good against the Heir tho the Executors have Assets he may have his Election 1 Anderson p. 7. Sir Ed. Capels Case Debt lies against the Heir of an Heir upon Obligation of the Ancestor to the 10th degree Noy 56. Dennyes Case The Obligee shall have a joint Action against all the Sons in Gavel-kind 11 H. 7.12 b. Debt against three Heirs in Gavel-kind the Defendant pleads C. one of the Heirs is within Age. The Heir of an Heir shall be chargable with an Obligation simul cum the immediate Heir and such Heir shall have his Age Moor n. 194. Hawtree and Auger 1 Anderson p. 10. n. 22. id Case If a Man bind himself and his Heirs in an Obligation and leaves Land at Common Law and Gavel-kind the Creditors must sue all the Heirs and if there be Land on the part of the Father and on the part of the Mother and both have Land by descent he shall have several Actions and Execution shall cease till he may take it against both so that the Construction of Law is stricter where the Heir is charged with Warranty real than when he is charged with a Chattel Hob. p. 25. Riens per descent pleaded and what shall be Assets J. S. by Will deviseth his Land to his Heir at 24. and if he die without Heir of his Body before 24. the Remainder over he attains 24. a Fee-simple descends for no Tail shall arise before his said Age which Tail shall never take effect 2 Leon. p. 11. Hind and Sir John Lion id Case 3 Leon. p. 70. The Father bound in Obligation and deviseth his Lands to his Wife till his Son comes to 21 years of Age the remainder to his Son in Fee and dies the Son shall be adjudged in by descent 2 Leon. 123. fol. 101. Bashpooles Case 3 Leon. p. 118. The Ancestor was seised in Fee and by his Will deviseth them to the Defendant being his Son and Heir and to his Heirs on Condition to pay his Debts within a year and if he failed his Executors shall sell he entred and paid no Debts the Executors after entred and sold It s not Assets in Heirs hands for though the Heir hath a Fee yet he hath it as a Purchaser being clogg'd with such a Condition Cro. M. 5 Car. p. 161. Gilpins Case Two things requisite to bind an Heir 1. Lien express 2. Lands by descent In Debt against an Heir he is charged as Heir and the Writ is in the debet and detinet and it s not in auter droit but taken as his proper Debt from 18 Ed. 2. till 7 H. 4. If the Executor had Assets the Heir was not chargeable but now the Law is changed in that Point if the Heir sell the Land before the Writ purchased he is discharged of the Debt in regard he is not to wait the Action of the Obligee Trusts descending shall be Assets by the Statute of Frauds and Perjuries so Lands of special Occupancy vid. Stat. The Defendant pleads his Father was seized in Fee and covenanted with J.S. c. to stand seized to the use of himself for Life the Remainder to the Defendant in Tail c. the Father had caused a Deed to be engrossed and delivered the Deed to a Scrivener to the use of J. D. and M. so as J. D. would agree to it J.D. died never having notice of the Deed Per Cur. the Father never covenanted because the Agreement of J. D. was a Condition precedent to the essence of the Deed and so no Deed to raise the Uses contra the Defendant Moor n. 426. Degoâ— and Rowes Case id Case 1 Leon. 152. n. 211. The Heir pleads riens per descent special Verdict find the Father was scised in Fee and enfeoft J. S. of the Mannor of P. excepted and reserved to the Feoffor for life two Acres only the Lands in question and after limited all to the Feoffees to the use of the Defendant in Tail Per Cur. the Lands do descend to the Son the Exception being void 2 Keb. p. 667 â—19 Wilson and Armorer Upon riens per descent pleaded special Verdict find M. seised in Fee de Saliva Anglice a Salt-pan died and his Son entred and was seised and the Defendant entred as Heir per possession fratris this is Assets by descent and such Heir per possession ' is chargable to the Debt of the Ancestor 3 Keb. Tr. 28 Car. 2. f. 659. Clinch and Butler The Heir pleads riens per descent the Defendant had levied a Fine but because no Deed of Uses was produced at Trial the Use was to the Conusor and his Heirs and so the Heir in by descent Mod. Rep. p. 2. Riens per descent pleaded Feoffment pleaded at the Trial it appeared to be fraudulent it need not be pleaded but may well be given in Evidence 5 Rep. 60. Gooches Case Debt vers l'Heir he may plead in Bar a Release made by the Obligee to the Executors and though the Deed belongs to another yet he must shew it forth for both of them are privy to the Testator Co. Lit. 232. a. Upon riens per descent pleaded it was found he had Assets in the Cinque-ports Judgment was general against the Defendants and as to the Moleties of the Lands in the Cinque-Ports the Plaintiff 〈◊〉 have a Certiorari to remove the Records into Chancery and thence by Mittimus to send to the Constable to make Execution 1 Anderson n. 65. p. 28. Hicker and Harrison vers Tirrel 3 Leon. p. 3. The Heir pleads riens per descent the Plaintiff replies he sued a former Writ vers l'heir and the Defendant was outlawed which was reversed and he freshly brought this Writ by journeys accompts and avers he had Assets the day of the first Writ purchased Hob. p. 248. Spray and Sherrat Cro. Jac. 589. id Case cited Debt vers l'heir the Defendant pleads his Ancestor died Intestate and that one J. S. had administred and had given the Plaintiff a Bond in full satisfaction of the former upon Issue joined it was found pro Def. If the Obligor had given this Bond it had not discharged the former but being given by the Administrator so that the Plaintiffs security is bettered and the Administrator chargable de bonis propriis it s a good discharge Mod. Rep. 225. Blith and Hill He pleads riens per descent but 20 Acres in D. in Com. Warwic The Plaintiff replies more by descent in S. viz. so many Acres and found pro Def. and a discontinuance in the Record of the Plea from Term P. to Term M. assigned for Error and per Cur. its Error and not deins Stat. 18 Eliz. because the Judgment was not founded on the Verdict but upon the Confession of the Defendant of Assets Yelv. p. 169. Hill 7 Jac. B. R. Molineux Case The Heir pleads the Obligor died Intestate and J. S. administred and he had given the Plaintiff another Bond in full satisfaction of the former vide Mod. Rep.
