206 Lord Cheneys case Cases of Usury fol. 208 Buttons case Claytons case fol. 208 Hoes case St. Johns case fol. 209 Williams case Case of Orphanes of London Wymarks case fol. 210 Cliftons case fol. 211 Pilkintons case Earl of Pembrooks case Pagets case fol. 212 Boothes case fol. 213 Samons case Grayes case Fitz Herberts case fol. 214 Fords case Case of of customs Snellings case fol. 215 Case of Market Overt Perimans case Sir Henery Knevits case fol. 216 Pennrins case Cases of Executions Blumfields case fol. 217 Garnons case fol. 218 Frosts case fol. 219 Hoes case fol. 220 Semaynes case fol. 221 Barwicks case fol. 223 Goodalls case Countesse of Northumberl case Buries case fol. 224 Flowers case Rookes case fol. 225 Penruddocks case fol. 226 Windsors case Hungats case fol. 227 Bakers case Boulstons case fol. 228 Aldens case Sir Henry Constables case fol. 229 Foxleyes case fol. 230 Malaries case Wades case fol. 232 Foliambs case Olands case Pynners case fol. 233 Edriches case fol. 234 Whelpdales case Longs case fol. 235 Saffins case De libellis Famosis fol. 236 Palmers case Caudreys case fol. 237 The Sixth Booke BReuertons case fol. 239 Markals case fol. 240 Sir John Molins case fol. 241 Wheelers case Ferrers case fol. 242 Spencers case fol. 243 Gentlemans case Morrices case Cases of Pardon fol. 244 Arundels case fol. 245 Treports case Edens case Colyers case fol. 246 Wildes case Sir Edward Cleers case fol. 247 Packmans case fol. 248 Gregories case Michelborns case fol. 249 Butler and Goodalls case Ambrosia Gorges case fol. 250 Marquesse of Winchester his case Reades case Helyars case fol. 251 Ruddocks case Sharps case fol. 252 The case of Souldiers Vicont Mountagues case fol. 353 Greenes case fol. 254 Boothies case Fitz Willams case fol. 255 Bishop of Baths case fol. 256 Dean and Chapter of Worcesters case fol. 257 Bellamyes case Henery Finches case fol. 257 Sir Anthony Mildmay Blakes case fol. 258 Higgins case Dowdales case fol. 259 Boswels case fol. 260 Countesse of Rutlands case fol. 261 Lord Chandows case Bredimans case fol. 262 Gatewards case fol. 263 Catesbies case fol. 264 Sir Moyle Finches case fol. 265 Lord Darcies case fol. 266 Burrels case Sir Drue Druries case fol. 267 Sir Gorge Cursons case fol. 268 Bullens case Lord Abergavennies case Sir Edward Phittons case fol. 269 The Seventh Booke CAlvins case fol. 271 Bulwers case fol. 273 Sir Miles Corbets case fol. 274 Gendils case fol. 275 Milbornes case Earle of Bedfords case Oghtreds case fol. 276 Englefields case fol. 277 Case of Swannes fol. 279 Sir Thomas Cecills case Lord Andersons case fol. 280 Butts case fol. 281 Cases of Quare Impedit Halls case fol. 282 Sir Hugh Portmans case Baskervills case fol. 283 Mauds case Discontinuance of processe by the death of the Queen fol. 284 Case of a Fine levied by the King fol. 285 Nevils case Penall Statutes fol. 286 Lillingtons case Bedels case fol. 287 Beresfoeds case Kenns case fol. 288 The Eighth Booke THe Princes case fol. 291 Calyes case Paynes case fol. 293 Barretry Greysleyes case fol. 294 Whittinghams case fol. 295 Jehu Webbs case fol. 296 Sims case fol. 297 Roger Earl of Rutlands case fol. 298 Beechers case fol. 299 Swaines case Sir William Fosters case fol. 300 Lovedayes case Crogates case fol. 301 Trollops case fol. 302 Whitlocks case Greenlyes case fol. 303 Lord Staffords case fol. 305 Wiat Weilds case fol. 306 Vinyors case Sir Richard Pexals case fol. 307 Buckmers case fol. 308 Frauncis case fol. 309 Foxes case fol. 310 Mannings case fol. 311 Baspoles case Sir Richard Lechfords case fol. 312 Talbots case fol. 313 Doctor Bonhams case fol. 314 Case of the City of London Case of Thetford Schoole fol. 316 Turnors case fol. 317 Shiplyes case Sir John Nedhams case fol. 318 Sir Francis Barringtons case fol. 319 Doctor Druries case fol. 320 Davenports case The Six Carpenters case fol. 321 Edwards Althams case fol. 323 Arthur Blackamores case fol. 324 Cases in the court of wards Myghts case fol. 326 Digbies case Earl of Cumberlands case Paris Stoughters case fol. 327 Toursons case Sir Gerard Fleetwods case fol. 328 Hales case Sir Henry Constables case fol. 329 Virgill Parkers case fol. 336 The Ninth Booke DOwmans case fol. 331 Anna Beddingfields case fol. 332 Case of Avowry fol. 333 The Abbot of Strata Marcella his case fol. 334 Bucknals case Henslowes case fol. 336 Earle of Shrewsburies case fol. 339 Hickmots case fol. 340 Batens case fol. 341 The Poulters case Aldreds case fol. 342 Lambs case fol. 343 Bradshawes case Mackallies case fol. 344 Peacocks case fol. 346 Doctor Husse case fol. 347 Combs case fol. 348 Petoes case fol. 349 Agnes Gores case Coneys case fol. 351 Pinchons case fol. 352 Banes case fol. 354 Sir George Reynels case fol. 355 Podgers case fol. 356 Treshams case fol. 357 Marys case fol. 358 Lord Sanchars case fol. 359 Cases in the Court of wards Lawes case fol. 360 Floyers case fol. 362 Sondayes case Quicks case fol. 363 Bewleys case Holts case fol. 364 Menes case fol. 365 Ascoughs case fol. 366 Thorogoods case fol. 367 Beaumonts case fol. 368 The Tenth Book THe case of Suttons Hospitall fol. 371 Portingtons case fol. 374 Lampets case fol. 375 Case of the Chancellor Masters Scholars of the University of Oxford fol. 378 Bishop of Salisburies case fol. 379 Whistlers Case Church-wardens Case of St. Saviours in Southwark fol. 381 The Case of the Marshalsea in false imprisonment fol. 382 Loveis Case in Ejectione ferme fol. 384 Doctar Leyfields Case fol. 387 Seymors Case fol. 389 Bewfages Case fol. 391 Denbawds Case in Error fol. 396 Lofields case in debt upon bond fol. 397 Legats Case fol. 398 Pilfolds Case fol. 399 Cheyneyes Case fol. 400 Case of the Major and Burgesse of Lin fol. 401 Cluns Case fol. 402 Osborns Case fol. 403 Read and Redmans case fol. 404 Richard Smiths Case fol. 405 Cases upon the Commissions of Sewers Case of Chester Mille Keighleys case fol. 406 The Case of the Isle of Elie fol. 407 Scroops Case fol. 409 The Eleventh Book THe Lord Delawares case fol. 411 Auditor Curles case fol. 412 Sir John Heydons case fol. 413 Priddle and Nappers case fol. 414 Doctor Grants Case fol. 416 Sir Henry Nevils case fol. 417 Doctor Ayrays Case fol. 417 Henry Harpurs case fol. 418 Henry Pigots case fol. 420 Alexand. Poulters case fol. 420 Metcalfes case fol. 423 Richard Godfreyes case fol. 425 Richard Lifords case fol. 426 The Taylors of Ipswich case fol. 428 Edward Savels case fol. 429 Benthams case fol. 429 Doctor Fosters case fol. 429 Magdalen Colledge case fol. 432 Lewis Bowles case fol. 34 The Case of Monopolies fol. 436 The Earle of Devonsh case fol. 437 James Bagges case fol. 438 THE FIRST BOOK The Lord Buckhursts Case 40. El. fo 1. IF a man for him and his heires do warrant Land to one and his heires this is a generall warrantie because there is not
part and Sir Gilb. Ger. and others on the same part for the advancement of the Heires Males of the said Earle the Earle did covenant c. to convey the said Mannor amongst others to the said Lord Burgleigh Sir Gilb. Gerrard and others or to any of them before the Feast of the Annunciation of our Lady next ensuing which Assurance should be to the use of the said Earle Edward and the Heires Males of his body and for want of such issue to the use of the Heires Males of Thomas Earle of Rutland with divers remainders over and in the same Indenture the said Earle Edward did Covenant c. to stand seised to the uses contained in the second Indenture No fine or other assurance was leavyed or made by the said Earle Edward before the end of Trinity Tearme Afterwards Viz. 17. Septemb. next following the said Earle Edward acknowledged a note of a fine of the said Mannor of Eikering onely to Sir Gilb. Gerrard and Thomas Ho and the Heires of Sir Gilb. And the 18. day of the said Moneth acknowledged another â—ote of a fine of the said Mannor of Eckering amongst many other Mannors mentioned in the later Indenture to the Lord Burghley Sir Gil. Gerrard and other parties to the later Indenture and both fines were entered in Octabis Mich. next after And it was proved by diverse testimonies that the said Earle Edward as well before the Indentures as after the fine leavyed said that the said Countesse should have the Mannor of Eckering And it was resolved by Popham chiefe Justice and all the Court. First although the Indenture being made for declaring of uses of a subsequent fine recovery or other conveyance to certaine persons and within a certaine time and to certaine uses yet they are but onely directory and doe not binde the estate or inerest of the Land yet if the fine recovery or other assurance be persued according to the Indenture there cannot be any averrment made against the Indentures taken in this Case that after the making of the Indentures and before the assurance by mutuall agreement of the parties was concluded and agreed that the assurance should be to other uses but if other agreement or limitation of uses be made by writing or by other matter of as high or higher nature then the later agreement should stand for every contract or agreement ought to be dissolved by matter of as high nature as the first was Nil tamconveniens est naturali aequitati quam unum quodq dissolui eo ligamine quo ligatum est Also it was very inconvenient that matters in writing should be controuled by averrment of parties to be proved by incertaine testimony of slippery memory and should be perillous to purchasors Farmers c. 2. It was resolved that if the forme of the Indentures be not pursued as for quantity of Land the time within which the fine should be leavyed c. Averrment without writing may be taken that the fine c was to other use then was contained in the Indenture by reason of a new agreement subsequent which in this case may be as well by word as writing 3. It was resolved that although the indentures be not pursued in circumstance of time quantity person c. yet if no other meanes new agreement be proved the fine c. in judgement of Law shall be to the use named in the Indenture The fines cannot be directed by both the Indentures although perhaps it was the meaning of the parties because the directions and declarations of the first Indenturs were controuled and frustrated by the said second Indentures