deux Guards nor Quare impedit of two Churches Yet by the Judges it was held good eonugh as of Trespaâ—s for a man may joyn Lands of twenty Titles in Trespass and Trespass lyes f Wood Pasture and the like and 4 E. 2. if a man hold Lands in Capite and dye having issue only two Daughters within age and they are ravished the Lord shall have but one Ravishment de Gard. and 31 H. 6. 14. if a stranger enters upon two Parceners they shall have but one Formedon and if the Lessor shall have one Writ of Covenant for those Houses the Assignce shall have the same For the Statute of 32 H. 8. ca. 14. gives the Assignee the power of the Lessor And the Lord Chief Justice Coke said If a man seised of Lands in Fee enfeoffs an other to the use of himself for Life the Remainder of part to one of his Daughters and â—he Heirs of her Body issuing the Remainder of the Residue to the other Daughter and the Heirs of her body issuing the Eldest Daughter dyes without Issue a Stranger enters upon the whole the other Sister shall have but one Writ Mich. 8. Jacobi in Communi Banco inter Pyot dominam St. John If an Infant Lets Lands for a Term of years rendring Rent he may at his Election have an Action of Debt for the Rent reserved upon the Lease or bring Trespass for occupying of the Land and so he may have an Action of Trespass for the use of of a thing sold by him And if an infant do give an Horse to one without actual delivery of the Horse into his hands at the time of the gift and the Donee taketh the Horse by reason of the gift the Infant may have an Action of Trespass against him 18 E. 4. 2. If an Infant makes a Lease for years or a Lease per dures if the Lessee enter the Infant may have an Assise but if the Infant makes a Feoffment and deliver seisin accordingly he shall have no Assise for by the Livery of seisin the Feoffee had a possession at Will at least but if he makes a Letter of Attorney to deliver seisin he may have an Assise 9 H. 7. 24. 8. 2. Mar. 109. Dyer Rug. Case If an Obligation be made to Husband and Wife the writ may be brought in the Husbands name only 12 R. 2. Breif 639. And so Where a Lease for years is made by Husband and Wife of the Lands of the Wife rendring Rent the Action of Debt must be brought in the name of the Husband only 7 E. 4. 5. But by 2 R. 2. in a Writ concerning a Chattel real they may joyn 2 R. 2. Breif 37. As to such things which concern the person of the Wife immediately there the Writ must be brought in both their names And therefore The Husband cannot sue a Writ of Appeal for the Rape of his Wife without naming the Wife 8 H. 4. 21. 1 H. 6. 10 H. 4. Brook Baron Feme 34. Husband and Wife brought an Action of Battery for the beating of them both the Writ was adjudged good for the Battery of the Wife but not as to the Husband 9 E. 4. 54. The Husband and the Wife shall both bring an Action of Trespass for the taking away the Goods of the Wife before Marriage 21 H. 33. In a Writ of Detinue of Chartres against Husband and Wife Declaration was upon a Trover and the Writ was abated 13 R. 2. Breif 644. A Writ of Covenant was brought by the Husband and Wife for that the Defendant had Leased to them Lands by Deed for Term of years and afterwards ousted them and the Writ was adjudged to be good for if the Husband dyes the Wife shall have the Term and in this Case they were both parties to the Covenant 47 E. 3. 12. An Action of Debt for the arrearages of Rent reserved upon a Lease for years made unto the Husband and the Wife shall be brought against them both and so shall a Writ of Wast for the Wife cannot waive the Lease during the life of the Husband 6 E. 4. 10 17 E. 4. 7. An Action upon the Statute of Laborers was brought against Husband and Wife supposing that the Wife had Covenanted with the Plaintiff to be waiting-woman to his Wife for a year and that she departed out of service within the year and the writ was adjudged to be good being brought against them both 8 R. 2. Laborers 59. A man may have a writ of Detinue of Charters and of Chattels joyntly because there one thing is the ground of the Action viz. the Deteyner 44 E. 3. 41 Breif 583. Likewise a man may have a writ of Debt where part of the Debt is due by Obligation and part by Contract because there the Debt is only occasion of the suit 41 E. 3 damage 75. 1 H. 5. 4. So in things of the like nature one writ may comprehend many wrongs and therefore an Action of the Case was brought for hindring the Plaintiff to hold his Leet 2. for the disturbance of his Servants and Tenants in the gathering his Tithe 3. for Threatning so that the people c. durst not come to a certain Chappel to do their Devotion and present their Offerings 4. for the taking of his Servants and Chattels 19 R. 2. Action sur le Case 52. When an Action is given by the Statute and the Statute doth not prescribe any certain form of the writ the writ framed at the Common Law shall serve for that purpose and the special matter shall be set forth in the Declaration Dyer 37. a. 83. Where a man shall have an Action against his own Deed. A man shall have an Action against his own Deed as if I disseise an Abbot and make Feoffment in Fee with waranty and afterwards I am made Abbot of the same House my Feoffment shall not be a Barr to me notwithstanding it was with warranty I shall have an Action against my Alienee because that I recover to the use of the House and not to my own use The same Law if I disseise Major and Commonalty c. The same Law of the Parson of a Church The same Law if I take a Horse of a Feme sole and Sell it and afterwards marry her I shall have an Action of Debt against my Alienee because that I recover to the use of my Wife tamen quaere A Monk shall have a Quo minus debitum Domini Regis solvere non potest for the advantage upon a Lease made by the King reserving Rent 14 H. 4. The same Law if a Villein be made executor to a man to whom the Lord is bound the Villein shall have an Action against his Lord. The same Law if a Monk be made Executor c. The same Law if an Abbot hath been disseised and afterwards the disseisor is desseised the Disseisor releaseth with warranty and after that is made Abbot he shall find against his own Deed
Tenant the Tenancy in Fee 2. Avowry upon my very Tenant by the manner as I make a Gift in Tail remainder over reserving Rent Also if Tenant by the Courtesy I avow upon him as before Also where a man dyes seised of three intire Mannors and if his Wife be endowed of one Mannor intire 3. Avowry upon my Tenant by the manner as Lessee for life rendring Rent Also if à Woman be endowed of the third part of a Mannor the Heir distrains her and avowes 4. Avowry upon the Land as a Rent-Charge is granted the Grantee avowes in the Lands charged with his distress 5. Avowry upon my matter as I am seised in Fee and let for years for certain Rent and so shew the whole matter Avowry for Homage or for Rent-service although that the Avowry be made upon the person incertain yet in this case he that is a Stranger cannot plead any thing but hors de son Fee or that which is Tantamount as a Release c. which prove the Land to be out of the Fee of the Lord. A Man cannot avow the taking of Beast for Rent arrear if those Beasts were taken by Night but for damage Fesant he may Pasch 10 E. 3. Where the Avowant shall justifie and where he shall make Avowry Where the Avowant is of right to have the thing for which he distrains he shall make Avowry although that the Estate of him upon whom he avows be determined as if I let Lands for term d'auter vie and I distrain for the Rent cestuy que vie dies the other sues Replevin I make Avowry for homage he that ought to do homage dyes his Executors sue Replevin now I ought to justifie because the thing for which the the distress was made by his death is gone and extinct As two Jointenants the one enfeoffs a Stranger of all that c. upon Condition the Feoffee gives notice to the Lord here he holds of the Lord pro particula illa and the Lord shall have several Rents of the Tenants And yet if the Lord grant the services of the Feoffee to a Stranger and he attorne and afterwards the Condition is broken by which the Feoffor who was jointenant enters again here the Jointure is reviv'd and they hold the grant of Services of his part and the other Jointenant holds of the Lord as he held before and yet they are Jointenants Avowry by the Lord for homage and alledgeth seisin by the Husband of Lands which he hath in Right of his Wife The Plaintiff alledgeth that the Husband hath nothing but in right of his Wife and although he alleadgeth seisin by the Husband c. yet he sheweth that the Husband was seized in his demesne as of Fee without that that the Wife hath any thing c. 11 H. 4. If a man makes Avowry upon one as Son and Heir of his Mother where he is in as Heir to his Father the Avowry is abated In Avowry for Rent Service or any other Rent except that he shews the Commencement of the Rent as a Gift in tail or a Grant of a Rent-Charge he ought to alledg no seisin of the Rent in his Avowry because he shews the Commencement of the Rent In Avowry for Homage or Escuage if he shew not the Commencement of the Tenure he ought to shew seisin of the Homage or otherwise it is not good Avowry for Releif or aid pur file marrier he ought not to alledg seisin of the Releif nor of the Aid because that they are no parcel of the Tenure as Homage or Escuage be but incident to the Seigniory Where in Avowry the Defendant shall answer to the seisin and where he shall traverse IN Avowry the Lord alledgeth seisin of the services the Tenant cannot traverse the Tenure in part but he shall answer to the seisin For in Avowry the Tenant shall not avoid encroachment of Services but in a Writ of Rescous or in Assife he may avoid the encrochment and not answer to the Tenure If the Lord encroch an other thing which was not part of the Tenure before the encrochment it is void and the party shall avoid it and Travers it notwithstanding seisin alledged as where the Tenant holds by Homage and Ten shillings the Lord encroches a Horse this encrochment is void because it is an other thing and other then the Tenure was before Also where the Lord avowes for Homage and Ten shillings Rent the Tenant may say that he holds of him by Homage Ancestrel without that that he holds of him by Homage and ten shillings in this case he shall not answer to the seisin because that he may traverse the entire Tenure of the same thing quod nota Where the Effect of the Plea shall be Traversed THe Avowant avows that I. S. was seised of an Acre of Land and so seised grants him Twenty shillings Rent in Fee The Plaintiff saith that the said I. S. had nothing but for Term of Life of the Lease of the Plaintiff the which I. S. is dead this is a good Plea and the Plaintiff shall not say without that that I. S. was seised in Fee and yet the Avowant alledgeth that he was seised in Fee and the Plaintiff saith that he had nothing but for Term of Life which is in a manner contrary and yet the plea is good and he shall not be compell'd to say without that that he was seised in Fee and the reason is because that seisin in Fee was not the effect of the Avowry but the Grant which is confessed and avoided and because Seisin in Fee is not the effect the Plaintiff may answer it by an Affirmative and shall not be compelled to travers with a without that The same Law is in Avowries when the Avowant saith that he was seised of an Acre in Fee and let the same to the Plaintiff for Life or for years reserving Rent and for Rent arrear he avows The Plaintiff saith that one I. S. was seised in his demesne as of Fee and let to the Avowant for the life of I. N. the which I. N. dyed and the said I. S. entred before whose Entry there was nothing arrear this is a good Plea and he shall not need to say without that that the Avowant was seised in Fee at the time of the Lease for if the Seisin had been the Effect of his Avowry he ought to have Traversed or Confessed and Avoided and this he hath notdone for the Avowant saith that he was seised in Fee and the Plaintiff saith that he was seised but for Term of Life the which is no direct Travers but Argumentative but the Plea is good enough because that the seisin is not the Effect of the Barr but the Lease quod nota Bail ALattitat is sued out against two in a Joint Action and both taken one puts in Bail as of Michaelmas and the other of Hillary Term The Court was moved That the Bail of Michaelmas Term might be taken