that he cannot do sans Licence Moor n. 294. Crocock and White An Action is brought against the Heir of Edmund A. the Condition Whereas the said Ed. A. such a day hath granted and given to the Plaintiff the Presentation to the Church of D. if therefore the said Ed. A. from time to time shall make good the said Grant from all Incumbrances made or to be made by him and his Heirs that then c. the Grantor died the Church became void the Heir of the Grantor presented this tortious Presentation is no Breach but this extends only to lawful disturbance by the Heir for it appears by the pleading the Heir had no right to present his Father having granted that before Per Hobert the words shall be construed as if it had been said that he shall enjoy the same from any Act or Acts made by him or his Heirs and in this Case there ought to be a lawful Eviction to make a breach of the Condition but otherwise if the Condition had been that he shall peaceably enjoy from any Act or Acts made by him or his Heirs for in this Case a tortious disturbance would have been a Breach of the Condition Winch p. 25. Dr. Hunt versus Allen. The Condition was That he should enjoy such Lands sans Eviction the Breach was assigned in the Recovery by Verdict in Ejectione Firmae upon a Lease made by one Essex and doth not shew what Title Essex had to make the Lease but avers that Essex had good Title and it might be he had Title derived from the Plaintiff himself after the Obligation made and therefore he ought to shew that he had good and eigne Title before the Lease made and in the Exchequer-Chamber the Replication held ill Cro. Jac. p. 315. Kirby versus Hansaker 2 Sanders Hele and Wotton though this was after a Verdict 2 Sanders 177 178. Id. The Condition was If the Obligee peaceably enjoy an Acre of Copyhold Land according to the Custom of the Mannor the Defendant pleads by Custom of the Mannor the Obligee ought to pay to the Lord a Rent and for non-payment the Lord to re-enter and that the Obligee did not pay it and the Lord entred and demanded Judgment si Actio bon Plea Benl p. 32. The Condition was to enjoy peaceably against M. Breach assigned that M. had entred and cut down five Elms upon Evidence it was A. Servant of M. by commandment and in the presence of his Master had entred and cut and good 1 Leon. 157. Seaman and Browning Debt on Obligation for performance of Covenants Breach assigned was the Defendant Lessor covenanted that it should be lawful for the Plaintiff being Lessee quietly to enjoy the Land and that the Lessor himself ousted him this illegal ouster was a Breach of the Covenant Cro. El. 543. Corus Case The Condition is If such Lands be discharged of all Incumbrances made by him except the Estate and Title of Jointure of his Wife Elizabeth that then the Breach is assigned that the Defendant before the Obligation made had surrendred these Lands to the use of Elizabeth his Wife it s no Breach vide Cro. El. p. 761. Woodward vers Dannock In Debt on Bond against Baron and Feme being made in her Widowhood with Condition that she her Heirs or Assigns keep Contracts and Covenants made between former Husband and his Lessee the Plaintiff and there was an Agreement that the Plaintiff should enjoy a Warren of the Demise of the former Husband and that he entred till put out by the Defendant Issue on the Agreement found pro Quer. Jones moved there was no Estate alledged in the former Husband in jure Uxoris whereby though the second Husband be assigned in Law yet he enters of his own wrong and not as claiming under her but per Windham it s not requisite that the Husband be Assignee of the Estate but her Assignee of Contract 1 Keble 348 512. Hall versus Creswel and his Wife Judgment pro Quer. A Covenant to save harmless from lawful Eviction the Defendant pleads performance the Plaintiff replies That J. S. took out a Writ of Hab. fac poss in B. I. debito modo exeunt ' and by vertue thereof entred and expelled him per Cur. debito modo is not sufficient without shewing particulars he ought at least to recite the Term of the Judgment but not the Title of him that evicted 1 Keble 379. Nicholas and Pullâ—n The Condition was That the Obligor should not enter nor claim a certain House the Defendant said he did not enter nor claim the Plaintiff replies he claimed no Plea he should say he came to the Land and claimed the Land and entred into the Land and nothing shall be traversed but the Claim 4 H. 7.13 not the Entry A Condition to discharge a Mesuage of all Incumbrances there one may plead generally that he did discharge it of all Incumbrances but if it be to discharge it of such a Lease he must shew how 1 Brownl 63. The Condition was That he shall suffer his Lessee for years to enjoy c. and that without the trouble of him or any other Person a Stranger enters per eigne Title the Condition is not broken for this word suffer is a passive and all the rest