foot by fraud and given in evidence how can a Creditor who sues for a just Debt be prepared to detect this fraud And note in Scire facias against an Execuor on Iudgement per Testator the Defendant pleaded fully administred generally and the Plaintiff demurred specially and Sir William Jones Sollictor general moved to amend the Plea and Hale Ch. Just thought he ought to plead specially how fully administred Bradford vers Hutchinson H. 25 26 Car. 2. B. R. Debt for Rent on a Lease the evidence to prove the Lease was that the Plaintiff leased a House to the Defendant at a Rent but no time mention'd and it was agreed at the same time that the Lessee was not to leave it without half a years warning per Hale Norf. Summer Assise 1668. It 's a Lease at will the leaving on half a years warning is but a Collateral agreement and no part of the demise Ejectment The Plaintiff Counts of a joint Lease made by A. and B. in evidence it appeared that A. B. and C. were Ioynt-tenants that C. Leased to B. and that A. and D. Leased to the Plaintiff by 3. Just against two it 's good 2 Cro. Jurdanes case fo 83. Count of a joynt Lease made by two in evidence it appears they were Tenants in Common by 3 Just against one it 's not good 2 Cro. 166. Mantles Case Count of a Lease by Husband evidence was a Lease by Husband and Wife with Letter of Attorney to make livery and 't is made in name of both by 3 Just against one it 's good for Livery as to the Feme was void 2. Cro. Gardners case Of a Lease made 5. May 10. Regis habendum from Lady-day last past for 21 years Extunc prox sequent In evidence a Lease of 5 May 10. Regis habendum from Lady-day last past for 21 years next following the date of the said Indenture adjudged good and affirmed in Error Hob. 19. Ejectment of a Rectory evidence of the taking of Tythes only and not Entry into the Glebe the Plaintiff was nonsuit Latch 62. Hems and Stroud Ejectment of a Lease to A. of Lands in the possession of three Tenants for years delivered to I. S. as an Escrow with Letter of Attorney to enter into all and then to deliver his Deed c. evidence that the Attorney entred upon one Lessee in name of all and delivered the Deed c. Per Jones Just It 's good enough for where the Freehold is in one his Entry into one Lessee for years in name of all the rest is good Latch 71. Dame Argells case Where one declares on a fictitious Lease to A. for three years and within the same time declares of another fictitious Lease to B. of the same Lands the last is not good For Trespass for the mean profits must be brought in the first Lessees name ut dicitur Ejectment of Tythes a Lease for life of Tythes is good if there be Church or Church-yard to make Livery in resolved in Tryal at Bar Wheeler vers Hanchet Hill 14 15 Car. 2. B. R. v. Jones rep 321 322. Entry and Claym made upon the Land within 5 years after the death of the Baron of the Countess of Peterborough to avoid a fine she being issue in tayle proved by one Witness and allowed at a Tryal at Bar B. R. Mich. 15 Car. 2. Floyd and Pollard Custom of Copyholders in extream is to surrender into one Tenants hands in the presence of credible Witnesses A surrender was made accordingly but presented to be done to another Tenant yet being proved to be done to a Tenant it was holden by Wadh. Wyndham Just to be good and by him a Glove or a Turfe is a Rod to give seisin by Maye's case Norf. Summer Assises 1663. A Will under which Title to Land is made must be shown it self and the Probate is not sufficient Contr. if it were on a Circumstance or as inducement or that the Will remain in Chancery or other Court by special order of such Court. Eden vers Chalk-hill Mich. 13 Car. 2. B. R. Also Inrollment of a Deed which needs no Inrollment is no evidence ib. The issue was fine uncertain or certain 2 years Rent and no more the evidence was of admittances on surrenders uncertain but all under 2 years Rent Per Williams Just you ought to produce fines on descent and fines paid above two years Rent 2 Bulst 32. Allen vers Abraham A lease was made by parol and agreed to be put in Writing and Indentures bespoke but being held for Ten years and no Indentures executed it was ruled for a lease parol Per Barkley Just 13 Car. 1. York Clayton 53. By Just Berkley 1638. York Hedges cont-Clayton 57 a Will under Seal proved examined by the original was allowed good evidence Quaere I think the practice against it A Lease and Release were given in evidence to entitle the Plaintiff and they both were named haec Indentura but were not indented good per Hale Ch. Baron Norf. Summer Assises 1668. Briant vers Trendle After default in Ejectment the Defendant may confess Lease Entry and ouster and may give evidence and have all advantages except Challenges and if the Plaintiff becomes non suit any one for the Defendant may pray it be recorded Per H. Wyndham Just Bucks Lent 68 Dr. Crawle's case Deprivation in spiritual Court for Simony disables from bringing Ejectment because he can make no Lease yet quaere If Mortgagor continues in possession without provision for that purpose in the Deed he is Tenant at Will and if he levies a Fine it 's no disseisin by him continuing in possession still because after the Will determin'd he is Tenant at sufferance Per Hale Ch. Baron Bedford Summer Ass 1669. Declaration on a Lease made 14 Jan. 30. Eliz. evidence of a Lease Sealed 13 Jan. good for if it was a Lease 13. it was a Lease made 14. 4. Leon 14. Feoffments of 40 years standing and possession going accordingly you need not prove Livery it may be intended per Jury Roll. rep 132. The Common Rock on which so many have split is laying the Lease to be à die datus and the Entry the same day which is a disseisin not purged by the Commencement of the Lease for where an interest passes à is exclusive and so the entry the same day is before the Lease was to Commence is a disseisin but in cases of Obligation where no interest passes it is contra quod nota Trespass Count of Trespass done in one acre evidence of Trespass done but in half that acre good 2 Cro. Winkworths Case The Lady Hatton brought Trespass for breaking her Close and taking away her Horse c. against two Defendants they plead Not guilty as to the taking of Her Horse as to the rest they say that the Horse of one of the Defndants was in the Close c. and they took him out doing as little damage as they could quae est
Castle but that there was a Goal this was for the Plaintiff because Goal is the Substance If the Issue be whether the Defendant had Accompted before R. and W. Auditors Accompt assigned by the Plaintiff and the Iury find an Accompt before R. only the Issue is found for the Defendant for the Accompt is the effect of the Issue Vide Rolls tit Trial. 707. c. If 11 agrée and the 12th will not the Verdict of the 11 cannot be taken but the Court Jury agree may carry the Iurors with them in Carts until they are agréed 41 Ass 11. A privy Verdict may be altered in open Verdict altered Court In an Extendi fac upon a Statute if the Iury deliver their Verdict in Writing they may afterwards make it more formal but they cannot alter it in substance for it is a compleat Verdict by the delivery So of Presentments c. A Fine pleaded in Barr and that after Fine and Non-claim the death of A. scil 1 August 3. Car. B. Father of the Plaintiff was alive in plena vita remansit infra hoc Regnum infra quatuor Maria c. apud W. in Com. D. and no Entry or Claim within five years after and the Plaintiff replies and takes Issue què Modo forma il non fuit remansit infra hoc Regnum Angliae modo forma c. And the Iury find quod non fuit remansit infra hoc Regnum Angliae 1 August 3 Car. but that he was there 1 Maii 4. Car. and remained there a Month and refer to the Court Au fuit remansit infra hoc Regnum modo forma c. This Issue is found for the Defendant for the matter and substance of the Plea is whether he was within the Realm after the death of A. and five years before Entry or Claim per him or the Plaintiff and modo forma shall not make the day material Roll. tit Trial. 