any other Title or to have any other Action to recover the Land than that by which he hath recovered and by the same reason that he shall not have a Cessavit he shall not have Eschete If a man hath Rent in Fee he may distrain or have a Writ of Annuity and if he brings a Writ of Annuity and hath Judgment to recover although that he sues not out Execution yet he shall never distrain for the Rent afterwards Tenant in Tail discontinues for Life and dyes and the Tenant for Life aliens in Fee and the Heir bring in consimili casu and recovers now by this Judgment he shall never have a Formedon of the same Land c. The disseisor enfeoffs the disseisee by deed indented upon Condition or makes a Lease for Life by Deed indented this is a good Conclusion to the disseisee to demand his Right and the Reason is that by the Deed indented the disseisee hath affirmed the Estate of the Disseisor which is as much as if he had confirmed his Estate before the Feoffment In Debt upon an Obligation the Defendant pleads a Release upon which the Plaintiff is Nonsuit afterwards the Plaintiff brings a new Action of Debt the Defendant shall be estopped to say that he was deins age or that the Obligation was made per minas But it is otherwise if the Plea be discontinued An Essoin is cast for the Tenant in a Writ of Dower yet the Tenant shall be received to say that he hath been allways ready to render Dower and because that an Essoin may be cast for a Stranger this Essoin is no Estoppel for an Estoppel shall be good to every intent but because an Essoin may be cast for a Stranger as well as for the Tenant himself it shall be said an Estoppel I bring an Assise of Mortdancestor and recover when in Truth I have no Right c. yet the Wife of the same Father shall be endowed c. Also in Avowry Tenant for life Aliens in Fee the Wife of Tenant for Life shall be endowed against the Feoffee Also Tenant in Tail is bound by Statute and makes Feoffment Execution against the Feoffee Of some Estoppels none shall have advantage but those who are parties or privies AS if I loose Land by Erroneous Judgment or false Verdict those that are Strangers shall have no advantage But of some Estoppels every one shall have advantage As Bastardy certified by the Bishop User of Action is no Estoppel to prejudice an other viz. Heir c. AS a man grants a Rent Charge in Fee to an Abbot and his Successors or to a Feme-Covert and her Heirs if the Abbot or Husband brings an Action it shall not prejudice the Successor or the Wife In no Case one person shall estopp another but in Dower AS where a Woman demands Dower and she hath Writings touching the Inheritance of the Heir for in debt it is no Plea to say that the Plaintiff is indebted to the Defendant in ten pounds because that it cannot be tryed by the Original 3 H. 6. In every Case where I am Barred of Land as if it be found that I am not next Heir this Estoppel shall pass with the Land and every one that claims the Land by me shall be Estopped but of other Lands it shall be no Estoppel against me 33 H. 6. IF I bring a Praecipe quod reddat by the name of Richard when my name is John and recover by default against the Tenant and afterwards I bring another Writ by my right name against the same Tenant he shall not estopp himself by that Recovery So if I have misnamed the Tenant in the first Record because he shall not be grieved by it Mich. 33 H. 6. contra per Prisot contra per Fortescue 34. By Prisot none shall be received to plead an Estoppel against another but he that pleads may be estopped by the same plea and this is where both parties are parties to the Record otherwise not For if I bring an Action by the name of Robert when my name is John against one that pleads with me if afterwards I sue him by the name of John he shall estopp me by that Record but against a Stranger I shall not be estopped by it by Prisott and by Fortescue 30 H. 6. 26 H. 6. 14 E. 4. contra Bastardy certified against me or found against me every Stranger shall estopp me because that every Stranger is estopped to say that I am mulier But if I am certified mulier a Stranger shall not be estopped by it to plead special Bastardy because that it may be that I am a Bastard in our Law and a mulier in the spiritual Law but not è contra No Stranger shall take advantage by an Estoppel but where the Estoppel extinguisheth the Right AS if a Man makes a Lease to me for Term of years of my own Land and the Term passeth and he enters and grants a Rent Charge in Fee and afterwards I recover against the Grantor the Land by default the Grantee shall not falsify the Recovery by Estoppel A Stranger shall not take advantage of an Estoppel in fait if it be in the Realty but by matter of Record it is otherwise A Man takes a Lease of Lands for years or for Life of which Lands he himself â—s seâ—sed in Fee or in Tail at the time of the Lease made if it be by Deed indented he is estopped to say that he had any Estate or Right in those Lands at the time of the Lease The same Law if a man be disseised and takes a Lease of the disseisor for a term of years of the same Lands by Deed indented But if a man takes a Lease for term of life of his disseisor he shall not be thereby estopped notwithstanding it be by Deed indented because that by the Livery he is remitted and the Lease is void ut dicitur quaere tamen for the Indenture is strong against him but if it be indented it is cleer Law but if it be by Fine it shall be an Estoppel because that the Estoppel takes effect before his Entry Or if Livery be made out of the Lands within View c. If a man makes a Lease by Deed indented to one of his own Lands now he is concluded after the Lease determines the Lessor enters by force of the conclusion and a stranger comes in aid of him the Lessee shall punish the stranger for this Trespass and he shall not conclude him by force of the Lease because he is wholly a stranger to the Judgment per totam Curiam 14 H. 6. But quaere if he justify as servant if he shall conclude himself Fines and Recoveries A Fine was Levied of Lands in two Counties and but one County mentioned in the Fine yet because it was for the uses declared in an Indenture which did mention the Lands in the other County all the Lands mentioned in the Indenture did pass If
two persons having several Interests in Lands acknowledg the note of a Fine before a Judg and then one of them dyes The Conusee may for all that proceed with his Fine against the other alone for the death of the other is no impediment for the Conusans of every one is against himself and shall work for so much as he can pass A man and his Wife acknowledged a note of a Fine before Commissioners the 26 th of March by Dedimus potestatem and the wife dyed 27 th of the same month and the next day being the 28 th Composition was made in the Alâ—enation-Office upon a Writ of Covenant Retornable in Hillary Term before and the Kings Silver was entred as of the same Hillary Term and so the Fine was past and ingrossed And in Easter Term the Heir of the Wife moves against the Fine But upon debate it was agreed the Fine should stand Tenant in Tail Levies a Fine with Proclamations and 5 years pass in his Life-time Yet this shall not Barr his Issue A man of full age and his Wife being but 19 Levy a the Fine of Inheritance of the Wife whereby an Estate is conveyed to the Husband and Wife in Tail and the Remainder to the right Heirs of the wife and many exceptions taken against the proceedings by the Heir to the Wifes inheritance viz. I. S. as that the said Feme was not of full age at the time of the Fine Levied and other undue means committed in getting out the Son Yet by the whole Court the Fine was held good Law for Facta valent multa que fieri prohibentur If there be Tenant for Life the Remander in Fee to an Infant and they both Levy a Fine and afterwards as to the Infant the Fine is Reversed yet the Conusee shall have the Land for the Life of the Tenant for each may pass and give what he lawfully may If there be two Jointenants and one of them suffer a Recovery declaring the uses of the whole this shall bind but only a Moiety unless the consent of the other Jointenant can be proved Heir IF an Heir be sued upon a Bond and Lands are proved to descend unto him from his Ancestor you must have a special Writ to enquire what those lands are worth to be delivered to the Plaintiff at a reasonable extent and price and if the Heir confess the Action and shew what Lands come to him by descent Then his Body and all other his Lands and Goods and Chattels are free from that Execution but if he deny the Action and plead Riens per descent or it go by default against him then Execution shall be against Body Goods or other Lands And the Declaration shall be in the Debet and Detinet as though it were his proper Debt Outlawries and Outlaws OVtlawry was pleaded in Barr and day given before when the Defendant reversed it the Defendant shall not be condemned for Failer of Record but Respondouster Green against Gascogne vide Title failer of Record Yel 36. Outlawry in the Kings Bench reversed by Error in the same Court but that is for Error in Fact not in Law as if no Outlawry lay in the Case and if Process of Outlawry lie in an Action upon the Case for turning a Water-Course vide P. 10. H. 7. pl. 15. Dy. 195. b. 196. Original in Debt called the Defendant Nuper de Lond. Exig called him de Lond. is erroneous for it must pursue the Original without Variance and the Original was against Lancelot the Exigent was against Lancelot ill 3 Cro. 49. vid. 50 95. 104. 116. 172. Error of a Judgment in Debt and Outlaw'd 2. on it against 2. where the Sheriff return'd quod non habent bona out catalla quod summon ' potuer it should have been per quod c. 2. it should be nec eorum aliquis het ' 3. the Original is against Lancelot A. and the Exigent is against Lancelot A. 4. 