is to be referred to this but if any procurement or occasion of disturbance be by the Lessor his Executors or Assigns then he forfeits the Obligation 2 Ed. 4.2 b. 1 Rolls Abr. 425. Q. 1. A Man is bound to warrant Lands by Obligation in Action de Det port pacifice gavisus est is no Plea for it s but an Argument that he had warranted and it s but a fallible Argument for the Party may enjoy peaceably without having Warranty Dyer 42. b. 43. a. 2 Co. fol. 3. A Condition peaceably to enjoy from the 1st of Febr. usque Michaelmas-day Tithes paying half yearly during the Term and on default of payment the Defendant Lessor to be free from all Obligation to the Plaintiff he replies he assigned a Breach in non-payment of Rent at Michaelmas which is after the Term ended and so the Defendant demurs Also the substance of the Suit is quiet Enjoyment and therefore ought not to be taken by protestation sed per Cur. enjoyment need not be answered where it s defeasanced by payment of the Rent yet Judgment pro Def. 3 Keb. 594. Biggin and Bridge A Condition that he shall suffer his Lessee for years to enjoy his Lands during the Term and that without trouble of him or any other Person a Stranger enters per eigne Title per Cur. the Condition is not broken for that this word suffer is a passive and all the residue is to be referred to this but if any procurement or occasion of disturbance by the Lessor his Executors or Assigns then he hath forfeited the Obligation a Man is bound to permit Land to descend to his Son he need not aver that this had descended to him
221 225. Blith and Hill Declaration IN the Declaration is omitted ad eandem solation faciend obligo me haeredes meos it was amended Cro. Jac. 147. Forger and Sales Alit if one declare in debet detinet where it ought to be in the detinet only ibid. Winch p. 20. If I declare on Obligation against a collateral Heir the Declaration must be special as Debt against the Brother and Heir the Defendant pleads riens per descent from his said Brother but he had Assets by descent from the Son of his Brother but he must be charged by special Declaration and so Judgment pro Def. Cro. Car. 151. Hill 4 Car. 1. Jenkes Case Judgment and Execution DET port en Lichfield against the Heir he pleads riens c. the Plaintiff replies Assets but shews not in what place whether within the Jurisdiction Judgment was erroneous yet per Dodderidge If the Jury find the Assets to be deins Jurisdiction its sufficient though not so alledged Q. if Costs and Damages shall be given to the Plaintiff on such Judgment 2 Rolls Rep. p. 48. Brown and Carrington In all Courts he must shew the place of Assets Q. Cro. Jac. 502. id Case Co. Rep. 6.46 Dowdales Case Det vers l'heir pendant le Action another Action was brought against the same Heir upon another Obligation of the Ancestor Judgment is given for the Plaintiffs in both Actions but the Plaintiff in the second Action obtains Judgment first he for whom the first Judgment was given shall be first satisfied but if the Heir after the first Action brought had aliened and the Plaintiff in the second Action commenced his Suit after such Alienation had obtained Judgment before the first Plaintiff in that case the Plaintiff in the first 〈◊〉 on should be satisfied and he in the second Action not at all Mod. Rep. 253. Anonymus In Det vers l'heir by Bill after riens per dâ—sm pleaded tempore exhibitionis Bills the Defendant excepted at the Trial because the Bill was not shewed and the Plaintiff was non-suit Per Câ— the Bill is confest and need not be shewed 1 Kâ—b p. 793. Rogers and Rogers The Heir shall put in Bail on a Writ of Error per Stat. 16 Car. 2. c. 2 Keb. 320. Coâ—ber and Walton Det vers tres Co-heirs two confess Assets the other pleads to Issue and is non-suited it s a Non-suit against them all though the two have confest and so the Plaintiff lost his Debt there being â—n Alienation before a new Original Siderfin p. 378 Blacks Case He ought to confess the Assets that truly descend to him otherwise his own Land shall be charged with the Debt Plow 440. Pepyes Case Dyer â— Henninghams Case Dyer 344. Qu. if upon â—il dicit or non sum informatus Judgment shall be general but in Sc. fac sur Recognizance of the Ancestor against the Heir he pleads riens per descent which is false here Judgment shall be special for he is not charged as Heir but as Terre-Tenant at the end of Popham 1 Car. B. R. 153. Bowyer and Ricots After Imparlance one is estopt to say that he is not Heir being charged in Debt as Son and Heir so to say he is a Bastard 35 H. 6. 36 37. The Heir pleads riens per descent besides one Acre if the Plaintiff please he may have Execution of that one Acre or if the Plaintiff plead that he hath Assets beyond that Acre and it be found that he hath ten Acres more the Plaintiff shall have Execution of the Land only and not of his Person Where the Heir pleads he hath nothing by descent generally and it s found against him the Land and all other Land that he hath and his Body are â—iable to judgment by Ca. sa Fi. fat or Elegit â—1 Brownl Rep. 254. Qu. what difference between a false Plea and nil dicit 2 Keb. 343. Riens per descent after the death of the Ancestor Prist Such Issue shall be good in a Formedon for if he have Assets at any time he shall be charged and barred of his Formedon intirely in this Case it must be riens jour de brevâ— purchase nec unâ—pâ—is 10 H. 7.8 b. In Det vers 4 Co-heirs on several Issues on riens per descent Assets was found as to one only Judgment given against her that had Assets quod reâ—uperes debitum damâ— sua generally 〈◊〉 de hunis propriis 