713. Iudgment upon a Demurrer and a Writ Judgment Arrest at what time of Inquiry executed at the return the party may shew any thing in Arrest of Iudgment for Iudgment is not compleat until the last Iudgment The first is but an Award A man may plead any thing in Arrest of Iudgment after a Verdict which will make Error if the Iudgment be given In Debt upon a simple Contract against an Executor if he will not plead in Abatement but other Matter which is found against him he shall not afterwards alledge that he is not chargeable in Arrest of Iudgment So in Debt against Executors upon Arrearages of Accompt where they are not chargeable That which appears ill upon the same Record What may be alledged but not a maâ—â—er of Fact which doth not appear upon the Record because the parties cannot by the Issue As that a Iuror was challenged and yet served on the Tales for this cannot appear without alledging matter of Fact Nor that the Defendants Attorney had no Warrant But if there be any irregular or foul practice this may be offered to set aside a Iudgment If any thing be omitted in the Declaration Variance between the Verdict and the Declaration or if more be put into the Declaration than is found by the Iury if it make a material Variance betwixt the Nar. and the Verdict the Action shall abate These following are adjudged material Variances If the Declaration be for these words Thou procuredst eight or Ten of thy Neighbours Words to Perjure themselves and the Iury find that he said Thou hast caused eight or 10 c. for he might be a remote Cause scilicet causa sine qua non without Procurement Nar. He is a Bankrupt Verdict He will be a Bankrupt within two days Nar. He is a Thief Ver. He stole a Horse Nar. Thou art a Murderer Ver. He is c. Nar. I know him to be a Thief Ver. I think him to be a Thief So it is a material Variance if a special Promise be laid to be upon Request and the Verdict find it without Request So if the Promise Declaration be upon a Lease made by two or by Baron and feme and the Iury find that one of them had nothing in the Land or that the Baron only made the Lease or that the two were Tenants in Common and so several Leases otherwise if they were Coparteners So in Case that the Testator was indebted to the Plaintiff in 55 l. and the Defendant being Administrator in consideratione c. Promise to pay this upon non Assumpsit if the Verdict find the Promise to be to pay 30 l. part of the 55 l. So in Ejectment If the Nar. be of a Lease Eje ment of thrée Acres a Lease of a Moiety will not maintain the Nar. So in Wast for Cutting Trees and the Wast Verdict find that he eradicated the Trées but did not cut them A Prescription in modo decimandi That Prescription every one who hath seven Lambs or under seven shall pay to the person ob for every Lamb and the Iury find that and further That if he had more than seven Lambs he should pay a Lamb and that the Parson should pay the Parishioner ob This is not the same Prescription but makes a Variance But if there be a Variance between the Variance Verdict and the Nar. either by way of Surplus or Defect but if this matter of Variance be not material in the extenuation of the Action or Damages the Action shall lye notwithstanding the Variance These ensuing are adjudged not to be material Nar. Strong Thief Verdict Thief Nar. I say c. Ver. I affirm or I doubt not Nar. The Plaintiff will do such a thing Ver. I think in my Conscience he will c. Nar. Of a Lease by a Parson for five years if he tam diu should be Parson tam diu viveret And the Verdict find the Lease to be for five years if he tam diu viveret without the words and should continue Parson for the Law implyeth That if he be deprived or resign that the Lease Determines Nar. He is a Murderer Ver. He was a Murderer for when he says He is a Murderer 't is not intended that he did the Act in presenti but before So in Trespasses or Actions upon Torts and wrongs which are several If the Verdict find part 't is no material Variance and the Plaintiff in these Cases shall have Iudgment Roll. tit Tryal 720. A Jury of Middlesâ—x was demanded in Enquest by default the Common-Pleas the first day of the Term and some appeared and some not so that there was not a full Jury and neither the Defendant nor his Attorney did appear and therefore the Plaintiff prayed that the Inquest might be awarded by default and by the opinion of Welsh and Dyer his prayer shall be granted and the Custos Brevium and all the Prothonotaries said the
English County to cause the Jury to come de propinquiori Visne of his County to the Visne in Wales adjoyning For the Court shall not be ousted of the Plea Fitz. Abridg. tit Visne 8. Jurisdict 24. In an action against a Hundred the Venire facias may come from the next Hundred generally In Trespass if the Defendant plead not guilty to part and to the residue a Plea which causes the Tryal of that to be by a Jury de Prochein Hundred The Venire shall be awarded al Prochein Hundred for both issues because there ought not to be two Venire facias in one action vide Rolls tit Tryal 596. In an Appeal of murder committed in the Cinque Ports although the King be concerned yet because this is betwixt common persons the Venire facias to the next adjoyning Vill. ibidem If the issue be joyned of a matter in Ireland Ireland this shall be tryed by a Jury of the next County in England ib. If the issue be to be tryed by the Venue of Prochein Hundred a Mannor and the Plaintiff suggests that he is Lord of the Hundred in which the Mannor is and that all within the Hundred are within his Distress if the Defendant acknowledge this the Venue shall not be de Corpore Comitatus but of the next Hundred for if it should be de Corpore Comitatus this should be tryed by the Tenants of the Mannor Rolls ib. 667. If the Visne is in some part mis-awarded or Visne mis-awarded in part sued out of more places or fewer than it ought to be so as some place be right named this is aided by the Stat. of Jeofailes which hath ended the differences in many cases reported in our Books concerning this point wherefore I purposely omit them Error for that the Iudgment was given Infamy where the Land lies by default against the Defendant being an Infant upon issue that he was of full age adjudged that the Tryal should be in Norfolk where the Land was and not in Middlesex where the Action was brought Cro. 3. part 818. If the Visne cometh from a wrong place May be out of a wrong place by Consent yet if it be per assensum partium and so entred of Record it shall stand for Omnis Consensus tollit errorem 1 Inst 125. Holmes vers Sanders Hill 22 23 Car. B. R. Error to reverse a Iudgement given in the Kings Bench in Ireland in Debt for Rent brought by the Assignes of a reversion the Plaintiff declared of a Lease of Land in such a Parish in the Suburbs of Dublin on nil debet pleaded the Venire facias was from the said Parish in Civitate Dublin and Iudgement there per Plaintiff it was assign'd for Error because the Land lies in the Suburbs of the City and the Venire facias was from a Parish in the City Per Cur. It is all one for the Suburbs are always within the Franchise of the City as Fleetstreet is within the Suburbs of London but the Strand not though so reputed Note It was adjudged Error in an Inferior Court that the Venire facias was awarded secundum consuetudinem Curiae which ought to be per Curiam Reader vers More Mich. 1650. B. R. CAP. IX Challenges YOu have already seen of what Visne the Jury ought to be The next thing to be considered is concerning Challenges Challenge is a word common as well to the English as to the French and sometimes Challenge signifieth to claim and the Latine word is vendicare sometime in respect of revenge to challenge into the field and then it is called in Latine vindicare or provocare Sometime in respect of partiality or insufficiency to challenge in Court persons returned on a Jury And seeing there is no proper Latine word to signifie this particular kind of challenge they have framed a word anciently written Chalumniare and Columpniare and Calumpniare and now written Calumniare and hath no affinity with the verb Calomnior or Calumnia which is derived of that for that is of a quite other sense signifying a false accuser and in that sense Bracton useth Calumniator to Calumnâ—ator be a false accuser but is derived of the old word Caloir or Chaloir which in one signification is to care for or foresee And for that to challenge Jurors is the mean to care for or foresee that an indifferent Tryal be had it is called Calumniare to challenge that is to except against them that are returned to be Jurors and this is his proper signification But sometimes a Summons Sommonitio is said to be Calumniata and a Count to be challenged but this is improperly And forasmuch as mens Lives Fames Lands and Goods are to be tryed by Jurors it is most necessary that they be Omni exceptione majores and therefore I will handle this matter the more largely A Challenge to Jurors is twofold either Challenge is twofold to the Array or to the Polls to the Array of the principal Pannel and to the Array of the Tales And herein you shall To the Array understand that the Jurors names are ranked in the Pannel one under another which order or ranking the Jury is called the Array and the Verb to Array the Jury and so we say in common