Cases of Executors Russells Case 26. Eliz. fo 27. banco regis A Release by an Infant Executor under the Age of 21. yeares is no bar but upon payment or satisfaction to an Infant Executor he may acquite and discharge the Debt for so much as he receiveth All things that he doth according to the Office and duty of an Executor shall binde him an Executor may release before probate of Testament for although he may not have an Action yet the Interest of the Action is in Law in him at the time of the release Middletons Case 1. Ja. in com banco fo 28. IT was adjudged betweene Middleton and Rymot that an Executor before probate may release action although that before the probate he may not have action for the right of the Action is in him but if A. release and after take administration that shall not barr him for the right of the Action was not in him at the time of the release Two Executors prove the Testament the third refuseth yet he may release Littlet 117. if one be bound to pay a summe of money at a day to come a release of actions before the day is a Bar and yet before the day he could have no action Harrisons Case 40. Eliz. fo 28. com banco IT was adjudged that a judgement upon Debt due by obligation shall be paid before a Statute made for performance of Covenants which are things in contingency and in future or other Statutes or recognizances for Debt vide Sadlers Case in the Fourth Booke although the judgement be after the acknowledgment of the Statute Piggots Case 40. Eliz. com banco fo 29. ONe bringeth Debt as administrator Durante minore aetate of one whhom he averr'd to be within age and he doth not say that he was within the age of 17. yeares and the Plaintiffe was barred because at that age the Administration ceaseth Princes Case 41 42. Eliz. com banco fo 29. AN Infant is made Executor Administration durante minori etate may be committed to the Mother or other Friend of the Infant which shall cease and be voyd when the Infant is at the age of 17. yeares and this administrator may not sell any goods of the Decest unlesse it be for necessity of payment of Debts for he hath his Office of administrator Pro bono commodo Infantis and not for his prejudice also he cannot assent to pay legacies unlesse there be assents to pay Debts c. and if it be a Woman under the age of 17. yeares and take a Husband of full age the Administration ceaseth Where one hath goods solely in an inferior Dioces yet the Metropolitan of that Province pretending that he had Bona notabilia in diverse Diocesses committed the Administration c. this Administration is not voyd but voidable by sentence because the Metropolitan hath Jurisdiction in all places within his Province but if the ordinary of one Diocesse commit the administration of goods when the party hath Bona notabilia in diverse Diocesse this administration is meerly voyd as well for his goods within the Diocesse as without vide Vere Jeffrays Case 22. Eliz. in banck le roy there cited and so adjudged Caulters Cose fo 30. 40. 41. Eliz. banco regis AN Executor in his owne wrong ought not to retaine goods in his owne hands to satisfie
Lands to the use of himselfe and of the heires males of his body And for default thereof to the use of the Queene her heires and successors After the Tenant in tayle in possession suffereth a common recoverie with voucher And whether it was a barre to the issue in tayle was the question And it was adjudged that the issue in tayle was barred for good considerations are too general to raise any use without speciall averment that valuable or other good consideration was given Resolved that the Land should continue in his name and bloud is not a consideration to raise a use to the Queene though the limitation to her were for the preservation of the tayle against discontinuances and barres for there wants quid pro quo Resolved if he had said in consideration that the Queene is the head of the weale publique and hath the care and charge as well to preserve peace as for to repell hostility yet 't is no good consideration for Kings ex officio ought to governe their Subjects in tranquillity which is implyed in the word King And admit the consideration had been sufficient to raise a use to the Queene yet that would not preserve the estate tayle by force of the Act 34. H. 8. for no estate tayle is preserved by the said Act except the same estate tayle be of the creation or provision of the King and not where the estate tayle is given or created of a common person without provision of the King as may appeare by the preamble of the Act. Resolved that before the Statute of 34. H. 8. a common recovery barred a tayle created by the King Lanes Case 29. Eliz. fo 16. THe Queene seised of a Mannor in right of her Crowne by her Steward granted coppie-hold Lands parcell thereof to one by coppie according to the custome in Fee And after the Queene under the Exchequer Seale made a Lease of the same Lands to another for 21. yeares who granted the same Tearme to the coppie-holder and after the Queene reciting the Lease for yeares granted the reversion thereof in Fee the Tearme of 21. yeares expired The Patentee of the reversion entreth upon the coppie-holder and the entrie was adjudged good Resolved that the Lease under the Exchequer Seale was good by the usage there for the course of every Court is as a law of which the common law takes notice without alledging of it in pleading and every Court at Westminster is bound to take notice of the Customes of other Courts otherwise of Courts in the Countrey and the order of Exchequer is to make Leases by Committimus such land Resolved that the estate of the Coppie-holder was determined by the acceptance of the Lease for yeares And so it was adjudged against the Coppie-holder for notwithstanding that the Coppie-holders estate is taken to be but an estate at will yet the custome hath so established the estate of the Coppieholder that he is not removeable at the will of the Lord so long as he performes his customes and services and by the same reason the Lord cannot determine his interest by any act that he can doe And so it hath been adjudged many times And the aceptance of this Lease was the proper act of the Coppie-holder Resolved that by the severance of the free-hold from the Mannor the Coppiehold estate is not extinguished Baldwyns Case 31. Eliz. fo 23. THings which lye in grant and take their essence and effect by delivery of a Deed without other ceremony as rent or common out of Lands c. by the premisses of the Deed to one and his heires habendum to the grantee for yeares or life this habendum is repugnant to the premisses for the Fee passeth by the premises by the delivery of the Deed and therefore the habendum is voyd And when a man giveth Lands by Deed in Fee by the premisses habendum to the Lessee for life there the habendum is voyd and when livery is made the effect of the Deed shall be taken the most strongly against the Feoffor and the best for the Feoffee When a ceremony is requisite to the perfection of an estate in the premisses limitted and to the estate limitted in the habendum no ceremony is requisite but onely the delivery of the Deed although the habendum be of meaner estate then the premisses the habendum shall stand good and qualifie the generalitie of the premisses as a Fee granted in the premisses habendum for yeares it is for yeares and no inheritance Note There is a diversity betwixt the estate implied in the premisses and expressed as if A. grant a rent to B. this is an estate for life but if the habendum be for yeares this is good and qualifies the implication of the premisses Case of Bankrupts 31. Eliz fo 25. REsolved that a grant or assignement of goods by a Bankrupt after the Commission awarded which is matter of Record of which every one ought to take notice and though to a Creditor in satisfaction of his debt is voyd and that a sale of such goods by the Commissioners is good Which sale by the Statute of 13. of the Queene ought to be equall to every one rate and rate like according to the quantity c. And the Court resolved that the proviso in the said Statute concerning gifts bona fide doth not make any gift good but excludes them out of the penalty c. Commissioners may sell by Deed without Inrollment and though they have not seene the goods agreed that the distribution ought to be severall not joynt for the one debt may be greater then the other and in this case the Jury found that the Commissioners sold the goods to three Creditors joyntly but further that the Bankrupt was indebted to them in 273. pounds which shall be intended a joynt debt and so good Resolved that the act giveth benefit to such as will come and not to them that refuse vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt and every Creditor may take notice of the Commission being matter of Record Bettisworths Case 33. Eliz. in communi Banco fo 31. A Lease for yeares was made of one Messuage one Close called Raynolds and of divers other Lands in Dale and afterwards the Lessee being in the house the Lessor entred into the same Close and maketh a Feoffment of the Messuage and of the Lands therewith demised and maketh livery in the same Close and afterwards the Lessee reentreth into the said Close And if this was a good Feoffment and livery of seison of the said Close the Lessee nor any for him being in the said Close was the question And it was adjudged that the livery and seison was voyd as well for the Close as for the Messuage and the other Land therewith demised For the Possession of the Messuage which is his Castle is a good possession of the Lands therewith demised and it matters not whether livery be made on the Land within view of the