't is said in Hastings and it should be in Hustingis de Com. plac revocetur Lancelot vers ' Jones 3. Cro. 50. An Outlawry was reversed because it was against Lewellin with a single l and now the mean Process against Llewellin with a double Ll and it was against two and returned quod non sunt inventi and not nec eorum aliquis Llewellin against Watkins vide M. 2. R. 3 4 13. pl. 16. 3 Cro. 85. 104. 49. 50. 116. 198. 240. 248. 205. M. 21. H. 7. pl. 37. Exigent names no place where the Sheriff is to have the Body and that adjudged Error to reverse the Outlawry For the Sheriff cannot tell in what County to carry him Cesar against Stone 3 Cro. 104. Outlawry reversed because the Party was Indicted in Com. Somerset and supposed to be of London and the Capias awarded to the Sheriff of Somerset where it ought to go to the County where he lives Rorset's Case 3 Cro. 179. vid. Dy. 295. b. vid. M. 1 E. 4. pl. 2. One Outlawed of Felony assigned his Term and then reversed the Outlawry the Grantee shall maintain Trespass for the Profits taken in the mean time between the Assignment and the Reversal of the Outlawry For though it was then the King 's yet it is now as if no Outlawry had been at all Ognell's Case 3 Cro. 270. vide 218. Accord Outlawry is not reversed but by pleading without Writ of Error per tot Cur. though there be apparent Faults in it 3 Cro. 274. vide Co. 1. Inst 259. b. One is Outlawed and has his Term sold and then reversed the Outlawry he shall be restored to the Term it self not the Money Otherwise if sold on a Fieri Facias c. quod vide plus Title Exec. Eyre against Woodfare 3 Cro. 778. Co. 5. Rep. 90. b. 1. Acc. pl. 285. In Debt against an Executor the Defendant pleads that the Testator was Outlawed and doubted if a good Plea because the Testator may have some Goods not forfeited by Outlawry as simple Contract c. but on the other side such special Ass shall not be intended to Com. next he has nothing Wooley against Brade 3 Cro. 575. 851. Outlawry reversed because the Writ was Teste Edmund Anderson so wanting a Title had no Teste which is the Warrant of it Growdy and Juham 3 Cro. 592. Judgment against two in Debt C. and B and Capias only against one and he Outlawed whereupon was brought Error and reversed it because the Capins should have gone against both Also 't was not per Judiâ— ' Coron ' Beverly against Beverly 3 Cro. 648. Debt against the Sheriff on an Escape where the Case was that the Party was Outlawed after Judgment reversed it by Error within the Year and because he assigned not any Error the Plaintiff took out a Capias utlegatum and the Sheriff took him and let him go and resolved for the Plaintiff and in Co. 1. Report of this Case the difference is taken of an Outlawry
or conversation are also Excommunicated Co. Lit. 134. If a Bishop be defendant an Excommunication by the same Bishop shall not disable the plaintiff and if no other matter be shewn it shall be intended for the same cause Co. Lit. ib. The Writ shall not abate for Excommunication in the Plaintiff or Demandant But the Judgment shall be that the Tenant or Defendant shall go quit without day because when the Demandant or Plaintiff hath purchased Letters of Absolution and they are shewed to the Court he may have a Resummons or Reattachment upon his Original according to the nature of his Writ Lit. lib. 2. ca. 11. Sect. 42. If an Alien brings an Action personal or mixt in his own right the Defendant may plead it in Abatement in disability of his person or in bar to the Action with this difference that in Actions personal or Trespass for breaking his house the defendant ought to aver that the plaintiff is an Alien born at such a place under the Allegiance of such a Prince who is Enemy to our Soveraign Lord the King for an Alien Friend as he may Traffick and have a House for a habitation so he may have an Action personal and Trespass for breaking his house as he may have a Writ of Error for necessity And the Opinion of the Lord Coke in his Commentary upon Littleton is That if an Alien Friend brings an Action it ought to be pleaded in disability of his person and not in barr to the Writ or Action but if he be an Alien Enemy the Defendant may conclude to the Action And therefore Mr. Theloal in his Digest of Writs well observeth That an Exception taken to a Writ propter defectum Nationis vel potius defectum subjectionis vel Ligeancie is peremptory and that the Action cannot be revived by Peace or League subsequent and that the King may grant Licence to Aliens to implead and likewise that such Aliens as come into the Realm by the Kings Licence or Safe Conduct may use personal actions by Writ though they be not made Denizens and that Denizens lawfully made by the Kings Grant and such Aliens born as are within the express words of the Statute of 25 E. 3. may use actions real by Original Writ Co. Lit. 129. a. b. 130. b. Co. 7. 1. Theloal Digest de Breifs Lib. 1. ca. 6. 32 H. 6. 23. An Alien may be Administrator and have Leases for years as well as personal Chattels and Debts Cro. Eliz. 683. Cro. Car. 8. 9. One brings an Action as Executor Utlary in the plaintiff is no Plea because he sues in auter droit but it is otherwise of Excommunication 21 E. 4. 49. 34 H. 6. 14. 14 H. 6. 14. If the defendant plead that the plaintiff is an Alien born and conclude to the person yet it seems he may demand the View 3 H. 6. 55. For the Pleading of Matters of Record in Abatement observe That in Formedon for a Mannor another Formedon depending for 20 s. Rent out of that Mannor is a good Plea 3 H. 7. 3. That where in Trespass the defendant pleaded that the plaintiff had brought Replevin against the Mayor and Commonalty of A. for the same cause and that he was one of the Commonalty die Captionis c. Necnon die impetrationis Brevis and it was there agreed That in Trespass a Replevin depending for the same Cause is a good Plea if there be not more Defendants in the Replevin than in the Trespass 8 H. 7. 27. A Quare Impedit is brought against the Bishop and another as Incumbent the Defendants plead that the plaintiff hath brought another Quare Impedit against the said Bishop for the same Presentation which was then depending undetermined and demands Judgment of the Writ and it was adjudged a good Plea But the plaintiff might have brought divers Quare Impedits against divers Defendants Hobart 138. 9. So in an Assise of Darrein Presentment it is a good Plea to say That there is a Quare Impedit depending for the same Presentation Hobart 184. But where an Assise is brought of Lands in one County an Assise for the same Lands in another County and Judgment thereupon cannot be pleaded So of a Recovery in Ancient Demesne because it cannot be intended that the Lands recovered in the Assise or in Ancient Demesne are the same Lands 4 H. 6. 24. Rast Entr. 65. In Formedon in le Diseender it is no Plea to say that the Plaintiff at another time brought a Formedon in the Remainder of the same Lands except both the Counts be of one and the same Gift 40 E. 3. 31. Where the Heir brought two several Formedons upon one and the same Gift although the last did vary from the first Gift yet it is no Plea in Abatement for he might claim by two Ancestors sub dono 4 E. 3 8. If the Defendant in a personal Action pleads another Action depending at the time of the purchasing the last Writ he ought not to say that it is yet depending for the last Writ is abated in Law notwithstanding he is afterwards non-suited in the first Writ Co. 6. Ferrers Case Where Note the diversity when the writ is general as Covenant Detinue Assise c. and the Certainty is in the Declaration for there if the Plaintiff is nonsuited in the first before he counts or declares the last shall not abate and when the writ is special and the thing demanded is specified therein as in Praecipe quod reddat c. What persons shall be admitted to plead in Abatement and what not Note One Defendant may plead the death of the other before the Writ purchased or that there is no such person in rerum natura 20 H. 6. 30. b. But in Replevin if the Defendant avow upon an Estranger the Plaintiff in the Replevin cannot plead in Abatement of the Avowry 22 E. 4. 35. b. If the Cognizee of a Statute sue execution against one Terretenant only without the other he cannot plead in Abatement but is put to his Audita Quaerela against the other because that the Cognizee is not bound to take Notice of all the Terretenants 16 Eliz. Dyer 331. a. Nota That after a Continuance the Defendant shall not be admitted to plead that the Plaintiff was made Bishop or that the Woman Plaintiff took Husband depending the Writ except that he pleads it after the last continuance but it is otherwise of the death or Coverture of the Plaintiff at the time of the Writ purchased because these Pleas do abate the Writ de Facto 32 H. 6. 10. 11. In a Replevin where the Plaintiff admits the Avowry the Priee shall not plead in Abatement but as Amicus Curiae and not then except it be apparantly known per totam Curiam 34 H. 6 8. In a Praecipe against I. S. the Son of W. Edmond at the retorn of the Grand Cape the Defendant said that his Father was named Esmond and by Thorpe it is a good
So it is of a Lease for years made by a Feme sole reserving Rent and She takes Husband So of an Obligation made to a Feme sole and she takes Husband for otherwise the words of the writ are false But if a Feme sole make a Bailiff of her Mannor of Dale and takes Husband of all the Rent received by the Bailiff after Coverture the Husband shall have an Action of Account in his own name for there the words of the writ are true And when an Action personal is given to the Husband and also to his Wife during the Coverture it is at the Liberty of the Husband to bring the Action in both their names or in his own name if it be so that the Wife may have advantage of it When a thing is given to Husband and Wife by matter of Record then he ought to joyn with her But there is a Diversity when it is of the part of the Plaintiff and when it is on the Defendants part as a Feme sole disseiseth me and takes Husband the Assise lyes against both supposing that they both disseised me So it is of Trespass Note It is at the Election of the Plaintiff to bring his Action of Debt against the Heir or against the Executors A Man marrieth a Wife That hath a Rent Charge out of the Lands of another Rent is arrear before and after marriage The Plaintiff shall recover by Action of Debt against the Grantor or his Heirs Action of Covenant shall not go to the Heir but to the Executors As Action of Debt upon a Bond or a Lease for years the Term goes to the Executors and not the Heir or any thing where damages shall be only recovered for that every Heir may not have Chattels descend and so not this Action A man seized of a House and Goods makes a Lease thereof and after enters and enfeoffs I. S. the Lessee reenters Rent is in arrear I. S. brings his Action of Debt and hath Judgment because the Rent