speech Battail Array for the order of the Battail Array And this Array we call Arraiamentum and to make the Array Arraiare derived of the French word Arroier so as to challenge the Array of the Pannel is at once to challenge or except against all the persons so Arrayed or Impannelled in respect of the Partiality or default of the Sheriff Coroner or other Officer that made the Return And it is to be known that there is a principal Principal Challenges cause of challenge to the Array a challenge to the favour principal in respect of partiality as first if the Sheriff or other Officers be of kindred or affinity to the Plaintiff or Defendant if the affinity continue Secondly If any one or more of the Jury be returned at the denomination of the party Plaintiff or Defendant the whole Array shall be quashed So it is if the Sheriff return any one that he be more favourable to the one than to the other all the Array shall be quashed Thirdly if the Plaintiff or Defendant have an Action of Battery against the Sheriff or the Sheriff against either party this is a good cause of challenge So if the Plaintiff or Defendant have an action of Debt against the Sheriff but otherwise it is if the Sheriff have an action of Debt against either party or if the Sheriff have parcel of the Land depending upon the same Title or if the Sheriff or his Bayliff which returned the Jury be under the distress of either party or if the Sheriff or his Bayliff be either of Counsel Attorney Officer in fee or of Robes or servant of either party Gossip or Arbitrator in the same
specialty or on Record Hob. 284. Hutt 35. But an account stated for rent and other things is good Evidence In Indebitat for money c. delivery of Corn or other matter in satisfaction is good evidence Contr. in a special Action of the case on Assumpsit Indebit lies not for money won at Dice Wiche's Case Hill 14 15 Car. 2. B. R. If a promise be made to pay at a day certain and the day is past the Plaintiff may declare to pay on request so if he declare on payment at a day certain give in evidence a promise on request i. e. when it 's created on account which gives the duty for there the time is ex abundanti but where the action is founded on the Contract otherwise for there the evidence must pursue the Contract Hill 1650. B. R. Child's case Promise to restore a Horse hired for a Iourney if the Horse dies in the Iourney without the Riders default his promise binds not Lisle's case cited in Matraver's case Trin. 1651. B. R. One brings an Assumpsit for 20 l. and gives in evidence a promise if two would surrender to pay them 20 l. a piece good Mich. 1655. B. R. Thomas and Gerey Indebit for 50 l. brought by Edgar against Chetham Clerk The evidence was T. was indebted to Edgar in 50 l. Chetham desires Edgar to let him take the 50 l. of T. and he would give Edgar a Bill of Exchange to receive so much at London accordingly T. promises to pay Chetham the money which promise he accepted and gave a Bill of Exchange to Edgar after T. became insolvent then Chetham prohibits the payment of his Bill whereupon this action is brought Per Wadh. Wyndham Just Ass Norf. Summer 1663. the action lies for Chetham having accepted the promise of T. and given a Bill c. is now become a Debtor to Edgar until his Bill be paid though he never receives the money of Thompson In Indebitat It is good evidence against the Father that Physick was delivered to his Daughter at his request Stone-house vers Bodvill Hill 14 Car. 2. B. R. One promises a Bayliff that if he would let one arrested be in his house that night he would deliver him in the morning it 's a good promise and the Bayliff or the Plaintiff may bring the action Benson vers French Pasch 15 Car. 2. B. R. Indebitat The case was the Plaintiff sold 60 Comb of Rye to the Defendant at 14 s. per Comb to be delivered before Mich. the Plaintiff delivered 50 Comb before the time and brought this action for the money for it and good though it was agreed the money to be paid on the delivery of the last Rye per Hale Ch. Baron 1. Though the agreement is intire yet the several deliveries make several contracts 2. Though the payment was to be on the last delivery yet a time being set for delivery it 's intended to be paid when the delivery should have been 3. The time being past it 's now a duty and so Indebitatus lies 4. The Defendant has his remedy for not delivering the residue Baker vers Sutton Lent Assise Norf. 1662. Indebitat lies for a portion after the Ioynture setled so for 1000 l. on promise of so much for every Horse-shoo nail but the Jury may mitigate Damages ib. A promise to marry B. within 3 Months within a Fortnight after they meet and the party promises again to marry her within 3 Weeks this last promise is no discharge of the former being all within the time of 3 Months but had the last promise been to marry her within some other time after the 3 Months it had discharged the former Hite vers Chaplin Pasch 1658. B. R. Indebitatus by one Defendant give evidence that another was partner with the Plaintiff at the delivery of the Wares Plaintiff Nonsuit Franklin vers Walker Norf. Lent Assise 1667. per Moreton Contr. in Trespass for there Ioint-tenancy must be pleaded Indebitatus for 9 l. Defendant pleaded non assumpsit infra sex annos issue inde the Plaintiff proved a Debt of 9 l. due 10 years before and an acknowledgement of the Debt within 6 years and an offer to pay 5 l. for the whole Per Hale The Plaintiff nonsuit for the acknowledgement of the Debt is no more than is done by the Plea but there must be a new promise of the Debt within 6 years to make the action hold and here the promise or offer to pay 5 l. gives no action for the 9. l. Bass vers Smith Suff. Summer Assise 1668. Debt Debt on a Bond to perform Covenants to deliver possession at the Terms end to the Lessor or his Assignes breach was assign'd in not delivery to two purchasors demand being made by both and issue joyn'd thereon in evidence demand by one is good 2 Cro. 475. Debt on Bond to perform an award ita quod the award be delivered to the parties in evidence delivery proved to the Wife is sufficient for the Jury to presume the delivery to the party himself per Hale Norf. Summer Assise 1665. Trice and Prat. At the same Assises per Moreton Just delivery to the parties Son is good evidence Violet and Cook Debt against an Heir c. riens per descent c. a Feoffment given in evidence made before the action that it was fraudulent may be given in evidence though not pleaded 5 rep Co. Goathes case Hob. 72. Debt against Executor who pleaded ne unques c. Plaintiff replied that he Administred as Executor and gave in evidence Administration granted to him by which he Administred Good Dyer 305. In Debt against Executors and plenè Administravit pleaded the Defendant cannot give in evidence a Bond satisfied where the Executor and Testator were obligors per Coventry Lord Keeper 33 Eliz. Perkins vers Perkins In Debt for Tythes Modus to a Vicar is good against the Parson and so is a Modus to a Parish Clerk per Moreton Just Lent Cambr. 1667. Barber vers Cosier In Debt against Executor de son tort who pleads ne unques c. It is sufficient to charge him by proving he hath administred of never so little value Clayton 6. Against Executor de son tort who pleaded fully administred the evidence was the Intestate made a Bill of Sale of his goods to the Defendant who was bound with him in a Bond as surety for his Counter-security but the goods remained in the Intestates possession during his life for some few hours ruled a fraudulent Deed by Barkley Just at York 11 Car. Legard and Linley Clayton 39. quaere Debt against Administrator who pleaded If the Defendant pleads plenè c. pretor judgements c. The Plaintiff must prove Assets above the sum of those Judgements Huntington by Judge Windham 33 Car. 2. plene c. and gave in evidence Iudgements and good without pleading per Henden 1638. York Clayton 65. Quaere for if Iudgements be kept on