prescribe In modo decimandi but not In non decimando And the reason is because he is not except in speciall Cases capable of Tythes at the common Law before the Statute of 32. H. 8. Cap. 7. And therefore without speciall matter shewing it shall not be intended that he hath any Lawfull discharge and in favour of the Holy Church although it may have a lawfull comencement the Law will not suffer this prescription In non decimando to put it to the Tryall of lay men which sooner will straine their conscience for their private benefit then render to the Church the duty which belongeth to it A spirituall person that was capable of Tythes at the common Law in pernancy may prescribe to be discharged of Tythes generally or to have a portion of Tythes in the Land of another Before the Counsell of Lateran every man might give his tythes to any spirituall person that he would and if the Lands of the Bishop were discharged in his hands absolutely by prescription the demising it to a lay man cannot make it chargeable and the Bishop might reserve the greater Rent And in discharge of Tythes the Judges of our Law doe know that the Ecclesiasticall Judges will not allow any such allegation and therefore a Traverse Absque hoc quod judices placitum c. recusarunt is insufficient for the refusall is not materiall for the party might have a prohibition before any plea pleaded by him but in some Cases the refusall is traversable as t was adjudgd in Morris and Eatons Case where t was pleaded that the plaintiffe did not read the Articles c. and that the Ecclesiasticall Judge refused this Plea But the truth is a man may prescribe that hee and all others whose estate he hath in the mannor of D. time out of remembrance have paid to the parson of C. for the time being one certaine pension yearly for the maintenance of Divine service there in contentation of all Tythes renewing or happening within the same Mannor and prescribe in respect of the pension payd c. to have all the Tythes within c. and this was adjudgd good in Banco Regis Mich. 39. Et. 40. El. Rotulo 199. And that a lay-person may sue for the Tythes c. For at the beginning it shall be intended that the Lord was seised of the whole Mannor before any tenancy was derived out of the same and then by composition or other lawfull meanes the Lord had all the Tythes within the Mannor for the said Pension paying to the parson and the Law intends it was for Divine service Et pro bono Ecclesiae the reason of whch intendment is the continuall usage time out of remembrance And upon such speciall matter a man might have Tythes as appurtenant to a Mannor for he prescribes in a Que estate in the Mannor and therefore cannot have them in grosse but t was adjudged Winscombs Case in a prohibition that a man cannot prescribe generally in him and all those c. to have Tythes appurtenant to a Mannor without speciall matter shewne because Tythes are due Jure divino The Arch-Bishop of Canterburies Case 38. Of the Queene fo 46. A Religious house in M. was given to E. 6. by the Statute of 1. E. 6. a Rectory which was impropriated to it was granted to the Arch-Bishop of Canturbury who leased to the Defendant and Land within M. parcell of the said Colledge came to the Lord Cobham and from him to the Plaintiffe who shewes that the Master of the Colledge was seised of the said Land and Rectorie Simul semel as well at the making of 31. H 8. as of 1. E. 6. Resolved that this Colledge came to the King by 1. E. 6. onely for when 31. H. 8. speakes of dissolution renouncing relinquishing forfeiture giving up which are inferior meanes by which c. or by any other meanes cannot be intended of an act of Parliament which is the highest manner of conveyance that can be and the makers would have placed this in the beginning if they had intended it Bishops are not included within 13 of the Queene which begins with Colledges Deanes and Chapters c. Also 1. E. 6. Enacts that all Colledges by this Parliament shall be in actuall possession of the King which last act being of as high nature as the first it cannot come to the King by 31. H. 8. and it was never pleaded that of Colledges which came by 1. E. 6. the King was seised Vigore of the Statute of 31. H. 8. Resolved that neither the Act nor the meaning of 31. H. 8. extends to other Colledges then to those which came to the King by 31. H. 8. for it should be absurd that a Branch of the act of 31. H. 8. should extend to a future Act of which the makers of 31. without a spirit of prophecy could not have foreknowledge and the Act of 31. concludes in as large manner as the late Abbots c. which late as it hath been agreed extends onely to those to be dissolved by 31. Resolved admitting that the Colledge had come to the King by 31. H. 8. that such a generall allegation of unity of possession of the Rectory and the Land with it was not sufficient for no unity shall be sufficient but lawfull and perpetuall unity of possession time out of minde as 't was adjudged in Knightly and Spencers case and that the generall allegation of the plaintiffe that the Master of the Colledge at the making of 1. E. 6. held the Land discharged is not good without shewing how either by prescription composition or other lawfull meanes as 't is adjudged in the Bishop of Winchesters case otherwise if the Land had come by 31. then by force of the said branch of discharge such generall allegation had been good Resolved that no Ecclesiasticall house except religious was within the Statute of 31. H. 8. Resolved that though 1. E. 6. saith that the King shall have the lands of Colledges in as ample and large manner as the said Priests c. enjoyed the same yet these generall words doe not discharge the land of any tythes for they doe not issue out of the land for a Prior had tythes against his own Feoffment of the Mannor and 't is no good cause of prohibition to alledge unity of possession in a Colledge which came to the King by 1. E. 6. as 't is upon 31. H. 8. in Abbyes c. For the Statute of 1. E. 6. hath no such clause of discharge of payment of tythes as 31. hath and therefore such perpetuall unity will not serve upon 1. E. 6. So 't was likewise resolved betwixt Greene and Buffkin Sir Hugh Cholmleys case 39. of the Queene fo 50. TEnant in Taile the remainder in taile the remainder bargaines and sells the Land and all his estate to J. S. to have for the life of Tenant in taile the remainder to the Queene c. upon condition that the
for the intended recompence and if the wife and the issue had joyned in a Fine this had barred the taile so if the wife had surrendered the issue might have suffered a recovery H. 39. of the Queene the case was that the younger Sonne tenant in taile by devise was vouched in a recovery suffered by a woman tenant for life by the same devise and this was to the use of the vouchee and his heires who dyed and 't was adjudged that the Sister of the vouchee by the intire bloud shall have it not the elder brother that the recovery was not within 14 of the Queene though suffered by tenant for life and the Statute says that it shall be utterly voyd for 't was not the intent that the Act should extend to a recovery in which he in remainder in taile was vouched who had an estate that might continue for ever and had the power to docke all the remainders so here this Statute doth not extend to this warranty because c. Resolved when the first issue disables himselfe for to take advantage of the forfeiture and dyes his issue shall never take benefit of it because he was not in rerum natura nor had the immediate interest at the time and this was Sir George Brownes case before where the issue in taile in the life of his Mother tenant in speciall taile levied a Fine without proclamations and here if error were in the recovery the warranty barres him of his action because he himselfe by his own act hath barred his entry But here if the wife had released c. after the death of the issue his issue might have avoyed the warranty Note Reader it seemes to me if in such case a woman levies a Fine or suffers a recovery though the daughter enters or not and though she joynes in the Fine or is vouched in the recovery or by any other act disables her selfe yet the Sonne borne after shall take advantage of it for entry upon this Act of 11. H. 7. is not like entry upon the Statute of 6. R. 2. ca ' 6. For there the daughter by expresse words hath it as a perquisite but upon 11. H. 7. per formam doni Resolved if tenant in taile in of another estate suffer a common recovery and a collaterall auncestor releases with warranty to the recoveror after the recoveror makes a Feoffement to uses which are executed by the Statute of 27. H. 8. and the auncestor dyes though the estate be transferred in the post before the discent of the warranty yet it shall binde and the terr-tenants shall Rebutt See excellent learning upon this point where an estate transferred in the post before discent of the warranty shall binde where not and where there shall be Rebutter in such case where not Pennants case 38. of the Queene fo 64. LEase for yeares upon condition that the lessee shall not assigne c. without assent of the lessor he assignes c. the lessor not having notice of the assignement accepts the rent due after and enters it was adjudged for the lessor his entry lawfull for that the condition being collaterall the breach whereof may be so secretly contrived that it is not possible for the lessor to have notice thereof and notice in this case is materiall and issuable for otherwise the lessee might take advantage of his owne fraud But if a man make a Lease for yeares rendring rent upon condition if the rent be not paid to reenter In this case if the Lessor demand the rent and the same is not paid if after he accept the rent before the reentry made due at another day he hath dispensed with the condition for there the condition is annexed to the rent and he having made demand of the rent well knew the condition was broken but although in this case that he accept the rent due at that day for which he made the demand yet he may reenter for as well before as after his reentree he may have an action of debt for the rent upon the contract between the Lessor and the Lessee If the Lessor distraine for the rent for which the demand was made he hath affirmed the Lease for after the determination of the Lease he may not distraine for rent It was also resolved that as well in case of the condition annexed to the rent as in case of a condition annexed to any collaterall act if the conclusion of the condition be that then the Lease for yeares shall be voyd there no acceptance of the rent due at any day after the breach of the condition will make the voyd Lease good Resolved that as a voidable Lease cannot be affirmed by