issues out of the House and not out of the goods A man was bound in a Bill Me teneri firmiter obligari in viginti libris solvendum in watches It was questioned whether the Action should be brought for the Watches or the Money But Resolved for the Money Otherwise if the number of Watches had been in the Bill For then it had been for so many Watches to the Value of 20 l. If a man had been indebted to me in a single contract and dyed I could have had no remedy at the Common-Law against his Executors For he might have waged his Law in his Life-time but his Executors could not But now I may have an Action upon the Case against his Executors Assault and Battery and Ejectment will lye both in one Declaration Where two Men are beaten together yet they ought to have several Actions because the Trespass is personal but otherwise it is in real trespasses If you bring your Action for live Cattle it must be Cepit abduxit But if it be dead Goods or Chattels then you must say cepit et asportavit so likewise you say for live Cattle pretii for dead things ad valentiam Divers persons may have an Action of Trespass joyntly for Goods taken or the like But of Battery or such personal Trespass the Action ought to be single unless it be a man and wife And if the man and wife bring an Action of Battery or for Goods taken The writ shall say the Goods of the Husband only For the Wife cannot have property in the Goods during the Coverture An Action lyes against an Executor upon a promise of the Testators upon consideration of forbearing to prosecute but altered since by the late Act to prevent Frauds and Perjuries If there be Three Executors named in the Testament and Two of them refuse the Third may prove the Will alone And yet the other Two may meddle with the Goods when they will and either of them when they will And if an Action be brought it ought to be in all their names notwithstanding such refusal Executors of Executors shall not have an Action of Debt or other Action for any thing due to the first Testator For that they are not Executors to the first Testator or privies to his Will but were Strangers by the Course of the Common-Law But by the Statute of 25 E. 3. Cap. 5. they may Sue and be Sued and shall answer for whatsoever comes to their hands of the first Testator Sr. O. C. seized of an House in Fee and possessed of an other House as Administrator for years Le ts them both for 10 years to the Lady S. who Covenants to keep them in Repair and so Leave them at the end of the Term. Afterwards Sr. O. grants the Reversion of both Houses by several Indentures to I. P. The Lease made to the Lady S. expires and the Houses are left Ruinous Whereupon I. P. brings his Action Nicholls for the Defendant said that the Plaintiff ought to have brought two Writs of Covenant for that the Houses are several and if the Case had been that the Lessor had Covenanted to repair them and had dyed yet the Lessee should have had one Writ against the Heir aad an other Writ against the Executor and when an Action is once severed it can never be joyned again and when Sr. O. hath granted the House of which he was seised in Fee by Deed to P. now the Action is severed and Sr. O. shall have an Action of Covenant for one House and P. for the other And for these Reasons he held the Action not to be well brought Doderidge è contra And first he agreed with the other that two Actions upon this Covenant are maintainable and that if Sr. O. had lett his House the Lessee shall have one Action upon this Covenant and the Lessor another But yet he said this Action will well lye for the Law is excellent in this Point for when the Ground upon which the Action is founded in one notwithstanding the things are several yet all shall be comprised in one Action for frustra fiunt per plura quae fieri possunt per pauciora and with this agrees 14 E. 3. If a man grant a Rent out of his Land to one and sells the same Land and afterwards the vendee grants another Rent-charge out of the same Land to the same person and he is disseised He shall have one Assise for both the Rents So if one distreyn for two Rents and the Tenant rescuos them He shall have but one Writ of Rescous 3 H. 6. 17. 13 H. 7. 12. b. There exception was taken because it supposed a Chasing in two Parks the which ought to have several Punishments Viz. for either Park Imprisonment for 3 years as it is given by the Statute W. 1. and because he joyns the chasing in two Parks together it is not good For a man cannot have a Writ of Ravishment de
c. The same law if an Abbot make a Feoffment in Fee and afterwards is deposed and sometime after is made Abbot now he shall have an Action against his Deed which he himself made when he was Abbot because that now he comes in as Successor and not in the place as he was before The same Law of Warden and Schollars But it would have been otherwise if he had disseised a Parson and made Feoffment in Fee with warranty or without warranty and afterwards is made Parson now if he will use an Action his own Feoffment shall be a Barr against him because that all that he shall recover by this Action is to his own use The same Law if a man disseise a woman and makes a Feoffment in Fee and afterwards he takes the woman to Wife in this case the Husband shall be Barred because that he will have advantage of this Recovery to his own use If a man hath right to have Land where his Entry is tolle and releaseth to the Tenant all manner of Actions and dye his Heir shall have his Action and recover the Land because that by such release no right is extinguished and if the Tenant makes Feoffment in Fee or dyes seised he that made the release shall have his Action against the Heir of the Tenant or his Feoffee against his own release and the cause is because that nothing is released but his Action against the same person and not any right If the Son disseise his Father and make a Feoffment with warranty or without warranty and after his Father dyes he cannot ouste his Feoffee because that it was his own Deed. A man hath good cause of Action sometimes and yet by matter ex post facto and by the Act of a Stranger his Action is destroyed As I am disseisee and he is disseisor and I release to the disseisor Also I bail or lend Goods to one a Stranger takes them the bailor sells them to a Stranger c. Action of Debt upon an obligation brought by an Executor the writ shall be detinet and not debet and for this cause they joyn in the same Action for an Horse delivered by themselves to the same Obligor The same Law if a man recover Lands by default in which I have an Estate for life and he recovers by another writ by default Lands wherein I have an Estate Tail I shall have a Quod ei deforceat because the conclusion of the writ serves me And so a man may joyn two or three things in his Action where the conclusion of his Action is pertinent to the several matters and doth not vary If two or three Acres are given severally in tail and the party discontinue the whole his Heir shall have Formedon for the whole because that the writ is le quel un I. dit S. dona and although the Acres are given severally that is not material forasmuch as the common Writ will serve in this case But if the Acres are given by divers or several men or that the one shall be given to the Heirs Males and the other to the Heirs Females and the third to the Heirs General in this case the Heir shall have several writs and not one writ because that one writ cannot serve for such several Gifts If I deliver Goods to one who is indebted to me and he dyes against his Executors I may have a writ for the Goods and for the Debt because that the writ is against the Executors for the Debt in the Detinet and for the detinue it is in the Detinet and therefore the writ well warrants the count to declare partly for debt and partly for Detinue but such an Action he could not have had against the Testator because that for the debt against him the writ ought to have been in the debet and detinet A Feoffment is made upon condition of payment by the Feoffor he commits Trespass and afterwards enters by force of payment c. yet the Feoffee shall have Trespass because his possession is affirm'd 43 E. 3. Assumpsit If he would relinquish such a debt to pay him 30 l. and sayes he did relinquish it c. and after Verdict for the Plaintiff Judgment stayed because he shews not how he relinquished it and it may be by parol which were void Gregory versus Lovell 3 Cro. 292. Assumpsit in Consideration he would discharge him from an Arrest and sayes that exoneravit ipsum moved in Arrest c. he shews not how he discharged him sed non allocatur for they might be per parol or for a time but in Pleading a discharge of a Rent or bond which must be by Deed and perpetual it must be shewed how King versus Hobs. 2. Cro. 930. 960. Assumpsit the Defendant pleads the discharge of the promise whereof Issue taken and found for the Plaintiff and divers defects in the Declaration moved in Arrest of Judgment but by Wrâ—y all these defects tending to the Assumpsit are cured by the collateral Plea Manwood v. Buston 2. Leond. 203 204. Assumpsit If he would make it appear c. and sayes he made it appear by the Court-Roll Good without saying what the Court Rolls were for the Infinitly So a Bond to save harmless from all Estreates good without shewing what for the same reason Vide 9 E. 4. 15. a. 22 E. 4. 41. a Mo. Pl. 1175. 3 Cro. 149 Pl 3. 919. Pl. 3. 3 Bulst 31. Latch 130. H. 2. H. 7. Pl 22. H. 6. H. 7. Pl. 8. 8. 22 E. 4. 15. ab 28. b. 29. a. Assumed he would assign Goods to pay c. and sayes he assigned and shews not how but per scriptum yet good Note after verdict Forth v. Yates Tr. 30 Car. 2. B R. Assumpsit against an Executor who Pleads solvit to such a one on a Bond of 100 l. and to another 100 l. on a Bond and so to divers others which he was forced to do the Payment being post exhibitionem Bille and Pleads a Recognizance in force not satisfied the Plaintiff Pleads non solvit to such a one 100 l. nor to such a one 100 l. Et si de ceteris hoc petit c. and to the Recognizance that it was satisfied and kept in force of Fraud the Defendant demurred quià replicatio multiplyed and double consisting of two matters where one goes to the whole but Judgment for the Plaintiff for the first objection to one 100 l. to another 100 l. make several Issues though que de hoc And in case of an Executor one may answer to every thing alledged by him H. 21 22. Car. 2. B. R. Jeffreys v. Dod. Assumpsit to permit Land to descend breach laid quod non permisit well being in the negative but in the affirmative it ought to be shewed how disposed though they could not descend H. 9. Jac. B. R. rot 3 Bulstr 18. Assumpsit to perform an Award and sets it forth the Defendant pleads