2 Keb. p. 588. Cary and Brickmâ—r versus Lock On nil dicit the Heirs own Lands and Goods shall be charged i. e. a general Judgment The Heir pleads Lands set out for Portions besides a Reversion of which he hath nothing replies a third part descended Judgment special 1 Keb. 156. Cudmoâ— and Lâ—wis Judgment against the Heir upon nil dicit shall be general and shall extend to his own Lands as well as to those which specially descend Poph. 154. Bowyers Case Mâ—or n. 657. Barâ—r and Borâ—e Capias lies too against the Heir in Case of a false Plea 2 Leon. p. 11. Sir John Lyons Case The Defendant confesseth he hath a seck Reversion beyond which he had no Assets the Plaintiff said he had ouster and were at Issue the Plaintiff comes and prays leave to wave this Issue and to have Judgment of the Reversion quod fuit concessum quando accideret 1 Rolls Rep. 57. Anonymus The Jury find the Defendant had divers Lands in Fee by descent and shews not what yet Judgment good for upon his false Plea Judgment shall be given generally against him if he have any Assets and so the quantity of the Assets is not material but otherwise in Case of Executors for there they must find the value of the Assets for he must there recover according to the Assets found 1 Rolls Rep. 234. Evet and Sucliff M. 13 Jac. 1. B.R. The Judgment and Execution shall be general unless the Heir acknowledgeth the Action and shews that he hath so much by descent Cro. M. 41 and 42 El. 692. Barker and Bourne If the Heir pleads riens per descent and it be a faux Plea it shall be a general Judgment against him and no Writ of Enquiry need to be to enquire what Lands he hath and need have no special Judgment for the Judgment ought to be that the Defendants Body and Goods shall be liable and half his Lands Stiles p. 287 288. Allery and Holden If the Jury find he hath Lands by descent and name them and Judgment accordingly its erroneous Stiles p. 327. Subgrave and Bosvil Cro. Jac. p. 236. Molineux Case Armourer versus Willis 2 Keb. 642 643 667 719. What Bail the Heir shall put in 3 Keb. 803. Lawrence and Blith Bonds of Arbitrament I Shall not here run into the Learning of Awards which is a curious and large Title in our Law and of which Mr. March hath composed a very Methodical Treatise but take notice of some few select Cases which respect the Nature of such
performance of Covenants the Breach ought to be more precise and particular than Actions of Covenants because of the Penalty yet if what is material and the substance of the Covenant be alledged it may suffice as a Covenant was that the Defendant a Bayliff should not let at large any Prisoner that should be arrested without Licence of the Plaintiff an Under-Gaoler The Breach was that the Defendant had let at large at Westminster sans licence c. such an one who was arrested but shews not the place or time of the Arrest Per Cur. he need not the Escape being the material part of the Covenant Siderfin H. 12 Car. 2. f. 30. Jenkins and Hancocks Debt by a Brewer on a Bond to perform Articles against his Clark one was that the Defendant should deliver such Ale and Beer weekly as should be delivered unto him to such Customers as he had in his Charge and to receive the Monies due for the same and should accompt with the Plaintiff every Saturday weekly for such Monies he should receive for Breach the Plaintiff assigns that the Defendant did not account with him for such Monies as he had received on Saturday the 25th c. Verdict pro Quer. Judgment was arrested for the Breach was uncertainly alledged because the Plaintiff doth not shew the Defendant had any Customers in his charge or who they were or that he had delivered Ale or Beer to them or received any Mony of them Stiles p. 473. Arnold and Floid A Covenant that he and his Executors and Assigns would repair a Mill and alledgeth that the Mill was defective in Reparations and the Defendant his Executors and Assigns did not repair it Def. demurs because he did not alledge that he not his Executors or Assigns did not repair it for if any of them did repair it the Action lies not and per Cur. it is naught But upon motion of the Court the Defendant waved his Demurrer and the Plaintiff amended Crook Eliz. p. 348. Cole and How If the breach of the Condition of an Obligation be ill assigned the Verdict shall not aid this Default Sanders 2 part 179. Hele and Wotton Kerby and Hansaker there cited Though the Action be well brought upon the Obligation yet when it appears the Condition was for performance of Covenants there can be no cause of Action without some Covenant broken and so shall not have Judgment though he hath a Verdict Hob. 14. in Sir Daniel Norton's Case Disability wherein the Obligor hath disabled himself to perform the Condition IF a day be limited to perform a Condition if the Obligor once disable himself to perform this although he be enabled afterwards before the day yet the Condition is broken as if the Condition be to enfeoff me before Michâ—mas if before the Feast he enfeoff another yet the Condition is broken 21 E. 4.55 The Condition is if he permit and suffer all his Lands c. to descend remain or revert to such an one his Son immediately after his decease without any Act c. The Obligor â—ells parcel of the same Lands though he purchase them again yet the Obligation is forfeited Benlow n. 34. p. 9. Sir A. Main by an Indenture demiseth Lands to Scot for 21 years and covenants at any time during the Life of Scot upon Surrender of his Lease to make a new Lease c. and an Obligation to reform the Covenants Sir A. Main pleads in Debt upon this Obligation that Scot