word for money c. so the acceptance of a rent which is not In esse nor due to him which accepts it doth not affirme the Lease as a gift to a Husband and Wife and to the Heires of the body of the Husband the Husband dyes the issue accepts the rent of the Lessee of the Husband during the life of the Wife the Wife dyes yet the issue shall avoyd the Lease for no rent was due And there is a diversity betweene a Lease for life and for yeares in case of a lease for life though the conclusion of the condition be that it shall be voyd yet acceptance of a rent due after the breach shall affirme it for the freehold being created by livery cannot be determined before entry If the successor accept the rent upon a Lease for yeares of a Parson Vicar Prebend 't is worth nothing for 't is voyd by death otherwise of a Lease for life But if the successor of a Bishop Abbot or Prior accept the rent upon a Lease for yeares he shall never avoyd it for 't was voydable onely Note Reader it seemes to me if upon a Lease for life the Lessor accepts the same rent which was demanded he hath affirmed the Lease for he cannot accept it as due upon any contract as upon a Lease for yeares for when he accepts it he cannot have an action of Debt for it but his remedy was by Assise if he had seisin or by distresse but after reentry he may have an action of Debt If he that hath a rent service or rent charge accepts the rent due at the last day and therfore makes an acquittance all the arrerages due before are thereby discharged and so it hath beene adjudged In Hopkins Mortons Case 10. El. Dyer A man is not bound to pay an annuity without an Acquittance but a rent service or rent charge he is If the Lord accepts the rent or service of the Feoffee he loses the arrerages in the time of the Feoffor though he makes no acquittance for after such acceptance he shall not avow upon the Feoffor at all nor upon the Feoffee but for the arrerages which incurred in his time otherwise where the Feoffor dyes and there is such an acceptance But acceptance of rent or service by
and because wives were not dowable of the use estates were made by the Feoffees to the husband and his wife before or after the marriage for life c. for a competent provision for the wife then 27. transferred the possession to the use and if further provision had not been the wives should have their dowers and joyntures also and therefore those branches were made in the same Statute of 27. Resolved that the Feoffement to the use of himselfe for life the remainder to his wife for life for the joynture of the wife is within 27. for though that five estates onely are expressed 1. To the husband and wife and the heires of the husband 2. c. to the heires of their two bodies 3. Of the body of one of them 4. For their lives 5. To the husband and wife for life of the wife yet many other estates are within the Act for these are put for example not to exclude others But resolved that no estate is a joynture except it takes beginning presently after the death of the husband for so are all the examples and therefore to himselfe for life the remainder to B. for life the remainder to his wife c. is not within the Statute c. And therefore though the wife enter and takes the profits she shall have Dower An estate to one and his wife and the heires males of their two bodies adjudged a good joynture yet none of the five estates mentioned an estate made to a woman for life before marriage adjudged a good joynture Resolved though the estate here were upon condition and though Dower in place of which the joynture comes were absolute yet because an estate for life upon condition is an estate for life 't is within the words and the intent of the Act if the wife accept it c. Resolved that a wife cannot waive a joynture made before the coverture as she may a joynture made after and this by the Proviso if any woman hath lands c. assured after marriage for her life c. after death of the husband she hath liberty to refuse c. and therefore the intent of the Statute was that she should not refuse a joynture made before and land conveyed for part of her joynture or in satisfaction of part of her Dower is no barre of any part for the incertainty for the Statute says for the joynture of the wifes and not for part of the joynture Resolved that though the estate of the wife be upon an expresse condition for to performe the will which imports a consideration of making the estate yet it may be averred for joynture for the one consideration well stands with the other and though it be not expressed in the Deed yet it may be averred and the case is the stronger because the averment is given by the words of the Act. And a Fee simple to the wife in satisfaction of her Dower is a joynture within the equity of 27. for the reasons aforesaid as also because 't is within the expresse words for terme of life or otherwise for all estates as beneficiall or more are within by this word otherwise in joynture after judgement was given against the demandant A devise to a wife for life in taile c. for her joynture is a good joynture within 27. as 't was resolved in Leake and Randalls case Otherwise where a man devises to his wife for life c. generally this cannot be averred to be for joynture and therefore no barre of Dower 1. Because a devise imports a consideration in it selfe and shall be taken as a benevolence 2. All the will for land by 32. 34. H. 8. ought to be in writing and no averrement ought to be taken out of the will which cannot be collected by the words within an estate before marriage is within the equity of the Statute so an estate by devise which takes effect after the marriage dissolved is within 27. Bevills Case 27. 28. of the Queene fo 8. TEnant by Homage Fealty and Escuage and suite to Court twice a yeare the Lord was seised of the Fealty onely by the hands of the tenant Resolved that seisin of Fealty was a seisin of all the said services for when the tenant doth fealty he takes a corporall oath that he shall be faithfull and true to the Lord and shall beare him faith of the tenements which he claimes to hold of him and that he will lawfully doe the customes and services c. And though Homage be more honourable and the most humble service that a Freeholder can doe to his Lord yet Fealty is the more sacred service for this is done upon oath not the other And the words shall be faithfull and true are also parcell of Homage and Seisin of any part of any service is a Seisin of the whole and the Law for this reason so respects these services that no distresse for them shall be excessive and though distresse be so often that the tenant cannot manure his land he shall not have an Assise as for rent or other profits Resolved that seisin of a superior service is a seisin of all inferior services incident to it as a seisin of escuage of homage and fealty homage of fealty rent of fealty where the Seigniory is by fealty and rent Resolved that doing of homage is a seisin of all services inferior and superior because he takes upon himselfe to doe all services Resolved that seisin of rent or suite or of other annuall service is seisin of escuage homage fealty ward releife heriot service service for to cover the hall of the chiefe house of the Mannor for to impale the Parke of the Lord or such casuall services which perchance will not fall in sixty yeares but seisin of one annuall service is not seisin of another annuall service as rent of suite nor of worke dayes for 't is the folly of the Lord that he attained not seisin and it should be mischeivous to the tenant for perhaps in ancient time the worke dayes are discharged which now cannot be shewne Note Reader all this is to be intended of a seisin in Law for seisin of fealty here is no actuall seisin of homage nor of suite nor fealty of rent but seisin of any part of a service is an actuall seisin of all to have an Assise And as to make a vowry seisin in Law suffices but for an Assise actuall seisin is requisite so in a Writ of right of Land See the Booke at large and there where ancient seisin to an estate altered or changed from one person to another shall be sufficient where not Resolved that seisin in Law was sufficient to make an avowry within the letter and the intent of the Statute of 32. H. 8. for the intent was to limit a time within which seisin ought to be had not to exclude any seisin which was a lawfull seisin by the common Law which appeares by the Preamble Also the
binde the lessor otherwise of admittances upon surrenders or descents for he was tenant at sufferance who hath no lawfull interest and a Writ of entry ad terminum qui praeteriit lyes against him and so he is a deforceor Murrell and Smiths case 33. and 34. of the Queene fo 24. THe Queene grants a Copyhold in fee and after grants the inheritance of the Copyhold to a stranger the Copyholder devises to M. and after surrenders to the use of his will Resolved that custome hath so established the estate of a Copyholder that by severance of the inheritance of the Copyhold from the Mannor the Copyhold is not destroyed for being the Lord himselfe could not ouste the Copiholder no more can another claiming in by him Objected that every Copyhold ought to be parcell of the Mannor and to be demised or demisable time out of memory Resolved that because once this had both the incidents aforesaid and its perfection the severance made by the Lord shall not destroy it Resolved that notwithstanding the surrender and devise the Copyhold descended to the heire for after the severance of the inheritance from the Mannor the surrender was utterly voyd for the land was not parcell of the Mannor at the time and the devise onely cannot transferre such a customary estate but it ought to be by surrender into the hands of the Lord c. Resolved that after severance the Copyholder shall pay his rent to the Feoffee and shall pay and do other services which are due without admittance or holding of a Court as to plough the demeanes of the Lord Heriot c. but suite of Court and Fine upon alienation or admittance are gone for now the land cannot be aliened for though the Copyholder hath some benefit by the severance as appeares before so he hath great prejudice for now he cannot surrender