where not Further if the Award be that he shall go to Pauls with an Estranger this is void and vet it is possible but peradventure the Stranger will not go with him Note if the Award be that one of the parties shall deliver to the other the Goods that is in the house of I. S. this is void and yet it is not impossible but because that he might do wrong to I. S. to enter into his house and to convey his Goods from thence But if the Property of the Goods be in the party that is to perform the Arbitrement peradventure it may be otherwise forasmuch as his Entry is lawful Audita Quaerela A Statute is Acknowledged before the Major of Westminster and Recordor of London according to the Statute The Cognizor being within the age of one and twenty viz. 20 years and upwards And after his full age to the 23 d he brings his Audita Quaerela upon this matter and Judgment that he take nothing by the Writ because it could not then be tryed by inspection whether he were within age or not And the form of the Writ in the Registors is to alleadge that he still is within age Audita Quaerela lyes upon Nihil facias but not upon Scâ—re facias 21 E. 3. For vigilantibus et don dormientibus subvenient Leges per Hutton Mich. 11 Jacobi in C. B. The Executor of the Conusee releaseth to the Conusor in a Statute Merchant and afterwards dyes and one takes Administration of the Goods of the Conusee not Administred and hath Execution of the Statute and against him the Conusor brings an Audita Quaerela Trin. 28 Eliz. rotulo 2136 in C. B. Avowry vide Replevin AVowry for an Amerciament in a Court Baron quia presentatum fuit that he was Summoned and came not and alleadges in fact that he was resident c. as he must c. for when t is only presentatum c. and not alledged in fact 't is ill Mo. Pl. 221. In Avowry it was set forth that a Dean and Chapter were seised in Jure Ecclesie and not said seized in Fee and held ill for they might be seized per auter vie and their Title ought to be certainly set forth and this is but that they made a Lease for 99 years per dodrige if it had been that they made a Lease for 200 years it had implyed a Feoffment in Fee Pop. 163. Latch 121. Avowry Avowry for damage feasant and shews a Lease from I. S. seized in Fee the Plaintiff says I. S. was seized in Tayl and conceives the Estate to himself as Heir the Avowal seizes the Land rendring Rent and that he had accepted it Qu. If it be not a departure 1 Jnst 304. It seems a fortifying of the Avowry and so not Sti. 41. Taylors Case Yelv. 134. Wood versus Haukshind i. Cro. 156. 2 Cro. 121. 3 Cro. 404 Dy. 956. 1 Jnst 304 Hob. 271 Dy. 103. 253 b. Yelv. 96 Leon. 32. 156. Avowry on a New Grant of a new Rent-Charge in Fee the Plaintiff pleads that nothing passes by the Deed 't is an ill Plea he should have said that he did not grant by the Deed for a thing not in Esse could not pass though it was raised by the Deed Stewards Case 2 Leond. 13. Avowry by an Executor for Rent reserved by her and her Husband upon a Lease for years derived out of a Lease Exception taken because not shewed when the Husband dyed so it appeared not due in his time but because all belongs to her one way or other Wellwood in Newman Latch 121 Pop. 163. Costs to the Avowant upon 7 H. 8. c. 4 vide Common et Commoners Sect 4. Costs given to the Avowant for Damage-Fesant by 21 H. 8. c. 19. Cro. 1. James vers Tutneg 532. Replevin against 3 the one Avowes and the other 2 makes Conusance and Judgment against the Plaintiff but reversed because that those two did not make Conusance as Bailiffs to another Yelv. Owen vers Williams 108. The Lord hath still his choice to avow as at the Common-Law but if he will take the Benefit of the Statute then the Privity on both sides is removed and the Tenant shall Plead any discharge though he be a meer Stranger for the Charge of the Land is only in question though in that Statute 21 H. 8. there be no literal Provision so to be Hob. Brown vers Goldsmith 108. Avowry for 5 l. and 80 l. nomine poenae no demand of the Rent was alledged which made it unsufficient for the penalty but Retorne adjudged to him for they appeared to the Court to be several Hob. 133 Howel vers Samback If the Donee Alien the Donor cannot Avow upon the Alienee Keilway 130. b. Prescription that if one be chosen Constable at the Leet he must serve himself or find a sufficient man to do it and the Avowant saies that the Plaintiff was chosen and did not find a sufficient man to serve upon which it was demurred and Adjudged That the Avowry was ill Escot vers Stokes 14 Car 2. in B. One who is a Stranger to the Avowry shall not Plead any Plea but hors de son Fee or some other which is Tantamount As Lord and Tenant the Tenant makes a Lease the Termor shall plead no Plea but hors de son Fee because that he is a Stranger to the Avowry and he cannot have a Writ of Mesne because it is a Maxime Where a man cannot be helped by way of Action he shall be aided by way of Reversion He that is a Stranger to the Avowry cannot disclaim for a man cannot disclaim in auter droit An Abbot cannot disclaim nor Tenant in Tail Mich. 9 E. 4. fo 34. Hill 8 H. 5. Disclaimer 11. 26. If a man hath common by Especialty as in Land held of me the Rent is not arrear if I take the Beasts of the Commoner I do him wrong and he shall recover damages for he may Plead rien arrere although that he be a Stranger to the Avowry If the Tenant be in arrearages with his Lord and the Tenant makes a Feoffment in Fee which was notice to the Lord in this case the Lord may choose whether he will take him for his Tenant or not if he will not tender him his arrearages and the reason is if he will accept him for his Tenant generally he shall never be received to avow for the arrearages afterwards But if the Tenant dye so that the Tenancy discends to his Son or that the Tenancy is recover'd or that the Tenant hath forjudg'd the Mesne so that he is become Tenant to the Lord Paramount in all these Cases he shall accept them for his Tenants and make Avowry upon them for all the arrearages and the reason is because they are become Tenants to him against his Will As to Avowries 5 things are to be known 1. AVowry upon my very Tenant where the Lord hath the Rent in Fee simple and the
off and filed as of Hillary Term Else it would be Error to declare in a Joint Action upon Bail for one in Michaelmas and the other in Hillary Term quod concessum fuit per curiam If a Captas be awarded and Returned non est inventus against the Principal and the Bail bring him not in If the Principle dye although there be no Scire facias against the Bail Yet the Bail is chargeable For though the Court will excuse the Bail Yet the Bail if they bring in the Principle before the Return of the Second scire facias yet this is of grace and not of necessity If the Husband and Wife be Arrested for the Debt of the Wife and the Baron find Bail for himself yet he may be detained until â—e find Bail for his Wife but he shall not be detained until find Bail for her Husband or the Husband for himself Judgment was given against one in the Kings-Bench upon which he was in Execution and had another Judgment against him in the Common-Pleas in which Court his Sureties to save their Bail brought him to the Barr by Habeas Corpus to render his Body but before that he had brought a writ of Error in the Kings-Bench to reverse the Judgment in the Common-Pleas but the Record was not removed In this Case the Court said When a man comes in to save his Bail he shall not be committed if the party do not pray it but when Error is brought before that he be in Execution it is a supersedeas so that they cannot commit him at the Prayer of the party And Waller Prothonatory said That the Bail is to render his Body so that the Party may take it in execution but here he cannot in regard a writ of Error is brought and therefore the Sureties shall be discharged Mith. 14 Jacobi in Banco Communi In the Common-Pleas the Bail is bound in a certain summ but it is not so in the Kings-Bench and when a man enters Bail in the Kings-Bench in a cause they shall be charged in all Suits between the same partyes entred the same Term. The Bail shall answer for all Actions brought the same Term against the Party for whom he is Bail but if a man be bail for another and hath Lands in Fee and he declares and afterwards the Bail sells his Lands and an other commenceth a Suit against the party the same Term he shall not be charged with the other Actions Cro. lib 2. fo 449. Term. no Sci ' Hillarii Anno 15 Jacobi Regis One Gabriel Mihil was indebted to A. B. and put in Bail in the Common-Pleas to pay the same and afterwards A. B. Arrested Mihil in London for the same Debt whereupon Judg Forster the other Judges being in the Chancery awarded an Attachment against A. B. for this Contempt and herewith agrees 2 H. 7. Hill 15 Jac. in C. B. Bankrupt IF Creditors after a Commission of Bankrupt is sued forth although at the first they refused yet within three or four months they come and tender their proportion towards the charges of the Commission They shall be received to have their parts as the other Creditors if no distribution hath been made of the Bankrupts estate before The Commissioners of a Bankrupt may sell the Goods of a Bankrupt altho the Bankry had sold them or disposed of them to his Creditors if the sale or disposal thereof were after he became a Bankrupt The Commissioners may sell the Copy-hold Lands of a Bankrupt for and towards the payment of his Debts by Deed indenâ—ed and inrolled declaring how he was found a Bankrupt and expressing to the use of the Creditors and at next Court the vendee shall be admitted and have his Copy I. C. and R. C. brought an Action of Debt jointly upon a joint Debt assigned to them by Commissioners upon the Statute of Bankrupts and it was said by the whole Court that the Commissioners had not pursued their Authority by that joint Assignment for they ought prorata to have assigned to every one but quere if the joint Debt may be divided among the Câ—edâ—tors and the Lord Chief Justice said That a Custom may devide a Debt and then à fortiori an Act of Parliament may Mich. 10 Jacobi in C. B. A Bankrupt cannot make sale of any of his Goods after he becomes Bankrupt but Goods which he hath as Executor or a Legacy before it be invested in him or a Grant of a Reversion before Entry all these shall not be charged within the Statute But if a man sells those Goods which he hath as Executor and afterwards retakes an Estate to himself or converts them to his own use this is within the Statute Per dom Coke et alios justic ' Pasch 9. Jac. in Com Banco A man shall not Forfeit those Goods which he hath as Executor by Outlary ib. Barr. A Man may be Barred pro tempore and yet afterwards he shall have his Action IN Debt against an Executor he Pleads plene administravit and so it is found the Plaintiff shall be Barred and yet if Goods comes to his hands which were the Testators he shall have a Writ of Debt The same law in Debt against an Heir who pleads Riens per discent which is found so and afterwards he hath Lands by discent c. In Formedon the Tenant pleads the warranty of the Ancestor of the Demandant with that that he hath Assets by discent he pleads that he hath nothing and it is found that he hath he is Barred To plead a thing by way of Barr or Estoppel which the Demandant or plaintiff is to defeat or destroy by the Usageof his Action is no good Plea AS in Attaint brought upon a Verdict de nativo habendo Villenage is no Plea Also where Reversion and Rent pleaded for Assets is not Assets there the Heir is to defeat the Assets If a man sues a Prohibition and the Defendant alledgeth Excommunication in the Plaintiff he may say t is for the same cause If a Villein brings a Writ of Error upon Judgment had in nativo habendo Villenage is no Plea Where a man Pleads a Recovery in Barr he ought to add more to it or otherwise the Recovery is no Barr. ANd that is where the Tenant Pleads a Recovery by default against the Demandant he ought to add more to it viz. with that that he will averr that he was Tenant at the time of the Recovery The same Law if Tenant in Precipe quòd reddat will Plead a Recovery in a Writ of Cosinage by default he ought to shew how he was Cosin Also if the Tenant will Plead a Recovery in a Writ of Right against the Demandant by default he ought to shew of what possession his Writ of Right was conceived But otherwise it is if he will Plead a Recovery in Formedon by Action tryed this Recovery is a good Barr without adding any thing more to it where note the Diversity Where a man