did not surrender Scot replies that after the said Demise Sir A. M. had accepted a Fine sur omisance de droit come ceo and by the same Fine grant and renders the Land to the Conisee par 80 ans Defendant demurs Per Cur. 1. Sir A. M. by the Fine levied had disabled himself either to take a Surrender or to make a new Lease and so hath broken his Covenant 2. Though the first Act was to be done by Scot viz. the Surrender and Scot may surrender if the term for 80 years be the Interest of a future term yet Scot shall have his Action without making any Surrender for after Surrender Sir A. M. cannot make a new Lease which is the Effect of the Surrender he hath disabled himself 5 Rep. 20. b. Sir Anthony Mains Case Poph. 109. Benl n. 121 125. So if he disable himself to perform it in the same plight as Feoffee on Condition to re-enfeoff grants a Rent-Charge marries a Wife c. this is a forfeiture of the Condition 44 E. 3.9 b. Coke on Litt. But if the Feoffee on a Condition to re-eneoff a Stranger and after another recovers the Land against him by default yet until Execution sued the Condition is not broken 44 E. 3.9 b. One promiseth to perform an Award which is that he shall after deliver an Obligation to another in which he is bound to him without limiting any time when this shall be performed If he bring Debt on the Bond and recover and after deliver the Obligation yet this is not any performance of the Condition for he ought to deliver this as it was at the time of the Award made Tr. 15 Jac. B. R. 1 Rolls Abridg. 447. Nichlâ— and Thomas If no time is limited if the Obligor be once disabled he is perpetually disabled 21 E. 4.54 b. Vid. Cases del Disability 1 Rolls Abr. 447 448. Conditions to perform particular Covenants To make Assurance TO make such Assurance as Counsel shall advise A Condition to make to the Obligee or his Assigns so good a Lease as Counsel shall advise and the Obligee appoints him to make a Lease to J. S. he must do it for it is not as shall be advised by Counsel Per Coke if the words were he shall make as good a Lease as Counsel shall devise he ought to have brought a Lease drawn by the advise of Counsel 1 Rolls Abr. 424. 1 Rols Rep. 373. Allen and Wedgwood To make such Assurance c. as the Plaintiffs Counsel shall devise it is not sufficient to plead he made such Assurance but that the Plaintiffs Counsel devised such Assurance which he had made Crook Eliz. 393. in Hutchinson's Case One covenants to make such Assurance c. as the Plaintiffs Counsel shall advise and he pleads performance of Covenants he cannot afterwards say Consilium non dedit advisantentum in Specot and Sheer's Case Crook Eliz. 828. The Defendant covenants to assure such Lands by such Assurance as by the Counsel of the Plaintiff shall be devised the Breach assigned in this the Plaintiff caused such an Assurance to be drawn and ingrossed and put Wax to it and required the Defendant to execute it and he refused The Defendant demurs per Cur. it is no Breach because the Plaintiff himself devised it Crook Eliz. p. 297. More versus Roswel On Covenant that before such a day he would make sufficient Estate of Lands to such value to the Plaintiff for term of his Life as by the Plaintiffs Counsel
his Election to accept the Estate tendred or the Mony and there cannot be an acceptance but where there is a tender on the other part Therefore the Conisor ought to have devised the Estate and procured the Conisee to accept thereof otherwise he ought to pay the Mony Crook Eliz. p. 718. Mills and Wood. A Covenant to make a Lease on such Covenants as the Plaintiff or his Counsel shall advise the Plaintiff must tender the Lease 3 Keble 183. Twiford and Buckly The Covenant is to make a Lease for three Lives before Michaelmas the Defendant pleads that none of the Lives were named by the Plaintiff The Plaintiff demurs Judgment was for the Defendant the Plaintiff must name them 3 Keble 183 203. Twiford and Buckly The Defendant pleads the Condition was if the Defendant make an Estate to the Plaintiff of certain Land before such a day in Fee by Feoffment Fine or otherwise as his Counsel learned in the Law shall advise The Plea was Concilium non dedit advisamentum The Defendant is not bound to request his Counsel to make advice and the advisement doth not come on the part of the Plaintiff but on the part of the Defendant This is not like the Case of Obligors being bound to pay to the Obligee 10 l. or enfeoff him of the Mannor of S. he ought to make tender of the Monies and in the other Case he oughâ— to tender that he will make a Feoffment because all comes from the Defendant 6 H. 7.4 as in this Case The Plaintiff replies J. S. was of his Counsel and no more and he made such advice which advisement the Plaintiff notified to the Defendant so it is good ibid. If I am bound to make you such an assurance as J. S. shall devise I am bound at my peril to procure notice but if I am bounden to make such assurance as your Counsel shall advise there notice ought to be given to me 1 Leon. p. 105. Case 141. in Atkinsons Case A Condition to perform Covenants Breach assigned whereas the Covenantor covenanted with the Covenantee that he at the costs of the Covenantee would assure such Lands unto him before such a day that the day was past and no assurance tendred by the Covenantor not costs by the Covenantee Per Cur. the Covenantor is to make the assurance and to give notice what assurance he will make and his readiness that the other may know what Costs to tender Crook Eliz. 517. Hallings and Connard The Covenantor ought to do the first act viz. notifie the Covenantee what