or alien his estate nor the Feoffee cannot make an admittance for he is not dominus pro tempore Resolved that such forfeitures remaine as were before the severance as Feoffement lease wast denier of rent So if the land were of the nature of Borough English or Gavelkind and other customes which run with the land remaine And 't was said that such Copyholder hath no other meanes to alien but by Decree in Chancery against him and his heires but by this the interest of the land is not bound but the person onely Kite and Queintons case 31. of the Queene fo 25. COpyholder in fee surrenders out of Court by the custome to the hands of certaine Copyhold tenants to the use of another and his heires upon certaine condition at the next Court the surrender was presented but the condition omitted he to whose use c. dyes the Lord admits his heire he that made the surrender releases to the heire being in possession and after enters Resolved that the presentment of the surrender was voyde for that the condition was omitted for the surrender that the Copiholder made was not presented but if the surrender the condition had been presented and the Steward in entring of it omits the condition upon sufficient proofe of it the surrender shall not be avoyded but the roll amended for the roll doth not conclude the party for to plead or give in evidence the truth of the matter Resolved if a Copyholder be ousted by wrong a release by him to the disseisor doth not transferre his right because he hath not any customary estate upon which the release of the customary right may inure and this should be prejudiciall to the Lord for by this he shall lose his Fine and services but a release made to him which is admitted by the Lord and in possession is good and a release of a customary right may inure to him and the Lord not prejudiced and the release shall inure by way of extinguishment And Littleton speaks of an alienation by surrender onely which ought to be into the hands of the Lord but a release cannot be done to the Lord and Littleton says He which claimes a Copihold by surrender hath no other evidence but he which claimes an extinguishment of a right may have it by release by Deed and 't is no perill to purchasors for if the Copiholder in possession sels it he will shew the release and he which is out of possession cannot sell till he hath regained the possession caveat emptor By Wray if he which hath a pretensed title c. to a Copihold bargaines c. this is within 32. H. 8. for the Statute says any right or title and great part of the land within the Realme is in Copy and therefore the intention was to include them to avoyde maintenance and champerty Melwich and Luters case 30. of the Queene fo 26. REsolved that the lessee of a copiholder for a yeare shall maintaine an Ej ' Firmae for his terme being warranted by Law by force of the generall custome of the Realme 't is reason that he should have remedy by Ej ' Firmae And this is a speedy course against a Stranger Resolved that the Copiholds are not destroyed by severance of the inheritance of them from the Mannor but remaine in force So Murrels case before adjudged Resolved that when the Lord of a Mannor having many ancient Copiholds in a Towne grants the inheritance of all the Copiholds the grantee may hold a Court for the customary tenants and accept surrenders and make admittances and grants for every Mannor which consists of Freeholders and Copiholders comprehends in effect two severall Courts the one the Court Baron for Freeholders and in this the Suitors viz. the Freeholders are Judges and the other Court for the Copiholders and in this the Steward or the Lord himselfe is Judge and though this is not a Mannor in Law because it wants Freeholders yet the grantee may hold such Court as aforesaid for Copiholders onely as the grantor himselfe might So if all the Freeholds escheate or the Lord releases the tenure and services yet he may hold a customary Court for the Copiholds Note Reader though the Lord by his own act cannot make of one and the same Mannor at common Law divers severall Mannors consisting of Demeanes and Freeholders yet he may make a customary Mannor of Copiholders Resolved that the Lord himselfe may make a grant or admittance of a Copiholder out of the Mannor at what place he pleases but if the Steward at any Court holden out of the Mannor shall make grants or admittances they are voyd Neales case 37. of the Queene fo 26. ADjudged that where the Lord of a Mannor demises all his lands granted by Copy for two thousand yeares that the lessee may hold Courts for Copiholders as Melwiches case is before and 't was said so to be resolved in C. Hattons case Note Reader a good diversity where the number of the Copiholders may support the custome and a singular case of a Copiholder as in Murrels case before in which case the
Lord doth not grant tacitly any customary Court Clifton and Molineux case 27. 28. of the Queene fo 27. REsolved if a Steward hold Court out of the Manner all grants and admittances there made are voyd for the Court ought to be holden within the Mannor not out of the jurisdiction of it as Melwich case is before but resolved that by custome the Court may be holden out of the Mannor and grants c. shall be good as Abbots c. used for to hold Courts at one Mannor for divers severall Mannors Resolved that if a woman Copiholder for life takes husband who commits wast and dyes the Copihold is forfeited otherwise if a stranger does wast without the assent of the husband Taverner and Cromwells Case 26 of the Queene fo 27. REsolved if a copiholder seised of three severall copiholds of three severall acres makes wast in part of one c. all that is forfeited but not the others for though they are all in one hand yet every one is severally holden and a severall condition in Law annexed and the severall conditions follow the severall tenures So resolved if the coppyholder surrender them to the use of A. and the Lord admits A. Tenendum per antiqua servitia inde prius debita dejure consueta and A. makes a forfeiture in one he shall forfeite that onely for the Tenendum red dendo singula singulis continues the severall tenures so that 't is not materiall if the copiholds are in one or severall copies So if diverse severall copiholds escheate to the Lord he grants them Tenendum per antiqua servitia they shall be severally holden as they were before though he grants them to one man Resolved that when he to whose use a surrender is made is admitted he is in by him that surrendered and in a plaint in the nature of an entry in the Per shall be supposed in by him for the Lord is but an instrument to make the admittance and his charge shall not binde him that is admitted So Reader where before 't is said that by the forfeiture of the Husband all the estate of the Wife shall be forfeited 't is to be intended all the copihold under the same tenures Hubbard and Hamonds Case 42. and 43. of the Queene fo 27. REsolved that if the fines of copiholders upon admittances be incertaine the Lord cannot exact excessive and unreasonable fines if he does the copiholder may deny to pay it without forfeiture and it shall be determined before the Judges upon a Demurrer or evidence upon proofe of the value of the Land what fine was reasonable to be demanded for if it should be otherwise great part of the Copy-holds should be destroyed at the will of the Lord and so was Hodesons Case adjudged Resolved if the Lord assesse a reasonable fine and require the Copy-holder to pay it he is not bound to pay it presently because he could not know what the Lord would assesse nemo tenetur divinare and he shall have a convenient time to pay it if the Lord limits no time otherwise of a fine certaine Resolved if a Copy-holder hath severall Copy-holds by severall services the Lord ought to assesse and demand fines severally for every parcell and the tenant may refuse to pay his fiine for one and forfeit that onely and every severall tenure hath severall conditions in law tacitely annexed to it So if all the severall Copy-holds are surrendered to the use of another and the Lord admits him Tenendum per antiqua servitia c. the tenures are severall and fines severall Taverners ca ' before Resolved that no fine is due to the Lord till admittance for admittance is the cause of the fine and if after the tenant deny to pay it 't is a forfeiture Bacon and Flatmans Case and Sands Case so resolved Westwick and Wyers Case 43. of the Queene fo 28. A Woman Copy-holder in Fee surrenders to the use of W. her Sonne in fee and at the next Court the entry was Ad hanc curiam venit W. and I uxor ejus ceperunt c. W. dyed I. his Wife survived and surrendered to the use of I. S. in fee. Resolved when the Lord hath the Copy-hold by surrender to the use of another he hath but a customary power to make admitance Secundum formam effectum sursum redditionis and 't is not like to the Feoffee at common Law and though the Lord grant this by Copy to another 't is without warrant and notwithstanding he might make an admittance according to the surrender and he which is admitted shall be in by him that surrendered as Taverners Case is before and the Court agreed if the Lord grant to Cestuy que use and a stranger all shall inure to Cestuy que use or if he admits him upon condition the condition is voyd As Executors agree that the legatory and I. S. shall have c. or that the legatory shall have upon condition the legatory shall have onely and absolutely for after the assent of the Executors he is in by the Devisee And 't was said that 't was adjudg'd in Buntings Case that where the Lord admits one to hold to him and his Heires where the surrender was for life onely that he hath but for life Resolved that without speciall custome or other speciall matter the admittance shall inure onely to the Husband and judgement was given according Buntang and Lepingwells Case 27. and 28. of the Queene fo 29. REsolved that though T. who was Husband of the Wife De facto was not party to the Libell for I. S. Libelled against the Wife without naming her Husband for a divorse upon a precontract betwixt him and the Wife nor the sentence in the Spirituall Court which dissolved the Marriage betwixt him and his Wife yet the sentence against the Wife onely being but declaratory shall binde the Husband De facto and for that the conusance of the right of Marriages belongs to the spirituall Court and they have given sentence in it the Judges of the common Law though it be against the reason of the Law shall give faith and credence to their proceedings and sentences as consonant to the Law of holy Church for Cuilibet in sua arte perito est credendum So 't was adjudg'd that the Plaintiffe borne in the second Marriage was legitimate Resolved when a Copyholder surrenders to the Lord to the use of his Wife and his younger Sonne without limitting any estate they have for life onely for as well estates as discents shall be directed by the rules of Law as necessary consequents upon the custome except there be a speciall custome within the Mannor that Sibi suis or Sibi assignatis may create an estate of inheritance And 't was observ'd that the Estates limitted upon surrenders are always annexed to the estates of him to whom the surrender is made and alwayes the surrender to the Lord is generall without