demands a Debt or any thing by Deed he shall not be Barred but by deed or a thing of as high a nature AS Trespass for taking of an Apprentice it is no Plea to say he discharged him â—â—â—â—out speciality Mich. 22 H. 6. The same Law in Debt upon an Obligation it is no Plea for the Defendant to say that the Plaintiff hath received parcel at such a place depending the Writ Judgment 7 E. 3. The same Law in Debt upon Arrearages of Account the Defendant Pleaded Arbitrement it is no Barr because that Debt upon Arbitrement is not of so high a nature as Debt upon Arrearages of Account for there he cannot wage Law The same Law in Debt upon an Obligation it is no Plea to say that he hath paid the Summ in demand to the Plaintiff because that he ought if he will avoid the Deed to say that he hath the Plaintiffs Release or Acquittance to shew The Disseisor Levies a Fine with Proclamations the Five years pass the Disseisee is bound afterwards the Disseisor reverseth the Fine by a Writ of Error then the Disseisee may enter and yet he was once Barred Vide Barr pro tempore Where a man shall Plead a Barr which shall comprehend one matter in fait and where it shall comprehend two matters IF a man Pleads in Barr an Arbitrement he ought to say where the Submission was and also where the Award was made and so to make the Plea certain But when he Pleads a Plea which comprehends two matters he ought not to shew the certainty until the Plaintiff hath Traversed one of them Of Barrs perpetual A Woman is bound to me in an Obligation and I afterwards take her to Wife I am once Barred and allwayes Barred Tenant in Tail leaves Assets which is Pleaded against him who is Heir both he and all his Heirs are Barred for ever A man is bound to pay the Abbot of Westminster and his Successors every year Twenty shillings the Abbey being dissolved he is discharged of the Twenty shillings for ever Also if a man be obliged to keep my Court in Dale I purchase all the Copy-holds and Free-holds of the said Mannor he is discharged from keeping the said Court for ever See Pleas and Pleadings Cinque-Ports AN Elegit to extend Lands within the Cinque-Ports was directed to the Constable of Dover But he would not extend so that the Plaintiff was compelled to have a Certiorari to remove the Record out of the Kings-Bench into the Chancery And from thence by Mittimus sent to the Constable to make Execution Custom 's and Prescriptions ALI Customes against Cannon-Law are to be Tryed at Common-Law and not in the Ecclesiastical Courts Customs are payable to the King by the Common-Law the Reasons why they are so paid see in Davies Rep. fo 9. ct 10. Le case del Customs See the difference between Malum in se etmalum prohibitum and how the King may Pardon it but not licence it to be done 11 H. 7. fo 12. et Davies Rep. fo 73. Where Debt or damages are recovered in a Court-Baron the Bailiff ought not to sell the Goods of the Defendant and deliver the money to the Plaintiff But to impound them and keep them as pledges until the Defendant makes his agreement but where it hath been the use of the Court to award a Levari facias it is good by Custome Where the younger son in Burrough-English dyes the Middle Son not the Eldest shall have the Land The same Law for Customary or Copy-hold Lands It was the Custom of the Kings-Bench every Term once or twice to send the Coroner of that place to the Marshal to view the Prisoners that are in the Marshals Custody by Commititur or matter of Record and if any of them are wanting that he could not find them there then to mark their names in his Coroners Book and to inform the Court thereof And thereupon the Court did pose the Marshal who was to inform the Justices what was become of those Prisoners And if he found not sufficient cause of excuse the Court would Record their escape against the Marshal And the abusing of an Office is the escape of Prisoners in the Marshal an abuse of his Office and just cause of Forfeiture If an Alien have a son that is also an Alien and after the Father is made free and then hath another Son and after purchaseth Lands and dyes The second Son born after the Freedom shall be Heir and not the Eldest by the Common-Law and usage of the Realm And also if there be three Brothers and the middlemost purchaseth Lands and dyes without Heir of his Body the Eldest Brother shall inherit and not the Youngest By the Custom of London a Feme Covert that is to say a Sole Merchant may sue and be sued in absence of her Husband Bulstrode part 1. fo 14. where you may read of three sorts of Customs that are void and against Law 1. a Custom against Justice 2. a Custom against the Benefit of the Common-Wealth and 3. a Custom that is to the Prejudice of a third Person Custom and usage in the intendment of the Law is such a usage as hath obtained the force of Law and is binding to such particular place as Gavelkind in Kent and Burrough-Euglish in many Corporations in England When the Custom of the Realm is the Common Law WHen it is the Common-Law a Custom ought not to be alleadged or Pleaded But an Action against a Carrier Hoyman Common Hosteler and for negligently keeping of Fire the Plaintiff may declare upon the General Custom of the Realm or not at his Election And note That a Custom is always Local and to be alleadged in one certain place but a Prescription is personal and ought to be alledged in some persons certain as in such a man his Ancestors or Predecessors or those whose Estate he hath 22 H. 6. 22. A Prescription is always to be of such a thing and in such manner as may be intended to have a lawful and legal commencement or otherwise it is not good but a Custom may be contrary to the Rules and Maxims of the Law as Borough-English Gavelkind Copy-hold Tenures So Lands devisable by Custom So that the Custom be reasonable Co. 6. Gatewards case lib 5. Perimans Case None can prescribe but who hath Fee but all other Estates derived out of the Fee as Lessee for years Life or at Will ought to prescribe in him who hath the Fee Gatewards case ubi supra A Lord prescribed that he and all those whose Estates he hath in the Mannor have hitherto used to have a Herriot after the death of any Tenant for life or for years within the Mannor and good notwithstanding the Estates of the Tenants have no continuance 21 H. 7. 15. Prescription ought not to be in the Negative but if it be in the Negative with an Affirmative it is good 14 H. 6. 3. 22 H. 6. 36. 11 E. 4
because he cannot have the next Avoidance and so is the second part of Croke 691. Shelley's Case and that if one grants a third Avoidance and the Woman recovers that in Dower the Grantee shall have the fourth Co. 1. Inst agrees with three Cro. grantee of proximam Advocationem cannot have the second where one is granted before Dy. 35. a. b. 1 Inst 378. b. 379. a. 3. Cro. 790. 791. One had the Nomination of a Church to an Abbot and the Abbot to present the Church being in the King's hands he presented without nominating the Party may have a Quare Impedit against the Incumbent without naming the King for it lies not against the King and he that had the Nomination had the Patronage Vide Mo. pl. 147. Vide 14. H. 4. 11. He that has the Nomination brings the Writ Quod permittat nominari the Writ abated for it should have been nominare 1 H. 5. 1. b. Dy. 48. a. 1 Cro. Daviston against Yates F. N. B. 33. b. 14 H. 4. 11. Two Parceners the younger in Ward the Guardian marries the eldest and presents in both their Names the Church voids again and whether the elder Sister shall present as in her Turn for the younger quaere Dy. 55. a. The Jury finds the Church full of a Stranger presented by one not party to the Writ and that ex officio yet good Dy. 77. a. Co. 6. rep 52. a. In Quare Impedit one made Title to a fourth part of the Church in Grosle and that he presented and shewed that others were seised of the other three parts as appendant to certain Mannors and they presented and their Clerk dyed and so it belongs to him to present Dy. 78. b. Quare Impedit by the King the Bishop makes Title to a Stranger and he permitted a Lapse then the ordinary presented the Clerk pleads that he is Parson Imparsonee of the Presentment in causa forma preallegata It seems that the Plea by the Bishop that he presented c. is good enough though indeed he collated but the Clerk's Plea is per totam Curiam uncertain and void for in causa preallegata cannot refer to any thing in his own Plea because nothing alledged and to the Ordinary in cannot because to the Ordinary he is a Stranger not a Servant p. 14. H. 7. Pl. 4. Tr. 15. H. 7. Pl. 12. Quare Impedit by a Corporation the Defendant pleads that they are incorporated by another name and demands Judgment so where the Plaintiff goes but to the Right by Fitzherbert 't is ill sans doubt p. 26. H. 8. Pl. 3. a. In Quare Impedit he counts of an Avoidance by Deprivation and shews not how it became void or for what cause and that assigned for Error for it might be for Simmony or some such Cause that gives a Title to the King sed non alloc ' and Judgment was affirmed Episcopus Glouc ' against Veake 3 Cro. 678. Quare Impedit the Bishop claims nothing but as Ordinary the Writ good if a Writ against him immediate quaere the Plaintiff says he presented A. whom he refused he says he presented to the Church because litig ' if a Departure semble 't is for he intended to have pleaded it at first Tr. 5. H. 7. Pl. 3. In a Quare Impedit the Plaintiff claims by a grant of a next Avoidance by A. the Defendant says that A. was Tenant in Tail held of D. by Knights Service and describes the manner whereto c. and then usurped upon the Description and dyed his Heir within Age and the Lord granted the Ward to him adjudged the Plea not double tho the Usurper had Writ Remitter which was one thing and though the Grantee of the Ward should have the first present against the Grantor of the next Avoidance which is no more than a Lease for years which the Guardian shall avoid for his time and he have it after the Ward comes of Age for with pleading both he could not shew his Title Tr. 5. H. 7. pl. 3. Quare impedit and makes Title as appendant and that A. as Ancestor presents B. c. the Defendant protests 't is not appendant says that he presented D. c. The Plaintiff says that at the time he presented D. it was in Lease to E. the Defendant rejoyns that before the Lease his Ancestor presented I. 