is insufficient for the whole But if the Iury give a Verdict of the whole Finding more than the Issue Issue and of more c. That which is more is Surplusage and shall not stay Iudgment for Utile per inutile non vitiatur Leon. 1 part 66. Gro. 1 part 130. But necessary incidents required by Law the Iury may find Yet in many Cases nay almost in all Where the Verdict ought to be of more than is in the Issue the Iury ought to find more than is put in Issue otherwise their Verdict is not good and therefore they are to assess Damages and Cost because it is parcel of their Charge as a Consequent upon the Issue though tâ— be not part of the Issue in terminis li. 10. 119. An Action of the Case on Deceit was brought for that he sold unto the Plaintiff two Oxen and warranted them to be sound on not Guilty the Iury found him Guilty as to one and not Guilty to the other and good for that the Action was founded not on the Contract but the Deceit 3 Cro. 884. Gravenor and Mete In Debt the Plaintiff declares that he had Iudgment against Baron and Feme for a Debt of the Wives dum sola c. that they were in Execution and suffered to Escape the Iury found the Husband only in Execution and Escaped and Iudgment for the Plaintiff Roberts versus Herbert Hill 12. Car. 2. C. B. So in Trespass against two one comes Damages by the first Inquest and pleads Not guilty and is found guilty In this case the first Inquest shall assess damages for the whole Trespass by both Defendants and afterwards the other comes and pleads Not guilty and is found guilty The finding of Damages by the first Inquest to which he was not party shall bind him and therefore if the Damages are outragious and excessive the Defendant Attaint in the last Enquest shall have an Attaint li. 10. 119. So in Trespass Quare clausum fregit if Issue be joyned upon a Feoffment and the Jury give outragious Damages An Attaint lies for the inquiry of Damages is consequent and dependant upon the Issue and parcel of their charge Ibidem In the 11th Report fo 5. It was resolved Damages by the first Inquest That in Trespass against two where one comes and appears c. against whom the Plaintiff declares with a simul Cum c. who pleads and is found guilty and Damages assessed by the Enquest and afterwards the other comes and pleads and is found guilty The Defendant which pleaded last shall be charged with the Damages taxed by the first Inquest for the Trespass which the Plaintiff had made joynt by his Writ and Count and done at one time cannot be severed by the Jurors if they find the Trespass to be done by all at one and the same time as the Plaintiff declared So in the Trespass against divers Defendants Several Damages Vide Devant ca. 4. if they plead not guilty or several Pleas and the Jury find for the Plaintiff in all the Jurors cannot assess several Damages against the Defendants because all is but one Trespass and made joynt by the Plaintiff by his Writ and Count. And although that one of them was more malicious and de facto did more and greater wrong than the others yet all came to do an unlawful act and were of one party so that the act of one is the act of all of the same party being present But in Trespass against two if the Jurors find one guilty at one time and the other at another time there several Damages may be taxed But if the Plaintiff bring an Action of Trespass against two and declare upon a several Trespass his Action shall abate And this is the diversity betwéen the fâ—nding of the Jury and the confession of the party And in Trespass where the Defendants plead several Pleas all tryable by one Jury and they find generally for the Plaintiff the Jurors cannot sever the Damages if they do their Verdict is vicious But in Trespass against two where one Judgment de melioribus dampnis appears and pleads not guilty to a Declaration against him with a simul Cum c. and afterwards the other appears and pleads not guilty to a Declaration against him also with a simul Cum c. Whereupon two Venire fac issue out and one Issue tryed after the other and several Damages assessed in judgment of the Law the several Juries give one Verdict all at one time and the Plaintiff hath his Election to have judgment de melioribus dampnis by any of the Inquests And this shall bind all but fiat nisi una Executio It is a Maxim That in every case where Damages an Inquest is taken by the Mise of the parties by the same Inquest shall damages be taxed for all And in Mich. 39 H. 6. fo 1. In an Action of Trespass against many who pleaded in Barr the Term before and one of them made default which was Recorded Writ of Inquiry There it is resolved by all the Court That for saving of a Discontinuance a Writ of Enquiry of Damages shall be awarded but none shall issue out because he shall be contributory to the damages taxed by the Inquest at the Mise of the parties if it be found for the Plaintiff and if it be found against the Plaintiff then the Writ of Enquiry shall issue forth And the Reason wherefore no Writ shall issue out at first to inquire of damages until c. is because that if a Writ should issue out and be executed this is nothing but an Inquest of Office and not at the Mise of the parties and yet this Inquiry if it might be allowed ought to serve for all the damages For inquiry of damages shall not be twice and the others which have pleaded to Inquest if the Issue be found against them shall be chargeable to those damages which are found by the Inquest of Office and if they be excessive they shall have no remedy although there be no default in them for they cannot have an Attaint because it is but an Inquest of Office But in Trespass against two who plead Damages by the first Inquest not guilty c. severally and several Venire fac awarded The Inquest which first passes shall assess damages for all and the second Inquest ought not to assess damages at all but that Defendant shall be contributory to the damages assessed by the first Jury notwithstanding he is not party to it yet if these damages be excessive he shall have an Attaint because though he is a stranger to the Issue yet in Law he is privy in Charge And so no damage or mischief can accrue to him in this Case Now let us sèe when something is left Verdict when to be supplied by Writ of Inquiry c. out of the Verdict which the Jury ought to have inquired of whether
it may be supplied by matter ex post facto and how And for this know that if damages be left out of a Vide hic cap. 6. Verdict this omission cannot be supplied by Writ of Inquiry of damages for this would prevent the Defendant of his Remedy by Attaint which would be very mischievous for then such omission might be on purpose to deprive the Plaintiff of his Attaint li. 10. 119. And the Rule is That when the Court ex officio ought to inquire of any thing upon which no Attaint lies There the omission of this may be supplyed by â— Writ of Inquiry of damages as in a Quar impedit if the Jury omit to enquire of these 4 things that is to say de plenitudine ex cujus presentatione si tempus semestre transierit and the value of the Church per annum there the Plaintiff may have a Writ to inquire of these points Dyer 241. 260. because of these no Attaint lies as it is holden in 11 H. 4. 80. because that as to these the Inquest is but of Office But in all cases where any point is omitted whereof on Attaint lyeth there this shall not be supplyed by Writ of Inquiry upon which no Attaint lyeth And therefore in Detinue if the Jury find Damages and Cost and no value as they ought this shall not be supplyed by Writ of Inquiry of damages for the Reason aforesaid Ib. Et sic in similibus But how then What shall the Plaintiff Verdict set aside because the damages not well assessed loose the benefit of his Verdict because the Jury assessed no damages or did insufficiently assess them Certes in such Cases where damages only are to be recovered he must loose the whole benefit of his Verdict but where any thing else is to be recovered besides damages as in Debt Ejectment c. he may release his damages and have Iudgment Release Damages upon his Verdict as to the rest And so where damages are to be recovered if part of them are assessed insufficiently and part well he may have Iudgment for those damages well assessed And oftentimes the insufficiencâ— Verdict set aside in part of the Declaration shall set aside the Verdict as if an Action upon the Case be brought upon two promises and one of For insufficiency in the Declaration them be insufficiently laid and the Verdict give intire damages this is naught for the whole But if the Damages had been severally assessed upon the several promises then the Verdict as to the promise well laid should have stood In the 11th Report fo 56. Marsh brought a Writ of Annuity against Bentham and the parties discended to issue which was tryed for the Plaintiff and the Arrerages found c. But the Iurors did not assess any damages or Cost which Verdict was insufficient and could not be supplyed by Writ of Inquiry of damages wherefore Release of damages where none were assessed the Plaintiff released his damages and costs and upon this had Iudgment upon which the Defendant brought a Writ of Error and assigned the Error aforesaid scil the insufficiency of the Verdict fed Judicium affirmatur because the Plaintiff had released his damages and costs which is for the benefit of the Defendant In Detinue of Charters or non detinet Verdict for the Plaintiff and Damages but the Iury did not find the value of the Déeds and a Writ of Inquiry was awarded to that purpose and returned and ruled good and by Twisden Just Debt against Executor who pleads plenè c. and it 's fouâ—d against him and the Iury give no damages that can't be aided by Writ of Inquiry Burton versus Robinson Pasch 17 Car. 2. B. R. In Dyer 22 Eliz. 369. 