limitation of any estate Resolved that when the Lord admits Cestuy que use for life the reversion is in him that surrendered not in the Lord for he is but an instrument Resolved that a man may surrender to the use of his Wife though that Cestuy que use is in by him that surrendered because the Husband did not doe this immediatly to the Wife but by a second meanes Viz. By surrender to the Lord and by admittance of the Lord. Resolved that when B. surrendered out of Court and before that 't was presented in Court he dyes yet after being presented according to the custome 't is good otherwise if it had not beene presented according to custome so if the Tenants in whose hands c. dyes yet if it be proved 't is good enough so Queintons Case before if Cestuy que use c. dyes before admittance his Heires shall be admitted Downe and Hopkins Case 36. of the Queene fo 29. REsolved that where the custome of a Mannor was to grant Coppies for one two or three lives that a grant to a Woman during her viduity is within the custome for 't is an estate for life but every grant for life is not Durante viduitate issue was whether the custome was that the Wife of a Copy-holder after the death of the Husband should have for life and 't was given in evidence that she should have during her viduity and adjudged that the evidence did not maintaine such custome for 't is a lesse estate then for life But in the principall Case 't is a greater estate which is warranted by the custome and therefore a lesse is within it according to Graveners Case before 'T was said that a Lord may retaine a Steward by word to hold Courts c. as a Bayliffe and this retainer shall serve till he be discharged Harris and Jayes Case 41. of the Queene fo 30. REsolved that a Lord may retaine one to be Steward of his Mannor and to hold Courts by word as in the Case before Resolved that where a Copy-hold escheates by attainder of felony of a Copy-holder of the Queene that the Steward may grant it over Ex officio without speciall warrant for the custome warrants the Steward to grant it and this shall binde the Queene and her Heires c. But yet his duty is before to informe the Lord Treasurer Chancellor or Barons of the Exchequer or any of them for his better direction Resolved that the Auditor or Receiver of the Queene hath no power to retaine a Steward to hold courts c. But it behooves that the Steward who makes such voluntary grants upon escheats or forfeitures to be good to have Letters Pattents of the Stewardship of the same Mannor And 't was said that 't was adjudged in the Lady Holcrofts Case that where one was retained generally by word to be Steward of a Mannor and to hold Courts that he may take surrenders of customary tenants out of Court Shaw and Thompsons Case 33. of the Queene fo 30. REsolved that a Woman shall not be indowed of Copy-hold without speciall custome and that when a Woman is to be indowed by custome she shall have all incidents to Dower and shall recover damages by the Statute of Merton because her Husband dyed seised and therefore the recovery of damage of 50. l. in the Court of the Mannor was allowed though this exceeded 40 s Resolved that no Action of Debt lyes for these damages at common Law for upon such judgement no error or false judgement lyes but the remedy is in the Court of the Mannor or Chancery Fenner Justice said That he had seene a Record 36. H. 8. where the Lord by Petition to him had for certaine errors in the proceeding reversed such a judgement and upon this the Defendant maintained an Audita quaerela to be restored to the damages recovered against him See 14. H. 4. cited before in Brownes Case And 7. E 4. 29. Hoe and Taylors Case 37. of the Queene fo 30. REsolved that Underwood growing upon parcell of the Mannor may by custome be granted by Copy of Court roll and 't is a thing of perpetuity to which a custome may extend for after every cutting the underwood growes Ex stipitibus So 't was resolved that Herbage or any profit of any parcell of the Mannor may by custome be granted by Copy and 't was said that a faire appendant to the Mannor of C. in S. is granted by Copy and this explaines the reason of the first pillar in Murrels Case Frenches Case 18. 19. of the Queene fo 31. REsolved if the Lord Lease for yeares life or make any other estate by deed or without deed of Copy-hold Land forfeited escheated c. to him that this Land can never be granted againe by Copy for the custome is destroyed for during these estates the Land was not demised nor demisable by Coppy So if the Lord make a feoffement and enter for condition broken but if the Lord keepe it in his hands a long time or leases it at will he his heires or assignes may regrant it So if the interruption be tortious as by disseisin and discent false verdict or erroneous judgement for Non valet impedimentum quod de jure non sortitur effectum quod contra legem fit pro infecto habetur But if it be extended upon a Statute or recognizance acknowledged by the Lord or if the Wife of the Lord hath this Land assigned to her in Dower though these impediments are by act in Law yet for that the interruptions are lawfull the Land cannot be after granted by Copy If a Copy-holder accept a Lease for yeares of the Lord of his Copy-hold 't is destroyed for ever If a Copy-holder take a Lease for yeares of the Mannor his Copy-hold hath not continuance Hides Case adjudged 17. of the Queene But there 't was resolved that such Lessee might regrant the Copy to whom he would for the Land was alwayes demised or demisable If a Coppy-hold be surrendered to the Lessee his Executors or assignes may regrant it If a Copy-hold escheate to the Lord his alienee by fine feoffement c. may regrant it Foiston and Crachroodes Case 29. and 30 of the Queene fo 31. ADjudged that where a Copy-holder in pleading alledges Quod infra Man praed talis habetur nec non a toto tempore cujus c. habebatur consuetudo Viz. quod quilibet tenentes praedictorum tenement vocat C. have used to have common in such a place parcell of the Mannor and that he is a Copy-holder of the said Tenement that this custome as well for the matter as the forme was good for the Copy-holder cannot prescribe in his owne name for the exility and basenes of his estate and if he had claimed common in the soile of another he ought to prescribe in the name of the Lord Viz. That the Lord and all his ancestors and all those whose estate c. have
such a Feast if you make a Feoffement to another of this Mannor before the same Feast you have forfeited the obligation although that you purchase the Land againe before the said Feast because that you were once disabled to make the feoffement If a man Lease a Mannor for yeares and the Lessee covenanteth to uphold the Houses and to leave the same Mannor in as good an estate as he found it and during the terme the Lessee maketh wast in Houses and cutting of Tymber c. the Lessor may have a Writ of Covenant before the end of the Tearme for cutting the Timber for it was impossible that the Covenant should be performed after for the Timber but otherwise of the Houses Fitz Na. br fo 145 K. It was also resolved that if a man seised of Lands in Fee covenant to infeoffee I. S. upon request and after he maketh a feoffement of the same to a Stranger in this Case I. S. may have an Action of Covenant without request Laughters Case 37. Eliz. fo 21. Banco regis WHere a condition of an obligation consisteth upon two parts in the disjunctive and both possible at the time of the obligation made and after one of them becomes impossible by the Act of God the obligor is not bound to performe the other part for the condition is made for the benefite of the obligor and shall be taken most beneficiall for him and he had an Election eyther to performe the one or the other for the saving of his Obligation but now Impotentia excusat legem Hallings Case 38. Eliz. Com. banco fo 22. ONe Covenanteth to make an estate in Fee at the costs of the Covenantee the Covenantor is to doe the first Act Idest to Notifie what assurance he will make that the Covenantee may know what summe to tender Mathewsons Case 39 Eliz. fo 23. Com. banco SEverall persons make severall Covenants in one Indenture or Writing the Seale of one of them is broken away that shall not avoyd the Covenant of the rest but onely the Covenant of him whose Seale is so debrused or defaced Vide Piggots Case in the 11th Report because severall Covenants otherwise if joynt Lambes case 41. Eliz. fo 23. com banco A. Is bound unto B. to give unto B. such a release c. before the 22. day of October next as by the Judge of the Prerogative Court is thought fit In this Case A. must procure the Judge to doe it or devise it for the Judge is a stranger to the condition and the condition is for the benefite of the Obligor and he hath taken upon him to performe the same at his perill but it is otherwise if the Obligee or his Councell should devise it Broughtons case 43. Eliz. fo 24. Banco regis IN an Action of Debt by Broughton Plaintiffe against Pretty upon an Obligation with condition where the Plaintiffe was bound in an obligation of 200. l. for the Defendant for