't is a Departure for he might at first have laid the Presentment in I. p. 10. H. 7. pl. 6. Tr. 11. H. 7. pl. 15. p. 27. H. 8. pl. 11. Quare Impedit for the King the Defendant pleads the Statute 25 E. 3. 1. That the King shall not present to any living in Auter droit but such as fall in his own time and if he do the Court is not to hold plea Judgment Si Curia cognoscere vult per Thurning This is a plea to the Action not merely to the Jurisdiction For pleas for the Jurisdiction of one Court give Jurisdiction to another which this does not 11 H. 4. 8. a. Quare Impedit and Counts of an Advowson appendant and makes Title to a Gift in Tayl the Defendant pleads the Donee in Tayl was seized of it in Gross and granted per Curiam illam admit it once Appendant and not shew how it after came to be in Gross 44 E. 3. 15. b. Quare Impedit to present to a Church in Somersetshire the Defendant pleads that the Land whereto the Plaintiff supposed it to be reputed parcel of the Mannor of S. in Devonshire Issue of both Counties tryed it Bend ' 26. Release IF Money be due upon Recognizance and the Counsor pay part and the Counsee give him a Release if the Release mentions not the Recognizance it shall release so much as paid only For the Recognizance is entire and being destroyed in part is destroyed in the whole If a man be bound to pay an 100 l. to another on such a day and he tender the same at the day he is not bound to pay the same on any other day unless the Obligee will give him an Acquittance or Release Replevin IN a Replevin the Defendant avoyed to distrein for Rent Charge granted in Tayl the Plaintiff says that an Ancestor of the Defendant whose Heir he is was seized of the Lands discharged of the Rent and gave to him with Warranty No Assetts descended adjudged an illlegal plea First because he pleads Warranty from an Ancestor and shewed not what whether lineal or collateral Nor Secondly because he pleads that he was seized of the Lands discharged of c. and shewed not how viz. by Union or otherwise H. 21 H. 7. pl. 11. Replevin avows Damage feasant barr that the place where his Acre called A. whereof he is seized of 100 l. and has Common in the Residue after Verdict moved the Blank in the Declaration makes all uncertain quid resid ' est sed non alloc ' 't is found there is a Residue and be it what it will he
Frauds and Perjuries 1. BY this Act it appears That if a Feoffment be made and Livery and Seisin duly executed although it were before many credible Witness as formerly the Law was yet unless it be put into Writing nothing shall pass thereby but an Estate at Will and in like manner all leases made by word for any longer time than three years or other Estates made or created without Writing are subject to the same Rule that is shall be only Estate at Will that are so made by Words without Writing after the 24 th of June 1677. 2. After the said 24 th of June 1677. No Executor or Administrator shall be charged with any special Promise to answer Damages out of their own Estates but only in Relation to the Testator having Assetts in their hands and that no other person shall be charged with any special promise to pay the Debt of another man or answer for the Default of any other or upon any Agreement of Marriage or for any Agreement for Lands or for any other commodity or thing not to be performed within one Year after the making of any such Agreement unless the same Promise Bargain or Agreement be set down in Writing and signed by the party to be charged therewith or by some other person lawfully authorised by him so to do 3. All Wills and Bequests of Lands Tenements c. after the said 24 th day of June 1677. shall be put into writing and subscribed by the Testator or some person else in his Presence and by his express Directions and attested and subscribed in the presence of three or four Witnesses other wise all such Gifts to be void all such Devises so made and subscribed by the Testatoror his Directions as aforesaid shall be good and stand effâ—ctual in the Law unless the Testator shall at any time cancell the Will or alter it by a subsequent Will 4. All Trusts shall be in Writing and signed by the Party declaring the Trust else to be void except such Trusts as arise by Implication of Law and Lands in Trust for the use of others shall be chargeable with the Judgment and lyable to the Execution sued out against Cestuque use 5. Aman seized of one Estate pur autre vie may devise the same by Will in manner afoâ—esaid and no such devise shall descend to the Heir that so died seized as Lands in Fee-simple should do and such Heir shall be chargeable therewith as a special Occupant and in case of no such special Occupancy then shall the Land descend to the Executors and Administrators 6. From and after the said day every Judgment shall be signed with the day of the Month and the Year in which such Judgment was Signed and the day of the Month and Year are to be entred on the Margin of the Plea-Role and they shall be accounted Judgments but from that day wherein they were so signed and not from the first day of the Term as formerly was used the like Rule for Recognizances 7. No Writ of Fieri facias or Writ of Execution shall after the property of Goods but from the day the Writ was delivered to the Sheriss to execute which day and year the Sheriff is to endoâ—se on the back-side of the Writ 8. No Bargain of Goods above the value of ten pounds shall stand good unless the Buyer take part of the Goods so sold into his Possession or give something in Earnest or that some Note or Memorandum be made thereof in Writing 9. No nuncupative Will whereby an Estate is bequeathed above the value of thirty pounds shall be good unless it shall be proved by three Witnesses at the least nor unless the Testator did bid the parties present bear witness that so was his Will or to such like effect nor unless such a Will was made in the time of the Testator's last Sickness and in his place of Habitation and unless he was surprised and taken sick from Home and that no Testimony shall be received to prove such Will after six Months unless the Testamentory Words were committed to Writing within six Days after the making of such Will 10. No words unless they are committed to Writing and read to the Testator and allowed by him and proved by three Witnesses to be his Will shall alter any Will in Writing concerning any Goods or Chattels or any Device or Bequest therein Trespass IF my Servant without my knowledge puts Beasts into another mans Ground the Servant is Trespasser and not the Master If a man beat my Servant I may have Trespass and my Servant another Action of Trespass diversis respectibus It is good to lay the Action some day after the Trespass committed yet it is not material or traversable if be laid before For it 's but a Circumstance As Trespass done the Fourth of May the Plaintiff alledgeth the First of May it 's sufficient if upon Evidence it be proved that the Trespass was done before the Action brought A Master is punishable for his Servant if he be about his Masters Business An Abbot for his Monk a Captain for his Souldier an Host for his Guess So a Sheriff for his Under-Sheriff and Bayliffs But a Master shall not be Punnished for Trespass of Battery or Entry into Lands or Felony or Murder or such like done by the Servant unless done by his Command If a Servant keeps his Master's Fire so negligent that it burns his Master's and the Neigbours House the Master is chargeable therewith A man is chargable with the Faults of his Family or of his Beasts If a Ship is perishing and the Marriners cast the Goods to save them on the Land next adjoyning yet this is Trespass and punishable by him that holds the Land A Servant may justifie the beating of another in Defence of his Master A Man shall not have his Action of Trespass for Threatning and recover Damage as well as in Assault and Battery The Law does not allow any man to strike in Revenge of Ill words and the reason is because there is no proportion between Words and Blows but he that is struck may strike again In Trespass he that consents and gives aid to the committing of Trespass is a Principal and no Accessary to the same Trespass If Tenant at Will commits voluntarily Waste Trespass lies against him notwithstanding his Possession so that if I deliver my Sheep to another to Fold or Dung his Land or a Horse to Ride or Oxen to Plow his Land If the Bailiff spoil or kill them I have an Action of Trespass against him notwithstanding the Delivery of them or Trover at his Election If a Man desseize me of my Land or dispossess me of my Goods yet I may enter upon the Land or take my Goods although I release to the party Disseizer or Trespasser all Actions yet this Release shall not Bar my Right No Trespass can be excused by Law but it may be justified as upon son assault demesne or
makes a Feoffment on Condition VVast is done and he enters for the Condition Lessor shall have wast fo if Lessee of a Bishop commits wast in time of Vacancy the Successor shall have the Action so if Tenant for Life be disseised and wast is done and the Tenant re-enters Lessor shall have wast yet he had no Reversion Note 't is no plea for Lessee in wast to say generally that Lessor had no Reversion c. but must shew how he lost it But in wast by Assignee of the Reversion such Plea general is good vid. 39 E. 3. 19. 20. Wast by Successor of a Bishop or wast done in the Predecessors time quaere sc bon for laid ad exheredationem Ecclesiae Co. 1. Inst 356. a. vid. 1. H. 4. 26. Opinion that Successor of an Abbot or Prior shall have wast for wast done in the Predecessors time or if a Bishop Parson c. that can make Executors Vid. 71 E. 3. 53. b. 43 E 3. 8. 49 E. 3. 26. Successor of an Abbot not chargable for wast of a Predecessor In wast if the Plaintiff's Reversion determine either before or pendant the Suit his Action is gone but if it be pendente the Suit it must be so specified Ewer against Moyle Yel 141. In Wast the Plaintiff declares Quod cùm seisitus fuit and let for years the Defendant had wasted and though not said of what Estate seised so it might be for Life yet being ad exheredationem and that alledging of Seizin but Surplus held by most good enough Sir Walter Astoâ— against Sweten hall 3 Cro. 47. Wast assigned in the house where it appears the Plaintiff has but two parts of the Reversion yet good he cannot assign it otherways Wast inquired of by the Sheriff where it was confessed by Nihil dicit yet no Error Warnford against Haydock 3 Cro. 290. Wast against a Husband Tenant for life in right of his Wife dead not being in the Tenet or Tenuit ill also the Writ is Quod fecit vastum and being in her right it should have been fecerunt vastum But by Co. 1. Inst this Wast is dispunishable by her death otherwise if it had been a term for years Co. 1. Inst 54. P. Note the Estate was made to the use of the Wife for Life yet Action lyes Sackervil against Bagnell Con. to Dr. and Student Co. 3. Cro. 356. 