370. In a Wri Release of damages where they were not well assessed of Ejectione Custodiae terrae haeredis the Iurors assessed damages intirely which was insufficient for it lay not for the Heir yet the Plaintiff released his damages and had Iudgment for the Land And Note that insufficient assessment of damages and no assessing is all one The Iury ought to assess no more damages Damages and Costs pro injdria illata than the Plaintiff declares for But they may assess so much and moreover give cost which is called Expensae litis though in the proper and general signification Dampnum also comprehends Costs of Suit as the Entry reciting both damages and costs well affirms scil Quae dampna in toto se attingunt cum c. But if the Iury do assess more damages More damages than the Plaintiff declares for then the Plaintiff declares for the Plaintiff may remit the overplus and pray Iudgment for the residue as in the 10th Report fol. 115. in Trespass the Plaintiff declared ad dampnum c. 40 l. at the tryal the Iury assessed damages occasione transgressionis prâ—dict ad 49 l. and for costs of Suit 20 s. upon which Verdict the Plaintiff at the day in Bank remitted 9 l. parcel of the said 49 l. assessed for damages and prayed Iudgement for 40 l. Damages remitted to which damage he had counted with increase of costs of suit and had 9 l. de Incremento added by the Court which in all amounted to 50 l. and had his Iudgment accordingly upon which a Writ of Error was brought and the Iudgment affirmed For as in real Actions the Demandant shall not count to Damages c. because it is incertain to what sum the damages will amount by reason he is to recover damages pendant le briefe so in the ease of Costs he shall recover for the expences depending the suit which being uncertain cannot be comprehended in the Count because the Count extends to damages past and not to expences of Suit For in personal Actions he counts Damages in real and personal Actions to damages because he shall recover damages only for the wrong done before the Writ brought and shall not recover damages for any thing pendant le briefe But in real Actions the Demandant never counts to damages because he is to recover damages also pendant le briefe which are incertain The Iury may if they will assess the damages Damages and Costs intirely assessed and costs intirely together without making any distinction 18 E. 4. 23. But then they must not assess more damages and costs than the damages are which the Plaintiff counts to for if they do the Plaintiff shall recover only so much as he hath declared for without any increase of cost because the Court cannot distinguish how much they intended for cost and how much for damages As in 13 H. 7. 16. 17. One Darrel brought a Writ of Trespass and counted to his damage 20 marks the Defendant pleaded not guilty and the Iury taxed the damages and costs of suit joyntly to 22 marks and the Verdict was held to be good for 20 marks and void for the residue because it doth not appear how much
for the Battery of the Baron by its self and for the Battery of the Feme by its self and Iudgment was given for the damages for the batâ—ery of the feme and the Writ abated for the residue And of that Opinion was Lea Chief Justice and Doderidge al. contra And the same Law I conceive if the Iury had found the Defendant Not guilty of the battery to the Palmer's Reports 338. Husband but guilty to the Wife Cro. 2. part 655. Rochel and his Wife brought an Action of Trespass and Assault in the Exchequer Rochel and his Wife against Steel Hill 1659. against Steel and others who pleaded Not guilty and the Verdict found Steel guilty of the Battery to the Wife but found nothing concerning the Husband Wherefore Iudgment was stayd but the Barons held That if the Iury had found the Defendants not guilty as to the Husband then the Verdict had helped the Declaration and the Plaintiff should have had Iudgment for the Damages for the Battery of the Wife The Iury may find any thing that may be Of what a Verdict may be given in Evidence to them as Records either Patent Statute or Iudgment Things Plo. Com 411. done in another County or Country for which sée Evidence before Hob. 227. And of those things they ought to have Conusance they are to have Conusance also of all Incidents and dependants thereupon for an Incident is a thing necessarily depending Incidents upon another Co. Littleton 227. b. If the Verdict may by any ways be construed How construed good a construction to destroy it ought not to be made If one of the Iury be Outlawed when the Verdict is found the Verdict is not good but Outlaw may be reversed by Error In a special Verdict the case in Fact must be found clear to a Common intent without Equivocation Vaughan's Reports 78. If the Iury collect the Contents of a Contents of a Deed. Deed and also find the Déed in haec verba the Court is not to Iudge upon their Collection but upon the Déed it self The Iury may find the Contents of a Déed or Will proved by Witnesses Ibidem Trespass for disturbing him of his Common Common belonging to 100 Acres and the Iury find Common for 50. this is for the Plaintiff otherwise upon an Avoury or Quod permittat which are founded upon the right but the Trespass is for Damages Palmer's Rep. 289. If the matter and substance of the Issue The Verdict may be against the Letters of the Issue so the substance is found be found it is sufficient though it be against the Letter of the Issue As in the first Institutes fo 114. b. A Modus decimandi was alledged by prescription time out of mind for Tythes of Lambs And thereupon Issue joyned And the Iury found that before twenty years then last past there was such a prescription and that for these twenty Prescription years he had payd Tythe Lamb in specie And it was objected first That the Issue was found against the Plaintiff for that the prescription was general for all the time of the prescription and 20 years fail thereof 2. That the party by payment of Tythes in specie had waved the prescription or custom But it was adjudged for the Plaintiff for albeit the modus decimandi had not been paid by the space of twenty years yet the prescription being found the substance of the Issue is found for the Plaintiff In Assiise of Darrein Presentment if the Avoydance Plaintiff alledge the avoydance of the Church by privation and the Jury find the voydance by death the Plaintiff shall have Iudgment for the manner of voydance is not the title of the Plaintiff but the voydance is the matter 1 Instit 282. If a Gardein of an Hospital bring an Assise against the Ordinary he pleadeth that Deprivation in his Visitation he deprived him as Ordinary whereupon Issue is taken and it is found that he deprived him as Patron the Ordinary shall have judgment for the deprivation is the substance of the matter Ib. The Lessee Covenants with the Lessor not to cut down any Trées c. and binds himself in a Bond of 40 pounds for the performance of Covenants The Lessee cut down 10 Trees the Lessor bringeth an Action Breach of 20 Trees cut down for 10. of Debt upon the Bond and assigneth a breach that the Lessée cut down 20 Trées whereupon Issue is joyned and the Jury find that the Lessée cut down ten Iudgment shall be given for the Plaintiff for sufficient matter of Issue is found for the Plaintiff to forfeit the Bond. Ib. And this Rule holds in Criminal Causes For if A. be appealed or indicted of Murder viz. that he of malice prepensed killed J. A. pleadeth that he is not guilty Modo forma yet the Jury may find the Defendant Indictment of Murder and Verdict finds Manslaughter guilty of Man-slaughter without malice prepensed because the killing of J. is the matter and mâ—lice prepensed is but a Circumstance Plo. Com. 101. And generally where modo forma are Modo forma not of the substance of the Issue but words of form there it sufficeth though the Verdict doth not find the precise Issue As if a man bring a Writ of Entry in câ—su proviso of the Alienation made by the Tenant in Dower to his disinheritance and counteth of the Alienation made in Fee and the Tenant saith that he did not Alien in Manner as the Demandant hath declared Alienation and upon this they are at Issue and it is found by Verdict that the Tenant aliened in tail or for term of another mans life The Demandant shall recover yet the Alienation was not in manner as the Demandant hath declared Littleton Sect. 483. Also if there be Lord and Tenant and the Tenant hold of the Lord by fealty only and the Lord distrain the Tenant for Rent and the Tenant bringeth a Writ of Trespass against his Lord for his Cattel so taken Trespass by the Tenant against the Lord. and the Lord plead that the Tenant holds of him by fealty and certain Rent and for that Rent behind he came to distrain c. And demand Iudgment of the Writ brought against him Quare vi armis c. And the other saith That he doth not hold of him in manner as he supposed and upon this they are at Issue And it is found by Vâ—rdict that he holdeth of him by fealty only in this case the Writ shall abate and yet he doth not hold of him in manner as the Lord hath said For the matter of the Issue is Whether the Tenant holdeth of him or no for if he holdeth of him although that the Lord distrain the Tenant for other services which he ought not to have yet such Writ of Trespass Quare vi armis c. doth not lye against the Lord but shall
