intent aforesaid in time of Divine Service in the hearing of the parishoners maliciously pronounced the plaintiff excommunicated and refused farther to celebrate divine Service until the plaintiff departed out of the Church whereupon the plaintiff was compelled to go out of the Church whereas the plaintiff was not excommunicated whereby the plaintiff was scandalized and hindred from hearing Divine Service for a long time and for the clearing of this Scandal and of his Innocency therein Diversos corporis sui grandes labores capere diversas ingentes denariorum summas errogare exponere coactus fuit in extremam depauperationem ignominium maximum of the plaintiff This Action lyes notwithstanding he doth not shew that any person did avoid his Company or refused to trade or deal with him and notwithstanding he doth not set forth any temporal or spiritual loss for it is a great Scandal and malicious tho to his Soul and spiritual Mich. Car. B. R. Barnabas against Traunter Adjudged in Arrest of Judgment If a man saith of another who hath lands by discent That he is a Bastard an Action upon the Case lyes for it tends to his Disinheritance and disturbance by Suit Mich. 3. Jac. B. R. per Curiam In an Action upon the Case if the plaintiff declare that he was Heir apparent to his Father and B. his Brother and that either of them hath Lands in Fee to the value of 40 l. per annum and that they did intend to suffer the said Lands to descend to him or to convey the same to him yet the defendant intending to disinherit the plaintiff said to the plaintiff Thou art a Bastard whereby his Father and Brother intended to disinherit him and to convey their Lands to another The Action lyes upon this Declaration for the temporal damage which might come to him thereby Pasch 13. Car. B. R. Humfries against Stutfield Adjudged in Arrest of Judgment Where there was Grand-father Father and Son and the Son brought an Action upon the Case and declared that the Grand-father whose heir he is entailed certain Lands upon him and the Heirs males of his Body and the Defendant intending to scandalize his possibility that he hath to inherit this Land as Heir of the body of his Grand-father said that he was a Bastard notwithstanding that the Grand-father and Father were alive yet the Action brought as above by the Son did lye Humfries Case ubi supra In an Action upon the Case if the Plaintiff declare that he exhibited Articles in the Kings Bench against the defendant for the good abearing and swear the Articles to be true before Justice W. Innuendo the said Oath taken upon the said Articles although it be not averr'd that the Oath was taken of Record yet the Action lyes for it shall be intended the Articles exhibited in Court and sworn before a Justice of the Court Mich. 10. Car. B. R. Yolden against Wannel Adjudged in Arrest of Judgment If a man saith of an other He hath written a forged Will wherein I will prove him salse forsworn and perjur'd in a Will that he made of John Hunt an Action lyes for these words for it shall be intended that he was perjur'd in his Oath taken touching the said Will. Hil. 12. Car. in B. R. Cowley against Clough In an Action upon the Case if the plaintiff declare that there was a Writ to inquire of Damages between A. and B. in a Court of C. at the Sessions-house where he was sworn to give Evidence according to his Knowledge
c. ibid. What Trees are Tithable what not see ibid. Parson makes parol Agreement of Tithes for his Life afterwards grants to another who sues for them Concord is no Plea ibid. Simony to give 10. l. to Patron to present Parson to next Avoidance the Church being full ibid. If Parson in by Simony dyes shall the King present ibid. Pleas and Pleadings Special non est factum to Debt upon Bond delivered as an Esâ—râ—ul whole matter pleaded Judgment on Demurer for Plaintiff p. 185. Solvit ad diem pleaded specially ibid. Recovery pleaded in Barr ill instead of Execution ibid. Bond ill dated how to declare upon it ibid. Acts of Parliament and Records how to be recited in pleading p. 186. Where Villenage no good Plea ibid. Pleading must be certain and why ibid. Where Frankfâ—e no good Plea ibid. Where Corruption of Blood by Attainder no good Plea ibid. In what case Warranty of Ancestor with Assets no good Plea in Formedon ibid. Of reversing Attainders ibid. 188. Of pleading in Formedon ibid. Attorney may plead not informed if no Order to the contrary ibid. If Defendant in case pleads to issue for part and demurrs to other part Demurrer shall be argued first p. 189. Plea by Manucaptors to Sci. Fa. ill double c. ibid. Plea shall be taken most strictly against him that pleads it ibid. Pleas ill for Ambiguity p. 191. For Incertainty of Intendment ib. Impropriety of words ibid. Repugnancy in pleading p. 192. Barrs may be good to common Intent though not to every Intent ibid. In pleading a man shall not disclose that which is against himself p. 193. Repleader awarded upon non dimisit p. 194. Covenant to make Assurance at my Charge 't is no Plea to say he was ready to do it unless he tender the Writings ready to seal and I refuse to pay the Charges ibid. Pleading of Judgments by Executor adjudged upon Demurrer to amount but to Plene Administravit specially ibid. Administrator durante minoritate c. Wasting Goods shall be punished as Executor in his own Wrong ibid. Administration brings Debt and avers Administration granted at L. when it bears date in another place the Plaintiff shall