manner of Estate he will make so that the Covenantee may know what Sum of Mony to tender and it is all one whether the Covenant be general or particular as to make a Feoffment c. and so if nothing were done before the day the Obligation is forfeited 5 Rep. mesme Case 22. b. The Obligor having election what manner of assurance he will make ought first to give notice to the Obligee that he will make such assurance More n. 595. mesme Case W. covenants for himself his Heirs Executors Administrators and Assigns within seven years upon Request to convey to the Plaintiff a Copyhold Estate for life W. dies a Request must be made to his Executors though W. was seised in Fee the Executors are bound to see it done 2 Bulstr 158. Thursdens Case A Condition to perform Articles one was the Defendant covenanted before such a Feast to make to the Plaintiff and his Wife a Demise of c. Hebendum immediately after the death of E. F. for 30 years if E. W. to this assent then Habend after the death of E. F. for 21 years The Defendant pleads E. W. denied his assent and farther that the Plaintiff did not require the Defendant to make him the Lease for 21 years Demurrer and Judgment pro Quer. For the Plaintiff need not make Request but the Defendant at his peril ought to have made the Lease for 21 years before the Feast 1 Anders n. 124. f. 49. Henry Cage versus Tho. Furtho The Condition is if the Obligor make all reasonable Acts c. which shall be for assurance c. to be required by the Obligee before such a day c. a general Request is sufficient Aliter if the assurance were to be advised by the Obligee or his Counsel there he must shew he had required such a particular assurance as Fine c. and as to this the Case was thus The Condition was if the Defendant before M. do make acknowledg and suffer c. all and every such reasonable Acts and things whatsoever they be for the good and lawful assuring and sure making of the Mannor of D. to J. S. and his Heirs that then c. The Defendant pleads that before M. the Plaintiff rationabiliter non requisivit le def ad faciend c. aliqua rationabilia actum acta quae forent pro bona legitima assurantia del mannor de D. c. The Plaintiff replies that such a day before M. he requested the Defendant quod ipse conveiret assuraret manerium de D. al J. S. c. secundum tenorem conditionis And Issue found pro Quer. Moved in arrest of Judgment that there was no sufficient Breach for that the Plaintiff ought to have required an assurance in certain viz. Fine or Feoffment but per Cur. the Condition is broken for by the Condition the Defendant is to do all and every act whatsoever c. so that if the Plaintiff request a Fine Recovery Feoffment Bargain and Sale the Defendant ought to do all but not to make any Obligation or Recognisance for the enjoying the Mannor for that is but collateral Security and not any Assurance Then when the Plaintiff requests the Defendant to convey the Mannor in the generality the Defendant ought at his peril to do this by some kind of Assurance and if upon this Request the Defendant makes a Feoffment of the Mannor yet if after this the Plaintiff request a Fine he ought to acknowledge a Fine also and so upon every several Request Yelv. p. 44. 1 Brownl p. 84. More n. 889. Pudsey and Newsam The Condition was to make an Estate of Inheritance to the Obligee at such a day and place The Defendant pleads he was ready at the day and place to make it c. The Plaintiff demurs Per Cur. ill Plea he ought to have shewed that he gave notice what Estate of Inheritance he would make him Stiles p. 61. Allen p. 24. Brook and Brook 5 Rep. 22. If a Man be bound to make a Conveyance of certain Lands if a Warranty or Covenant be put into the Deed he is not bound to seal it 1 Rolls Abr. p. 424. sect 13. The Condition is to make such Assurance to the Obligee as the Obligee shall devise and after the Obligee deviseth an Indenture and tenders this to him and he requires time to shew it to his Counsel he must seal
into the Court by the Plaintiff nor appears to be in Court omnino Per Cur ' This is aided per Stat. 27 Eliz. c. 5. upon general Demurrer but per Cur ' the Defendant ought to have shewed the Deed and not the Plaintiff by Law although the Court sometimes will compel the Plaintiff to give a Copy of an Indenture to the Defendant if he swear that he never had a part or had lost it But this is ex gratia Curiae not ex debito Justiciae for the Entry always supposeth this to be brought in Court by the Defendants and so 7 H. 4.1 that the Plaintiff in such case ought to shew the Indenture is no Law at this day 1 Sanders 8 9. Jevans and Harridge 2 Keb. 1 16. mesme Case Demand Oyer to save the advantage of Demurrer pur Variance 1 Keb. 426. Billage and Blake The Defendant prays Oyer of the Condition which is for performance of Covenants in an Indenture made between the Plaintiff on the one part and H. H. on the other part on the part of the said H. H. to be performed and upon Oyer of the Condition the Defendant pleads that the Indentures were made between the Plaintiff and the said H. H. such a day and place and one part under the Seal of the Plaintiff the Defendant brought in Court and further that there were not any Covenants in the said Indenture of the part of the said H. H. to be performed Et hoc paratus c. The Plaintiff prays Oyer of the Indenture per the Defendant brought in Court which is entred in haec verba and upon this it appears that there are divers Covenants to be performed on the part of H. H. and upon Oyer of the said Indenture being so entred the Plaintiff demurs It was urged for the Defendant That