that the Land was held in Socage yet this is good for this shall be intended this being a Collateral thing and this being the most common Tenure If they find that he was seised and made his Will in haec verba c. although they Will. do not find that he Devised the Land as in the former yet this is good by intendment But if a thing is left out and cannot be intended the Verdict is not good If the Issue be whether the Sheriff took J. S. and kept him in Prison in Execution for certain Debt and Damages by force of a Cap. ad Sa. and the Iury find that he took him by force of an alias Cap. ad Sa c. although they do not find that he kept him in Execution for the Debt and Damages aforesaid according to the Issue yet this is a good Special Verdict for it shall be intended for the Consequence is necessary from this which is found for he could not take him but that he must be in Execution Vide several instances of this Roll. tit Tryal 697 c. If the Iury find that J. S. was seised in Fée and made his Will in haec verba and that he afterwards died although they do not find that he died seised yet it shall be Will. intended that he died seised and so good If they find that A. did Bargain and Bargain and Sale Sell c. although they do not find any consideration yet this shall be intended So if they find that such persons Authorizati Letters Patents virtute literarum patentium dominae Elizabethae c. and do not find that the Letters Patents were under the Great Seal yet this shall be intended Verdicts of Lay-men shall be taken according to their intent and néed not so precise a form as in Pleadings lib. 4. 65. Hob. 76. Therefore if the Iury find a Recognizance in nature of a Statute Staple in this manner That the Conusor came before R. O. Recorder of London and T. O. Maior of the Staple Et recognovit se debere to B. 200 l. and do not say Secundum formam statuti c. nor Prescriptum Obligatorium c. although the Statute of 23 H. 8. provide That it shall be by Bill Obligatory sealed with three seals and here it doth not appear that there was any Bond or Seal nor that it was according to the Statute yet these things shall be intended they having found a Recognizance before the Maior and Recorder A Special Verdict may be amended by Notes the Notes If the Iury find a Special Verdict and Where a special Conclusion of a special Verdict shall aid the Imperfections of it refer the Law upon that special Matter to the Court although they do not find any title for the Defendant which is a Collateral thing to the point which they refer to the Court yet the Verdict is good enough for all other things shall be intended except this which is referred to the Court lib. 5. 97. In Ejectment If the Plaintiff declare upon a Lease made by A. and the Iury find a Special Verdict and Matter in Law upon a power of Revocation of Vses by an Indenture and limitation of new Vses and then a Lease for years made to the Plaintiff by the Lessor in the Declaration and another in which there is an apparent Variance but they conclude the Verdict and refer to the Court whether the grant of a new Estate found in the Verdict be a revocation of the first Indenture or not The special Conclusion shall aid the Verdict so that the Court cannot take notice of the variance betwéen the Lease in the Declaration and Verdict because the doubt touching the Revocation is only referred to the Court. And although they refer to the Court whether this be a Revocation of the first Indenture and not of the former Vses and limitation of new Vses as it ought to be yet in a Verdict this is good for their intention appears So Note a difference between a special Conclusion and Reference to the Court and a general Conclusion and Reference to the Court Vide hic apres In Debt for 40 s. for a Horse sold and For whom the Verdict shall be said to be found the Iury find 40 s. Debt for two Horses sold this is found against the Plaintiff for this is not the same Contract So in Debt for 20 l. if the Iury find 40 l. Debt this is against the Plaintiff In Debt for 20 l. for Wood sold and the Iury find the Bargain was for 20 Marks the Plaintiff shall not have Iudgment for this Variance So in Debt for Rent upon a Demise of two Acres and the Iury find it upon the Demise of one Acre the Plaintiff shall not have Iudgment But in Debt for 24 l. 8 s. received for the Plaintiffs use if the Iury fiâ—â— the Defendant owes 24 l. but not the 8 s. the Plaintiff shall have Iudgment for perhaps he had paid the 8 s. In an Action upon the Case against A. if the Plaintiff declares That by Custom c. amongst Merchants c. If two are found in Arrearages upon Accompt and they assume to pay this at certain Days that any one of them may be charged for the whole by himself and then shews the Accompt of A. and B. who were found in Arrear in so much c. and promised to pay this at certain days but paid it not and now he brings his Action against A. although upon non Assumpsit pleaded it be found that the days of payment are mistaken yet the days being past the Action lyes because the Law makes the Duty upon the Accompt for which after the days an Action lyes Where all is to be given in Damages Damages the Iury are Chancellors and may give so much as the Case requires in Equity In Detinue of a Bond of 100 l. if the Detinue Iury find that he received a Bond of a greater or less Sum the Verdict is for the Defendant So in a promise to do two things if the Promise Iury find but one of them 't is for the Defendant Otherwise in Ejectment upon a Demise Ejectment of 10 Acres if the Iury find a Demise of less the Plaintiff shall have Iudgment If the Issue be upon a Prescription for Prescription Common belonging to a Messuage and 200 Acres of Land 50 of Meadow and 50 of Pastuâ—e if the Iury find Common belonging to the House 20 Acres of Meadow and 20 of Pasture in two of the Vills and not in the rest the Prescription is not found If part of the Trespass or wrong be found Trespass Case 't is sufficient in Trespass or an Action of the Case upon a Tort as by a Commoner for putting and depasturing Cattel in the Common If the Issue be whether all the Lands in Audita Quaerela Execution were the Estate of the Father in Tail or in
Fee and part is found in Tail and part in Fée Iudgment shall be given for the Defendant who pleaded the Seisin in Fée If the Plaintiff declares upon a Demise Ejectment made the first of May to Commence at Michaelmas next if the Iury find a Lease made at any other day before the Feast 't is found for the Plaintiff for the day of making is not material Otherwise of a Lease for years â—n Possession As of a Lease made the 5th of May Habend for thrée years from Lady-day before and the Iury find a Lease made the 15th day of May for three years from the same Lady-day for this is a Lease in Possession In false Imprisonment in Middlesex and Imprisonment the Defendant justifie in London to which the Plaintiff saith the Defendant took him in Middlesex de son Tort demesn and Issue upon this and the Iury find the Defendant took him in Middlesâ—x lawfully upon a Writ yet this is for the Plaintiff for the Issue is upon the place and not upon the Tort for that is confessed by the Pleading if the taking was in Middlesex In Debt for 20 l. and the Iury find 40 l. the Debt Plaintiff shall not have Iudgment the reason séems to be because it cannot be the same Debt which is intire but upon another Contract which is mislaid If the Issue be Payment afâ—er Execution Audita Quaerela and the Iury find payment before yet the Issue is proved for payment before is payment after In Debt upon a Bond bearing date the 