the payment of 100. l. to C. if therefore the Defendant should save and keepe harmlesse the said Broughton from all Suites quarrells and Demands touching the said Obligation c. that then the Obligation to be void c. at the day of payment of the 100. l. the Plaintiffe commeth to the place where the 100 l. ought to be paid and perceiving there not any person present to pay the 100. l. for the Defendant Broughton to save the penalty of the Obligation paid the money to C. and brought his Action upon the Counter-bond and it was adjudged that the Plaintiffe should recover for the payment of the 100. l. is damage and harme And it is not necessary whither the Plaintiff was arrested or sued c. Terror of suite so as he dare not goe about his businesse is Damnification although he be not arrested Deane Chapter de Winsors Case 44. Eliz. fo 24. Banco regis A Man Leased a House by Indenture for yeares the Lessee Covenants and grants for him and his Executors with the Lessor to repaire the house at all times necessary the Lessee Assignes over and the Assignee suffereth the house to decay the Lessor brought an Action of Covenant against the Assignee and it was adjudged per Popham and all the Court that the Action lyeth although the Lessee had not Covenanted for his Assignes because in respect thereof the rent is the lesse which is for the benefite of the Assignee Qui sentit commodum sentire debet onus If a man grant one Estovers to repaire his house this is appurtenant to the house Fitz H. nat br 181.28 H. 8.28 Sir Thomas Palmers Case 43. El. fo 24. banco regis SIr Thomas Palmer seised in Fee of a great Wood. Did bargaine and sell to one Cornford and his Assignes 600. cords of Wood to be taken by Assignement of Sir Thomas Cornford assignes his interest to one Basset and afterward Sir Thomas sells to one Maynard such quantity of Wood as will make 4000. cords at Election of the Vendee and afterwards Sir Thomas assignes to Basset 600. cords of Wood to be taken by him who doth fall the same and Maynard did take them away and converted them c. an Action upon the case was brought by Basset and iudgement was given for him for Corneford had an interest which he might assigne over and not a thing in action or a possibility for it was resolved if Sir Thomas did not assigne them to Cornford upon request Cornford might take them without assignment for the Grantor cannot by his owne act or default eyther subvert or derogate from his owne grant Therefore it ensueth that Cornford had an interest that he might assigne over If A. have a house and Land and reasonable estovers in the Woods of another by view and livery of the Bayliffe c. if A. take estovers without view or livery c. he is a trespassor although he take lesse then he ought to have by livery But if A. demand his estovers and the Owner or his Bayliffe will not deliver to him he may have an Assize 2. If the Assignement were voyd yet the Defendant cannot take Trees cut by another but out of the residue of the Wood. The Earle of Rutlands case 2. Ja. fo 25. banco regis EDward Earle of Rutland seised of the Mannor of Eykering by Indenure dated 10. March Anno. 21. El. for augmentation of the joynture of Issabell his Countesse did Covenant with Sir Gilb. Gerrard and Thomas Houlcroft his Brother that before the end of Trinity terme then next following he would assure by fine or other conveyance the said Mannor to the said Sir Gilb. Gerrard and Thomas in Fee which syne or other conveyance should be to the use of the said Earle and Issabell his Wife and the Heires of the said Earle which Indenture was acknowledged and inrolled in the Chancery the 28. of the same Moneth of March by another Indenture betweene the said Earle on the one part and the Lord Burleigh on the other
The question was whether they have an estate for life or an inheritance in taile And it was resolved that if they had children at the time of the Demise made then they had but an estate for life But if they had no children then they had an estate of inheritance in taile Sir Edward Cleeres case 42. Eliz. fol. 17. A Man is seized of three acres of Land houlden in Capite and maketh a Feoffment in Fee of two of them to the use of his wife for her life and after maketh a feoffment by Deed of the third acre to the use of such persons and of such estate and estates as he should limitt and appoint by his last Will in writing And afterwards by his last Will in writing hee Devised the said third acre to one in fee and if this Devise was good for all the third acre or not or for two parts thereof or voyd for all was the question And it was adjudged that the Devise was good For the Feoffor by his last Will limitted the estates according to his power reserved to him upon the Feoffment the estates should take effect by force of the Feoffment and the use is directed by the Will So as in this case the Will is onely directory But if he declared his Will by writing without any reference to his authoritie or power as owner of the Land and to limitt no use according to his power In this case the Land being houlden in capite the Devise is good for two parts and voyd for the third part If a man make a Feoffment in Fee of Lands in capite to the use of his last Will although he Devise the Land with reference to the Feoffment yet the Will is voyd for a third part for a Feoffment to the use of his last Will and to the use of him and his heires is all one In this case when the partie had conveyed two parts to the use of his wife by his act executed hee cannot as owner of the Land Devise any part of the residue by his Will and therefore because he hath not an election as in the case put before whether to limit according to his power or Devise the same as owner of the Land for in the case at Barre as owner of the Land having conveyed two parts to the use of his wife he cannot make any Devise The Devise of necessitie must inure to a limitation of the use otherwise the Devise should be altogether voyd Packmans case 37. Eliz. Banco Regis fol. 18. WIlson brought an action upon the case upon a trover against Packman The case was thus A man dyed intestate and the Ordinary committed the administration to a stranger and after the next of kindred of the Decedent sued out a Citatiō in the Court Christian to have it repealed and pendente lite the administrator to defeate the plaintiffe selleth the goods of the decedent to the defendant and after the Letters of administration were revoked by sentence and the first sentence anulled and made voyd and the administration granted to the plaintiffe And it was resolved that the action did not lie and in this case the diversitie was houlden betweene a suite by Citation for to countermand or revoke the former administration and an appeale which is alwayes a reversing of a former sentence for an appeale doth suspend the former sentence otherwise of a Citation And in this case because the first administrator had the absolute propertie of the goods in him without question he may sell them to whom he will and although the administration be revoked afterwards yet that cannot defeat the Sale But if the sale or gift be by covine it is voyd against Creditors by the Statute of 13. El. but it is good against a second administrator And if an administrator wast the goods and afterwards the administration is granted to another yet every debtor shall charge him in debt An administration may be granted upon condition and whatsoever the administrator doth before the condition broken is good Gregories case 38. El. Banco Regis fol. 20. VErba aequivoca in dubio posita intelliguntur in digniori potentiori sensu secundum excellentiam as if the speech be or writing of J. S. generally it shall be intended of the father where the father and sonne are both of a name and if it be of two Brothers both of a name it shall be intended of the eldest for these are more worthy so where the Statute of 4. 5. Phil. Ma. speaketh in any Court of Record it shall be intended of the foure Courts at Westminster because the Kings Attorney is attendant there Michelbornes case 38. Eliz. Banco Regis fol. 21. THe Court of Marshalsea doth onely hould plea of actions of trespasse within the verge if the one of the parties be of the Kings houshold and in contracts and Covenants where both parties are of the Kings houshold and of none other actions nor persons by the Act of Articuli super Chartas 28. E. 1. Butler Goodalls case 40. El. Banco Regis fol. 21 IT was resolved upon the Statute of 21. H. 8. that a Parson of a Church ought to stay and be Commorant upon his Rectorie viz. upon the Parsonage-house and not in any other house although it be within the Parish but lawfull imprisonment without covine is a good excuse of non-residence also if there be no Parsonage-house for impotentia excusat Legem also sicknesse without fraud if the patient remove by advice of his Councell in Physicke bona fide for better aire and recovery of his health Ambrosia Gorges case 40. El. fol. 22. in Cur. Wardorum IT was resolved that the Father shall have the Wardship of his Daughter and heire apparent so long as shee continueth his heire apparent But when the Father hath issue a sonne then shee shall be in ward to the Queene for then he is heire apparant and not the Daughter Ambrosia was daughter of Sir Arthur Gorge by Douglas Daughter and heire of Vicount Bindon and was married to Francis Gorge which Francis dyed when Ambrosia was of ten yeares of age It was resolved also that the Queene notwithstanding the said marriage should have the Wardship of the said Ambrosia for it was not a compleat marriage because to every marriage there ought to be a consent For consensus non concubitus facis matrimonium consentire non possunt ante annos nubiles And upon conference had with the Civilians it was agreed after such a marriage if the husband and the wife marry again it shall not be counted Bigamie And 30. E. 1. tit Gard. 156. if the ancestor marry his heire infra annos nubiles and dye the Lord shall recover the body of the Infant because the heire may disagree It was agreed that the grandfather shall not have the wardship of the sonne within age the father being dead in his life time Marquesse of Winchester his case 41. Eliz. fol. 23.