357. In wast the plaintiff prayed a writ of Etrepement against the Tenant and his Servants and at last a Warrant against both though doubted at first if it lye in this Action though it do in Writ of Entry c. Anderne against Anderne 3 Cro. 393. F. N. B. 61. In a Writ of Entry sur disseisin done to himself the plaintiff prayed a writ of Etrepement doubted if allowable because in that Action he is to recover Damages but because Non constat whether the Tenant be able to satisfie him if he pull down his Houses granted Wright against Pearcy 3 Cro. 484. 774. Tenant in cutting three hundred Oaks Defendant as to two hundred justifies that the House was ruinous and he cut and employed them in repairs and for the other hundred he cut them to have them ready to repair Tempore opportuno adjudged an ill Plea on Demurrer for so every Lessee might â—ut where there is no Necessity Grey against Stanfeild 3 Cro. 593. vid. 498. 499. Waâ—t the writ was general and that the woman held c. ex dimissione A. her former Husband and counted that A. enfeoffed B. to the intent a Rocovery be had against him to the use of A. for Life Remainder to the woman for Life which was done accordingly and for this Judgment against the Plaintiff for the writ ought to have been recited for the Husband could not let to the Wife but she is in by the Husband and so has the Estate from the Feoffee Green feild against Dennis 3 Cro. 722. A. le ts to B. B. assigns to C. and D. D. assigns to E. except the Trees then 't is enacted by Parliament that the Heir of the Body of A. shall have the Land A. being dead leaving three Daughters who took Husbands one of them dyes the other two and their Husbands quitt the Tenant by the Curtesie brings wast against C. and E. in the Term the Term being ended adjudged first the Writ good notwithstanding the setling the Estate by the Statute without shewing the special Title and secondly without joyning the Tenant by the Curtesie because he not intitled to the Damages non locum vastat And thirdly the Writ supposes quod tenuerunt which implies a Joynt-tenancy now they appear Tenants in Common good because the Land at first one and entire but if wast can be committed in the Trees excepted by the Lessee not agreed but in Co. 5. Rep. adjudged it does and the Exception void Sir Roger Leuknor against Freed 1 Leon. 48. 3. Cro. 17. Co. 6. Rep. 12. b. Lessee for Life and he in Reversion make a Lease wast is committed they shall joyn and Tenant for Life recover Locum vastatum and he in Reversion the damages Lessee for Life Sans Impeachment c. Wast is committed by a Stranger the Lessee in Trespass shall recover no Damages for the Trees cut but only for the Entry for the property of the Trees remaining in the Lessor 1 Leon. 49. Co. 1. Inst 42. a. p. 27. H. 8. p. 36. Lease of Lands exceptis arboribus grossis super Praemissa crescentibus Trees then little grow great and are cut if wast Semble non per Anderson for they were excepted whereas great and not only what were great at the time of the Lease Garrock versus Cliffe 1 Leon. 61. A. le ts to B. for years and during the Term le ts to C. for years by Indenture to commence presently B. commits wast A. brings a Writ against B. the Defendant cannot plead nul wast nor can he plead that the Lessor had nothing for the Plaintiff will estop him by the Indenture and though the Count be general of a Lease and says not per Indenturam yet a Replication that by Indenture is no departure but a coroborating of the Declaration 1 Leon. 156. Tenant for Life is disseised and Disseisor commits wast he in Reversion shall maintain an Action of wast against Tenant for Life yet note that by the disseisin the Reversion was out of him 1 Leon. 264. If wast be assigned in a whole wood sparsim if the Jury have view of the out-side of the wood 't is good without entring and viewing of every part and so of a house otherwise if the wast were assigned in certain part of the wood or Rooms in the house 1 Leon. 267. Feoffment to the use of himself and wife for Life Remainder to his own Heir he dyes she commits wast the Writ must be general Quas tenet de hereditate c. non ex dimissione for she comes in by the Statute 2 Leon. 222. vid. Co. Entr.
a Chest By which he lost his Marriage with A. D. c. I. S. shall have an Action for these words 2 Cro. 323. Mathews Case Mich. 12. Jac. B. R. Sell against Fairee per Cur. To say to a Woman Thou art a Whore I will marr thy Marriage by which she loseth her Marriage an Action lyes Trin. 22 Jac. B. R. Tonson against Spring adjudged upon Arrest of Judgment In Action upon the Case if the Plaintiff declare that she hath many Wooers to marry her and that the Defendant said of her She is with Child and hath taken Physick for it whereby she came into Disgrace Et perdidit consortium vicinorum suorum c. Although that it be not alledged that she lost any Marriage thereby yet the Action lyes Mich. 21. Jac. B. R. Medhurst against Balam adjudged in Arrest of Judgment If a man saith to an other Thou wast found in Bed with J. S. his Wife by reason of the speaking of which words he lost his Marriage with A. S. c. Although that he might be in Bed with her without any ill done yet because that it sounds in Disgrace and he hath lost his Marriage by it the Action lyes Mich. 8. Car. B. R. Southal against Dawson adjudg'd in Arrest of Judgment If the Plaintiff in an Action of the Case for words declare that the Defendant said of him He had the use of my Wife's Body by Force by reason of which words he was brought before certain Justices c. and examined by them for a Rape committed by him upon the said Woman whereupon to purge himself thereof he expended divers Sums of Money an Action lyes upon this Deelaration for the temporal Dimage he had thereby Mich. 9. Car. B. R. Harris against Smith adjudged upon Writ of Error In Action upon the Case if the plaintiff declares that in London by the Custom a Common Whore ought to be carted and a Bason rung before her And that the Defendant spoke these words of the Plaintiff Thou art a Whore and a common Whore and art a Bawd to thy Mistress and I will have a Bason tinged before thee the Action well lyes upon this Declaration for these Words Trin. 15. Car. B. R. Hassell against Capcot adjudged in Arrest of Judgment In Action upon the Case if the Plaintiff declare that in London there is a Custom that a Bawd ought to be carted and the Defendant said these words of the Plaintiff She is a Bawd and I will have her carted Hill 15 Car. B. R. Riley against Lewes adjudged in Arrest of Judgment If the Plaintiff declares in an Action upon the Case that whereas he was a Parishoner of S. the Defendant being Vicar there to the intent to scandalize the plaintiff and to create an evil opinion of the plaintiff among his Neighbours so that they Abstraherent seipsos à consortio of the plaintiff tanquam ab homine excommunicato nulla fide aut credentia digno and to exclude the Plaintiff injustly from the Church and for a long time to deprive him of the benefit of hearing divine Service in the said Church the Defendant in time of divine Service in the Church in the hearing of the parishioners maliciously pronounced the plaintiff excommunicated Praetextu cujusdam Instrumenti by him received from the Ordinary whereas he never had any such Instrument of Excommunication nor was he excommunicated And also at another time to the same Intent aforesaid in time of Divine Service in the hearing of the parishoners maliciously pronounced the plaintiff excommunicated and refused farther to celebrate divine Service until the plaintiff departed out of the Church whereupon the plaintiff was compelled to go out of the Church whereas the plaintiff was not excommunicated whereby the plaintiff was scandalized and hindred from hearing Divine Service for a long time and for the clearing of this Scandal and of his Innocency therein Diversos corporis sui grandes labores capere diversas ingentes denariorum summas errogare exponere coactus fuit in extremam depauperationem ignominium maximum of the plaintiff This Action lyes notwithstanding he doth not shew that any person did avoid his Company or refused to trade or deal with him and notwithstanding he doth not set forth any temporal or spiritual loss for it is a great Scandal and malicious tho to his Soul and spiritual Mich. Car. B. R. Barnabas against Traunter Adjudged in Arrest of Judgment If a man saith of another who hath lands by discent That he is a Bastard an Action upon the Case lyes for it tends to his Disinheritance and disturbance by Suit Mich. 3. Jac. B. R. per Curiam In an Action upon the Case if the plaintiff declare that he was Heir apparent to his Father and B. his Brother and that either of them hath Lands in Fee to the value of 40 l. per annum and that they did intend to suffer the said Lands to descend to him or to convey the same to him yet the defendant intending to disinherit the plaintiff said to the plaintiff Thou art a Bastard whereby his Father and Brother intended to disinherit him and to convey their Lands to another The Action lyes upon this Declaration for the temporal damage which might come to him thereby Pasch 13. Car. B. R. Humfries against Stutfield Adjudged in Arrest of Judgment Where there was Grand-father Father and Son and the Son brought an Action upon the Case and declared that the Grand-father whose heir he is entailed certain Lands upon him and the Heirs males of his Body and the Defendant intending to scandalize his possibility that he hath to inherit this Land as Heir of the body of his Grand-father said that he was a Bastard notwithstanding that the Grand-father and Father were alive yet the Action brought as above by the Son did lye Humfries Case ubi supra In an Action upon the Case if the Plaintiff declare that he exhibited Articles in the Kings Bench against the defendant for the good abearing and swear the Articles to be true before Justice W. Innuendo the said Oath taken upon the said Articles although it be not averr'd that the Oath was taken of Record yet the Action lyes for it shall be intended the Articles exhibited in Court and sworn before a Justice of the Court Mich. 10. Car. B. R. Yolden against Wannel Adjudged in Arrest of Judgment If a man saith of an other He hath written a forged Will wherein I will prove him salse forsworn and perjur'd in a Will that he made of John Hunt an Action lyes for these words for it shall be intended that he was perjur'd in his Oath taken touching the said Will. Hil. 12. Car. in B. R. Cowley against Clough In an Action upon the Case if the plaintiff declare that there was a Writ to inquire of Damages between A. and B. in a Court of C. at the Sessions-house where he was sworn to give Evidence according to his Knowledge