25 Obligation of June upon Non est factum if the Iury find it his Déed but that it was delivered 8 days after the â—ate this is found for the Plaintiff If the Issue be that two made the Feoffment Joynt and several or two were Churchwardens c. and the Iury find but one c. the Issue is not found If the breach of Covenant or Wast be Obligation Covenant Wast assigned in cutting 20 Trees and the Iury find but 10 yet the Plaintiff shall have Iudgment If in Replevin c. the Iury find that Totum Pars. part of the Cattel were Levant and Couchâ—nt and part not and the Issue is upon all the Issue is not found In Ejectment for him who pleaded all Ejectment Void in part of 14 Acres and the Iury find guilty of 20 the Plaintiff shall have Iudgment for the 14 and the Verdict is void for the residue In an Information upon an usurious Contract Information Usury by two 't is not sufficient to find a Contract by one Otherwise where the Tort and offence is several as against two upon the Statute 4 E. 6. Pâ—o emptione butiri and selling it by Retail c. and so in an Action upon the Case in Nature of Conspiracy and for words laid twice in one Declaration This will put in Issue the manner as well Modo forma as the matter where the manner is material as the time of the Fact and other Circumstances The Plaintiff replies That W. made a Replevin Lease Lease to him 30 Martii Habend from Lady-day last and Issue Modo foâ—ma and the Iury find a Lease made the 25 Marâ—ii Habâ—ndum Exâ—unc for a year this is good although the time of making and Commencement of the Lease are mistaken inasmuch as Extunc includes the Feast Yet because a sufficient Title and Lease is found for the Plaintiff to put in his Cattel this is sufficient this being the substance and the Modo forma shall not put the Circumstances in Issue So in Trespass if the Defendant justifie the putting in his Cattel for Common which he Claims from Pentecost to a certain time every year which is traversed Modo forma and the Iury find that he had Common in Vigilia Pentecostis in festo and the day next to this to the time this is found for the Defendant But otherwise in these Cases id an Assise of Common because there he ought to recover his Title In Debt for Rent if the Defendant plead an Entry by the Plaintiff before the Rent was due scilicet such a day which was after and Issue upon the Entry Modo forma and the Iury find for the Defendant he shall have Iudgment for the scilicet is void and the Modo forma go to the matter Sée after In Debt upon a Bond and the Defendant Non est factum plead Non est factum and the Iury find the Bond made joyntly by another with the Defendant the Plaintiff shall have Iudgment for the Defendant should have pleaded this If a Devise be pleaded Absolute if the Devise Iury find a Devise upon a Condition Precedent 't is not good In Debt against A. as Daughter and Riens per Discent Heir to B. and the Defendant plead Riens per discent of B. and the Iury find that B. was seised in Fée and dyed having Issue the Defendant his Daughter and his Wife with Child of a Boy who was afterwards born alive and dyed one hour after this Issue is found against the Plaintiff because the Defendant had the Land as Heir to her Brother who was last seised and not to the Father and so the Defendant had not the Land by Discent from the Father but from the Brother and yet this is Asseâ—s in her hands if it had béen specially pleaded In a Writ of Error brought by him in remainder Error in Tail to reverse a Fine if the Defendant plead in Barr of the Writ of Error a Common recovery by the Tenant in Tail to which the Plaintiff replies That at the time of the Recovery suffered he himself was Tenant to the Praecipe and so the Recovery void Vpon which Issue is joyned Part. and the Iury find that he was Tenant of part but not of other part This Issue is partly found for the Plaintiff and partly for the Defendant so the Court shall procéed to the Examination of the Error for that whereof he was found no Tenant but 't is a good bar of the Writ of Error for that whereof he is found Tenant to the Praecipe In Assumpsit to pay Money upon request Promise and issue upon this if the Iury find the Plaintiff promised to pay the Money but do not say upon request nor Modo forma 't is not found for the Plaintiff In Ejectment of a Manner if the Iury If the Substance of the Issue be found 't is sufficient Manner find that there were no Fréeholders and so 't is no Manner in Law yet being a Manner by Reputation and so the Tenements pass by the Lease Therefore this Verdict is found for him who pleads the Lease of the Manner for the substance is whether any thing was demised or not In an Information of Extortion against Goal the Gaoler of the Goal a Prison of the Castle of Maidston the Iury found there was no
course was so for the parties are demandable before the Jury and if the Plaintiff make default he shall be non-suited and if the Defendant make default the Jury shall be awarded by default whether they appear or not Dyer 265. Where an Inquest is taken by default What the Defendant looses by his default the Defendant shall loose his Challenges and by 28 Ass p. 42. tit Enquest in Fitz. he shall loose his Evidences also Bro. Enquest 10. quod non est lex Det. The Defendant pleaded a Release and the Plaintiff replyed non est factum and at the day of the Venire facias the Defendant made default and the Inquest was taken upon his default and found for the Defendant for which the Plaintiff took nothing by his When the Defendant may be condemned by default and when an Enquest must be taken upon the default Bill And yet if the Plaintiff had prayed it he might have had the Defendant condemned by his default before the taking of the Verdict Et sic â—ide folly in le Plaintiff Bro. Ib. 5. But upon such Release and default in Trespass the Enquest shall be taken by default and the Defendant shall not be condemned by default though the Plaintiff pray it and the reason is because the debt is certain and the damages are incertain in Trespass Bro. Ib. 3. And Finch fo 409. hath well collected out of Brook That always in an Action of Trespass whatsoever the Issue be Release Iustification c. and also in Debt Detinue Accompt and the rest which are for things in certainty if the Issue be taken upon a matter in fait only as payment or that an Acquittance pleaded in Barr by the Defendant was made by Dures c. The Inquest shall be taken by default if the Defendant makes default But in the last recited Actions of Debt c. If the Issue be upon the Acquittance it self Release or other matter in writing the Plaintiff may pray Iudgment upon the Defendants default if he will but if he do not pray it the Jury shall be taken by default as in an Action of Trespass The Jury may give a Verdict without testimony Verdict without or against testimony or against testimony when they themselves have Conuzans of the Fact Plo. Com. 86. CAP. XIV How the Jury ought to demean themselves whil'st they consider of their Verdict when they may eat and drink when not What Misdemeanor of theirs will make the Verdict voyd Evidence given them when they are gone from the Barr spoils their Verdict For what the Court may fine them and where the Justices may carry them in Carts till they agree of their Verdict An Amercement Assered by the Jury THere is a Maxime and an old Custom Jurors ought not to eat or drink in the Law that the Jury shall not eat nor drink after they be sworn till they have given their Verdict without the Assent and Licence of the Justices and that is ordained by the Law for eschewing of divers inconveniencies that might follow thereupon and that especially if they should eat or drink at the Costs of the parties and therefore if they do so it may be laid in Arrest of Indgment But with the assent of the Iustices they may both eat and drink as if any of the Jurors fall sick before they be agréed of their Verdict so soon that he may not commune of the Verdict then by the assent of the Iustices he may have meat or drink and also such other things as be necessary for him and his fellows also at their own costs or at For by assent of the parties they may eat and drink Br. Jurors the indifferent costs of the parties if they so agrée or by the assent of the Justices may both eat or drink and if the Case so happen that the Jury can in no wise agrée in their Verdict as if one of the Jurors knoweth in his own Conscience the thing to be false which the other Jurors affirm to be true and so he will not agrée with them in giving a false Verdict and this appeareth to the Iustices by Examination the Iustices may in such case suffer the Iury to have both meat and drink for a time to sée whether