the Plaintiff ought to have shewed a breach of one of the Covenants to maintain his Action But per Cur. when the Defendant brought the Indenture into Court and saith there are no Covenants in it c. Now upon Oyer of this the Indenture is made parcel of the Plea and by this it appears Judicially to the Court he had pleaded a faux Plea and had taken an Averment against the truth of that that appeared to the Court by the Indenture it self and so the Plaintiff need not shew any matter of Fact in his Replication to maintain his Action but a Demurrer was more proper 1 Sander's 316. Smith and Yeomans Condition to perform Covenants in an Indenture i. e. to pay 300 l. and to Repair as three shall award The Breach was that Award was made and the Defendant had not Repaired The Defendant prays Oyer of the Indenture which was well and of the Award and sets it forth untruly The Oyer was set aside because Irregular and if the Award be not at first truly set forth the Defendant might traverse it but cannot pray Oyer of any thing not in Curia prolat ' 3 Keb. H. 28 Car. 2. p. 716. Sands and Tâ—mlinson Le Defendant demand Oyer del Oblig ' de Condition la form 2 Sanders 75. Le Defendant demand Oyer des 2 Oblig ' Demur ' 1 Sanders 282. Defendant ad Oyer de Condition de Oblig ' apres ad Oyer des Instructions 2 Sanders Le Defendant sur Oyer del ' Condic ' a performer Covenants amesne en Court le Indenture plede Conditions performe 1 Sanders 52. Monstrans de Obligation Rast Entr. 180. b. Condition Where a Recital in a Condition shall be an Estoppel BY a bare Recital in an Obligation one shall be Estopped 13 Ed. 4.4 A Recital by a single Bill shall estop the party 25 Ed. 4.54 Recites by an Obligation that he made a Will he is estopped to say the contrary 2 3 El. Dyer 190. As to Estoppel by Recital there is a difference where it goeth in the generality and where in the particularity For where it is in the generality as to enfeoff one of all the Lands descended to him or to be Nonsuit in all Actions depending in the Common Pleas he shall not be estopped to say that he hath not any Land or that he hath not any Action depending there 18 Ed. 4.4 Against a Condition to perform all Covenants a man may say there were not any Covenants 21 H. 4.54 Condition to pay Rent reserved upon a Demise according to such Articles The Defendant pleads he hath not any thing in the Land demised by such Articles Per Cur. upon demand he shall be estopped to plead that Cro. El. 3. p. 362. Strowd versus Willis Popham p. 114. Condition whereas E.W. hath commenced divers Suits in B. R. against W. H. If the said W. H. shall without delay by his lawful Attorney appear and make answer to all Actions and Declarations commenced against him that then c. The Defendant pleads That postea viz. such a day W. H. appeared and paratus fuit respondere C. but that there were not any Actions there depending Upon Demurrer per Court ill Plea He is estopt to plead that there were not any Actions there depending As if a man be obliged to perform the Covenants in the Indenture on his part to be performed it 's no Plea to say there were not any Covenants on his part to be perform'd 3 Eliz. Dyer 196 279. Cro. El. p. 756. Willoughby versus Brook p. 42 Eliz. C. B. Condition to perform Covenants in Indentures between W. S. and A. his Wife of the one part and the Plaintiff on the other part The Defendant pleads the Indenture as the Indenture of W. S. and A. his Wife whereas in truth the Feme never sealed The Plaintiff replies That the Indenture shewn by the Defendant non fuit fact ' inter W. S. A. his Wife on the one part and the Plaintiff on the other Per Cur. the Plaintiff is not estopped to say that the Deed shewn is not the Deed of the Baron and Feme but he is estopped by the Condition to say that there is not any such Indenture Cro. El. p. 769. Ship versus Steed Condition was Whereas the Plaintiff had carried so many Thousand of Billets for the Defendant to D. amounting at so much a 1000 to 100 l. If the Defendant therefore should pay the 100 l. The Defendant pleads upon Oyer that the Plaintiff did not carry and deliver so many Thousand of Billets c. Per Cur. this Recital in the Obligation is an Estoppel to the Defendant to plead the contrary Stiles 103. Allen 52. Hill 23 Car. 1. Hart versus Buckminster The Defendant pleads in Abatement that he is Earl of Nova Albion in Ireland and ought to be impleaded by that Name and not by the Name of Edmund Plowden Kt. Per Cur. He pleads he was Earl of Nova Albion in Ireland before he entred into the Bond which he cannot now plead for he is estopped to plead so by his own Deed which testifies the contrary Stiles p. 187.
1 Rolls Abr. p. 425. Q. 1. A Condition to perform Covenants in a Lease one was That he should enjoy such Lands let to him quietly without interruption and the Plaintiff in his Replication sheweth in facto that the Defendant the 20th of March 30 Eliz. had disturbed him and in that assigned the Breach the Defendant by Rejoynder sheweth that in the Indenture there was a Proviso that if he paid 10 l. the 31 of March 30 Eliz. that the Indenture and all therein contained should be void and alledged he paid 10 l. at the day but this was after the disturbance supposed and the Plaintiff demurs Judgment pro Quer. for by the Covenant broken before the Condition performed the Obligation was forfeited and it s not material that the Covenants became void before the Action brought but by Wray if the Proviso had been that upon the payment of the 10 l. as well the Obligation as the Indenture should be void â—lâ— for then the Bond was void before