abate p. 195. Sci. Fa. against two Executors nulla bona retorn'd to both and Devastavit to the value of the Debt against one and another Sci. Fa. and Judgment against him only by default and Fi. Fa. de bonis propriis against him alone ibid. Two Executors one confesseth the Action the other lets it go by default c. or pleads Non est factum or Plene administravit Judgment shall be against both de bonis Testatoris for diverse Executors but as one representing the Person of the Testator who if living should have made but one Answer to the Action ibid. After Imparlance the Tenant cannot plead to the Writ that the Demandant is a Bastard but he may plead it in Barr of the Action p. 196. If Husband and Wife bring Assise and Feoffment or Release of either of them or the Ancestor of one of them be pleaded in Barr both shall be barred p. 197. Excommunication pleaded in disability of the Plaintiff or Demandant p. 198. Action of the Case wherein Legitimo modo acquietatus is set forth makes the Declaration erroneous p. 198. If a man pleads a general Act of Parliament and mis-recite the same yet it shall not prejudice him and why p. 199. Where a thing alledged doth confess and avoid my Plea I may traverse it ibid Departure in pleading what Several Cases of Departures ibid. 200 201 202 203 204. Quare Impedit TO present by Turns in an Advowson in gross the Commencement how it came presentable by Turns ought to be shewed per 3 Justic 2 contra p. 205. Descent of three Mannors to three Sisters Advowson is Appendant to one Partition is made of all except the Advowson the Advowson seems to be in gross pro toto but if not excepted it had been clear p. 209. A Church may be appendant and in gross alterternis vicibus ibid. See the Method of bringing Writs of Quare Impedit of counting thereon and variety of Pleading therein p. 205 to 248. Release OF part of the Money due upon Recognizance if not mentions the Recognizance shall be for so much as is paid only and not destroy the Recognizance p. 248. A man bound to pay 100. l. tenders the same at the day he is not bound to pay the same at another day without Acquittance or Release ibid. Replevin see Avowry Variety of pleading in Replevin p. 248. to 254. Scire Facias HOw to be brought and pleading thereto 254. to 261. Statute Observations on the Statute of 29 Car. 2. for prevention of Frauds and Perjuries p. 266. Trespass WHere it lyes how to declare therein and plead thereto p. 261. Wager of Law IN what Cases Wager of Law doth lye and in what not what persons shall wage Law and the manner of performing it p. 294. to 316. Wast Where an Action of Wast doth properly lye how it is to be brought and the manner of pleading to the same p. 317. to 357. Wills Wills and Testaments originally proved at Common Law 358. They are proved in the Spiritual Court not de Communi Jure but by Courtesie ibid. Prohibition granted to the Spiritual Court to hinder the Probate of a Will quoad Lands and allowing that it may be proved quoad bona ibid. Bond conditioned he permit his Wife to make a Will he is bound to perform it ib. 350. Action upon the Case lyes not for Non-payment of a Legacy 359. Bond conditioned that the Wife shall make a Will of so much in the presence of her Husband if he will be present if not in his Absence she makes it not requesting him to be neither doth it appear that he was present yet good ibid. Memorandum quod A. B. fecit Testamentum suum nuncupativum in hunc modum viz. constituit C. D. fore Executorem Resolved a good Will and he Executor and well able to sue ib. 360. Witnesses Of the Crimes which render Persons incapable of being Witnesses p. 360. One under the Age of Discretion or interessed or a mans Wife for or against her Husband cannot be Witnesses ibid. One out-lawed in personal Actions may be â— Witness ibid. Witnesses are not to prove a Negative ib. Where Tryal is by Witnesses there ought to be two at the least ibid. A Juror may give Evidence publickly not privately to his Fellows p. 361. Bail cannot be Witness for the Defendant ib. A Felon burned in the hand may be a Witness ibid. In Ejectment he that had the Inheritance of the Land was admitted as a Witness ibid. A Councellor at Bar being examined as a Witness for his Clyent was denyed to be examined on the other side and why ibid. Debt for 10 l. brought on 5 Eliz. ca. 9. against the Wife for not appearing being served and Charges tendred held good ibid. Debt for 10. l. against a Witness that being subpened appeared not does not lye without averring that he was damnified by the Noâ—appearance of the Witness p. 362. Judgment staid because the Verdict was had upon the single Testimony of one convict of Perjury in the very same thing ibid. In Deceipt for forging a Will a Legatee allowed as a Witness in a Tryal for the Forgery ibid. A material Witness that lyes dying may be examined by consent of both Parties not otherwise p. 363. A Councellor may be examined as a Witness against his Clyent so far as it is of his own Knowledge not what his Clyent bath reveal'd to him ibid. One shall not justifie what he heard an other say ibid. Witnesses may be sworn against the King in Indictments Battery c. because though Criminal not Capital ibid. Tenant at Will of Lands in Question allowed a Witness in Tryal at Bar. ibid. Person attainted of Felony and afterwards pardoned by the King is uncapable after of being a Witness ibid. Words VVHat Words are actionable and what not see fol. 265. to the end FINIS