they will agrèe And if they will in no wise agrée the Iustices may take such order in the matter as shall séem to them by their discretion to stand with reason and conscience by awarding of a â—ew Inquest and by setting fine New Inquest when the Jury cannot agree upon them that they shall find in default or otherwise as they shall think beâ—â— by their discretion like as they may do if one of the Iury die before the Verdict c. D. aâ—â— Student 158. If the Iury after their Evidence given unto them at the Barr do at their own Charges eat or drink either before or after they Where if the Jury eat or drink it shall avoid the Verdict and where only fineable be agreed on their Verdict it is finable but it shall not avoid the Verdict But if before they be agréed on their Verdict they eat or drink at the charge of the Plaintiff if the Verdict be given for him it shall avoid the Verdict But if it be given for the Defendant it shall not avoid it Et sic è converso But if after they be agréed on cheir Verdict they eat or drink at the charge of him for whom they do pass it shall not avoid the Verdict 1 Inst 228. To give the Iury money makes their Verdict void by two Iustices Leon. 1 part 18. If the Plaintiff after Evidence given and What delivered to the Jury after Evidence shall avoid their Verdict the Jury departed from the Barr or any for him do deliver any Letter from the Plaintiff to any of the Jury concerning the matter in Issue or any Evidence or any escrowle touching the matter in Issue which was not given in Evidence it shall avoid the Verdict if it be found for the Plaintiff but not if it be found for the Defendant Et sic è converso But if the Jury carry away any Writing unsealed which was given in Evidence in open Court this shall not avoid their Verdict albeit they should not have carried it with them Ib. By the Law of England a Jury after How the Jury ought to be kept by the Bayliff their Evidence given upon the Issue ought to be kept together in some convenient place without meat or drink Fire or Candle which some Books call an Imprisonment and without spéech with any unless When they may eat and drink See Smith's Common-wealth 74. it be the Bayliff and with him only if they be agréed After they be agréed they may in causes betwéen party and party give a Verdict and if the Court be risen give a privy Verdict before any of the Judges of the Court and then they may eat and drink and the next
c. R. P. Esq late Sheriff of the said County of E. from the same Office of Sheriff of that County was duely amoved and the said King now by his Letters Patents haâ—h Committed unto one T. P. Knight the Custody of the said County of E. by pretence of which said Letters Patents the said J. P. now remaineth Sheriff of that County which said T. P. of A. at A. aforesaid took to his Wife Anne of the Blood of M. now the Wife of him the Plaintiff that is to say the Daughter of R. D. the Son of W. D. Knight Father of Anne Mother of the said M. now Wife of him the Plaintiff which said T. P. Knight and A. had Issue betwéen them A. P. yet alive and in full life remaining at A. aforesaid and this he is ready to prove c. And out of that cause he prayeth a Writ of the Lady the now Queen of Venire fac to try the said Issue in form aforesaid joyned to be directed to the Coroners of the said County and because the said Defendant doth gain-say and doth not grant that to be true therefore notwithstanding the same Challenge a Command Challenge gain-said is to the Sheriff that he make to come Twelve c. of the Visne of B. by whom c. Easter Term 38 H. 8. Rot. 558. And hereupon Challenge to the Array because the Coroners made the Pannel at the Denomination of the Plaintiff the Defendant doth Challenge the Array of the Pannel of the said Iury because he saith That that Pannel was made and arrayed by A. and C. Coroners of the said County at the Denomination and in favour of the Pannel of the said Plaintiff and this he is ready to verifie and requesteth that the same Pannel may be quashed And the said Plaintiff saith That the said Pannel by the said Coroners was well and equally made and not at the denomination nor in favour nor in promotion of the said Plaintiff whereupon the said Iustices by the consent of the said Parties did choose and assign D. and E. two of the said Iury now appearing to try the said Challenge which said Tryors being elected and tryed say upon their Oaths That the said Pannel was well and faithfully made and arrayed by the said Coroners and not at the denomination neither in favour nor in promotion of the said Plaintiff whereupon the Iurors of the said Iury being called tryed and sworn say c. A Precedent of Challenge to the Array May it please you Mr. Baron This Enquest you ought not to take for that Sir John Ramsden Knight Sheriff of the County of York who did retorn the Pannel betwéen the said A. Plaintiff and B. Defendant is Cosin to the Plaintiff c. and shew how of Kinn c. and so where the Challenge is for lack of Hundredors or other principal Challenge put it down c. and this he is ready to averr whereof he prays Iudgment and that the said Pannel be quashed Or thus And now at this day S. c. comes the aforesaid J. S. Plaintiff and J. B. Defendant by their Attorneys and the Iurors also impannelled and demanded did come and thereupon the said J. B. doth Challenge the Array of the Pannel aforesaid because c. This must be put in Writing but under Counsels hand where the Challenge is to the Poles it is in short way by a Verbal Challenge see the learning of this is excellent and copious in our Books A Precedent of a Plea after the last Continuance And now at this day c. comes such a one Defendant by J. C. his Councel and saith This Action the Plaintiff against the Defendant ought not to maintain for that after the Quindene of the Holy Trinity last past from which day until such a day in Michaelmas Term next unless the Iustices of Assizes before come such a day c. the Action aforesaid is continued c. the Plaintiff by his Déed dated c. did Release c. and shew the Matter what it is whether in abatement in Bar dilatory or peremptory as the Case is c. and this he is ready to averr Note Brook in his Abridgment tit Continuance 61. 83. says That after the Inquest is awarded to inquire of Damages The Defendant cannot plead a Plea Puis le darrein Continuance because he hath no day in Court to Plead The day of Nisi prius and day in Bank are all one so that a Release made betwixt these days cannot be pleaded in Bank but it seems that a Release made betwéen the day of the Venire facias retorned and the Writ of Nisi prius awarded and the day of the Nisi prius may be pleaded at the day of the Nisi prius but not after the Verdict 21 H. 6. fo 10. Bro. tit Jour c. 31 tit Continuance 76. 42. 27. 13. A man shall have but one Plea after the last Continuance for the Plaintiff shall not be delayed ad infinitum 16 H. 7. 11. Bro. tit Continuance 59. 41. 45 46. 5. 21. After the Inquest taken by default and before Iudgment the Defendant came and pleaded an Arbitrament made after the last Continuance And by the Opinion of the Court he had no day in Court to plead this Plea and 't was said That he could Plead no Plea in such Case but as Amicus Curiae and of matter apparent he shall be received otherwise he must resort to his Audita Quaerela 21 H. 7. 33. Broke ibid. 38. But if the Iury remain for default of Iurors the Defendant may plead a Release c. at the day in Bank Puis le darrein Continuance although he did not offer it at the Nisi prius otherwise if the Iury had béen taken at the Nisi prius 22 H. 6. 1. Broke ibid. 30. If it be pleaded at the Nisi prius the Court Record the Plea and discharge the Inquest and give day to the parties in Bank Bro. ibid. 34. 8. In Debt after Issue joyned the Defendant at the Nisi prius pleaded Payment of part after the latter Continuance in Abatement And the Iury being discharged and the Plea adjourned in Bank for that no place of Payment was pleaded the Plaintiff had Iudgment to recover his Debt because after Issue joyned no Respondes ouster can be awarded L. 5. E. 4. 139. Aleyn's Reports 66. in the Case of Beaton and Forrest Now although when difficulty arises in the Evidence the matter is most commonly of late found specially and Demurrers on the Evidence are seldom used yet in asmuch as it is sometimes done and that our Practicer may be prepared with an Authentick Precedent for that purpose I shall transcribe one out of Coke's Entries fo 134. viz. Postea die loco Infra ContentÌ„ Coram â—ss Postea Jacobo Dyer Milite Capitali IustitiatÌ„ DomÌ„ Regine de Banco Nicolao Barham uno servientÌ„ dictÌ„ DomÌ„ Regine ad legem IusticÌ„ ipsius DnÌ„e Regine ad