the Action brought so where a Parson made a Lease for years in which were divers Covenants and after he became non resident by which the Indenture became void yet he may maintain an Action of Covenant for a Covenant broken before his non Residency Cro. Eliz. p. 244. Hill and Pilkington Dyer 57. Bylones Case The Condition was If the Obligee his Heirs and Assigns shall and may lawfully hold and enjoy a Mesuage c. without the let c. of the Obligor or his Heirs or of every other Person discharged or upon reasonable request saved harmless by the said Obligor from all former Gifts c. the Defendant pleads no request was made to save him harmless Judgment pro Quer. because the Defendant hath not answered to all the the Conditions viz. to enjoying of the Land and there were two Conditions viz. the enjoying and saving harmless Moor n. 756. Creswell and Holmes Debt to perform Covenants in a Lease one was for quiet enjoyment against all claiming Title the Plaintiff assigns for Breach that a Stranger entred but saith not habens titulum Hales habens titulum at that time would have done Dyers Case is another entred claiming an Interest but that is not enough for he may claim under the Lessee himself If the Covenant had been to save him harmless against all lawful and unlawful Titles yet it must appear that he that entred did not claim under the Lessee himself Mod. Rep. 101. 3 Keble 246. Norman and Foster Hob. 34. Tisdale and Essex Moor 861. The Condition was if neither J. S. nor J. B. nor J. G. did not disturb the Plaintiff in his possession of such Lands by indirect means but by due course of Law The Defendant pleads that neither J. S. nor J. B. nor J. G. did disturb the Plaintiff by any indirect means but by due course of Law Q. if Plea good 2 Leon. 197. Dighton and Clark K. was seized and leased for years to J. H. Husband of Isabel and J. H. being so possessed by his Will devised that the said Isabel should have the use and occupation of the said Lands for all the years of the said Term as she should live and remain sole and if she died or married that then his Son should have the residue of the said Term not expired J. H. died Isabel entred to whom the said Kidwilly conveyed by Feoffment the said Lands in Fee and covenanted that the said Lands from thence should be clearly exonerated de omnibus prioribus barganiis titulis juribus omnibus aliis oneribus quibuscunque Isabel married and the Son entred Per Cur. this possibility which was in the Son at the time of the Feoffment though it was not actual yet the Land was not discharged of all former Rights Titles and Charges by the Marriage of the said Isabel it s become an actual Charge and the Term is not extinct by the acceptance of the Feoffment 1 Leon. p. 92. n. 120. Hamington and Rydear I am bound in a Statute and afterwards sell my Land with Covenant prout supra here the Land is not charged but if the Condition in the Defeasance be broken so as the Conusee extends now the Covenant is broken 1 Leon. p. 93. ibid. On Covenant to enjoy absque legali molestatione of the Defendant the Defendant pleads performance the Plaintiff replies by entry of the Defendant Lessor which is intended tortious and and so no breach for which cause the Defendant demurs Per Moreton Entry and lawful Entry are all one as to the Lessor and Rainsford conceived a general Entry no Breach the general Covenant being restrained by special Covenant against any lawful let 2 Keb. 717. Lee and Dalfton Debt on Bond to perform Covenants one of which was That the Plaintiff should not be interrupted in his possession of certain Lands by any Person that had lawful Title and particularly that he should not be interrupted by one Thomas Antony by vertue of any such Title the Defendant pleads performance the Plaintiff replies 1 No. 20 Car. The Defendant made the Lease to the Plaintiff and 3 No. he entred and that 17 Aug. 20 Car. before the Defendant made a Lease to Antony for years yet to come who 20 Aug. 20 Car. entred the Defendant pleads the Lease to Antony was on Condition of re-entry for non-payment of Rent and that before the Lease made to the Plaintiff the Rent was behind legitâ— demandat secundum formam Indenturae and he re-entred and made the Lease to the Plaintiff upon general Demurrer per Cur. the Demand was not sufficiently alledged for he ought to set forth when and where it was made that the Court might know if it were legal but for a â—w in the Plaintiffs Replication because he alledged his Entry after the Lease made to Antony so that it appears not he was interrupted by him the Opinion of the Court was against the Plaintiff Allen p 19. Colman and Painter Debt on Bond conditioned that if the Obligee his Executors and Assigns from the time of the Obligation may enjoy such Land c. The Defendant pleads that post obligationem until the day of the Bill the Plaintiff had enjoyed that Land Plaintiff demurs 1. Because the Defendant doth not say a die confectionis scripti obligatorii semper post non allocatur a Bar is good to common intent and it shall be taken he always enjoyed it unless the contrary be shewn which must come on the Plaintiffs part 2. Because he does not plead the Plaintiff and his Assigns enjoyed it non allocatur for it shall not be intended the Plaintiff made an Assignment unless he himself had shewn it Judgment pro Def. but it was moved to have the Plaintiff discontinue his Suit for otherwise he should be barred of his Debt whereas he had good cause of Action and the Court adjourned it till next Term that in the interim he might discontinue Cro. Car. 195. Harlow and Wright The Plaintiff