countenance that dangerous and desperate error of the Spencers viz. That Homage and Oath of legeance was more by reason of the Kings Crowne that is of his politique capacity then by reason of the person of the King which was condemned by two Parliaments one in the Reigne of E. 2. called Exilium Hugonis le Spencer and the other in 1. E. 3. cap. 1. No one Opinion in all our Bookes is against this judgement The Lord Chancellour and 12. of the Judges concurred in one opinion herein and not in any remembrance so Honourable and Intelligent an Auditory as was at this Case Bulwers Case 27. Eliz. fol. 1. H. H. recovered against the Plaintiffe in the common place and dyeth the Defendant in the name of H. Outlawed the Plaintiffe who brings an Action of the Case in N. where the first Action was brought and recovered for there was the visible torte when matter in one Câ—unty dependeth upon matter in another County the Plaintiffe may choose in which County to bring his Action except that the Defendant upon generall issue pleaded may be prejudiced of his Triall as if two conspire in one County to Endite one in another County and doe it an Action may be brought in either but if he be indited but not by them there it shall be brought where the conspiracy was If Manasse be made in E. whereby my Tenants recede into L. an Action shall be brought in E. if an action be founded upon two things materiall and traversable in two severall Counties an action may be brought in any of them An Annuity granted in one County to be paid in another the Action shall be brought where the grant was he who is robbed may have an appeale of felony in every County where the goods came but of robbery where the fact was done onely A lease for yeares in one County of Land in another Debt shall be brought where the Lease was made and wast where the Land lyeth every Action which concerneth the life of a man shall be brought where the offence is committed Every issue which ariseth upon an Action in which Land shall be recovered shall be brought where the Land lyeth as in right of ward of Land or body or intrusion of ward and forfeiture of Marriage Valore maritagij and Quare impedit but ravishment of ward where the ravishment was and a Quare non admisit where the refusall was before the Statute of 7. R. 2. c. 10. an Action for Land in diverse Counties or for common in one County appendant to Land in another County shall be brought by severall Writs in both Counties but now In confinio comitatuum a per quae servitia shall be brought where the note of the fine is levyed Sir Miles Corbets case 27. Eliz. in Scaccario fol. 5. REsol That the speciall manner of Common in Norf called Shacke to be taken in arrable land after harvest untill sowing begin is good Resol also if in D. there are fifty acres and in S. 100. l. who ought to intercommon for vicinage D. cannot put in more in their Common then it will depasture and so to escape reciprocally for the originall cause of this Common was onely to prevent suits in Champian Countries Cases upon the Statute of 13. E. 1. of Winchester upon hue and cry Sendills case 27. Eliz. in Com. Banco fol. 6. A Robbery for which the Hundred must answer by force of the said Statute is to be done openly so as the Country may take notice thereof themselves but a Robbery done secretly in the house the Country cannot take notice thereof for every one may keepe his house as strong as he will at his perill For it was adjudged in Ashpoles case that the partie robbed needed not to give notice thereof to the Country For it may be that the partie robbed was bound or maimed c. so as he could not make hue and cry to give notice A robbery was done in January presently after the Sunne setting during day-light and it was adjudged that the Hundred should answer for the same for it was a convenient time for men to travell or to be about their businesse One was killed in the Evening and escaped and by the common Law the Towne was amerced for that was accounted in Law parcell of the day and not of the night But by the Statute 27. El. ca. 13. none shall have action upon the said Statute except the partie robbed so soone as he may give notice of the same to any of the Inhabitants of any Village Towne or Hamlet next to the place where the robbery was done and if they in pursuite apprehend any of the offenders that will excuse the Towne Mibornes case 29. Eliz. in Com. Banco fol. 6. A Robbery was done in the morning ante lucem the Hundred shall not be charged Cum quis felonicè occisus fuit per diem nisi felocaptus fuit tota villata illa amercietur The Earle of Bedfords Case 29. Eliz. fol. 7. 1. REsol If tenant in taile make a voydable lease for yeares and dyeth his heire in ward to the King or other Lord the Lord shall avoyde this lease but if an infant make a feoffment the Lord by Escheate shall not avoyde it but a gardian shall because he doth it in right of the infant 2. This avoidance is but during the interest of the Lord for afterwards the heire may make it good But if he who hath a particular estate avoideth an act in all after his Interest determined it shall not be made good as if a feme be indowed of an appropriation and her clerke inducted the appropriation is defeated for ever so if a feme Covert as a feme sole levy a fine and the Baron enters and dyeth the Conâ—see shall not have the land for the estate is wholly defeated Vghtreds Case 33. Eliz. fol. 9. THe M. of W. granted the Captainship of a Fort to the plaintiffe and for exercising of the said office and for finding a Master Gunner and six Souldiers granted to him an Annuity of 32. li. per annum the plaintiffe brings an Annuity 1. Except It doth not appeare by the Count that the M. had power to grant this office Non allocatur 2. The plaintiffe doth not averre the exercising of the said office Non allocatur for if he had not used it that shall come in on the other part because this is a condition subsequent and not precedent but if one be to have a thing in consideration of an act to be done by him there he must shew the performance because that amounts to a condition precedent as in debt for salarie but if each party had equall remedy one for the money and the other for the act to be done there the Count shall be without shewing the performance as if one Covenant to serve c. and the other Covenants to give money c. But although that an interest vested is to be devested by non feasance
make a Lease for yeares and after enter into the Land and make wast and the Lessor recover in an Action of wast against the Lessee for life he shall avoid the Lease for yeares made before the wast committed But if a Lessee for life make a Lease for yeares and after enter and make a feoffement in fee the Lessor shall not avoid the Lease for yeares and so if a Tenant make a Lease for yeares and after is attainted of felony or dyeth without heire the Lord by escheate shall not avoide the tearme But because the feoffement in the case at barre was executed by Letter of Attourney it was resolved to be void and the Land escheated to the Queene Jehu Webbes Case 6. Jacobi com banco fo 45. THe King grants the office of the Kings Tennis plaies at W. to one who being disseised brings an assize The Patent shall have a reasonable construction not onely when the King himselfe playes but when any of his Houshould As if a Commission be made to take Singing-Boys in a Cathedrall-Church for the Kings Chappell those that Sing there for their pleasure cannot be taken but such as get their living by it There were but two manner of assizes at the common Law assizes De libero tenemento and De communia pasturae but for no other common but for this onely there is a Writ in the Register But the Statute of W. 2. c. 25. giveth it De proficuo in certo loco capiendo in lieu of a Quod permittat and although that there offices amongst other things are named yet an assize lay of an office at the common Law and although that no Tenant for life may have a Quod permittat yet an assize did lye for him but that is to be understood of an office of profit for it lyeth not of an office of charge Originall Writs made by Statute cannot be altered without Statute In an assize of a new office it ought to be shewed what profit belongs to it but not for an ancient office because that is sufficiently knowne Syms Case 6. Jacobi fo 51. TEnant in taile levyeth a fine with warranty and dyeth the warranty discends upon the issue of him in the remainder inheritable to the taile and another the issue in taile brings a formedon and is barred for all for the warranty is intire and barreth every one upon whom it discends of all his right as if one seised of three acres maketh a feoffement of one with warranty and dyes having issue two Daughters who make partition the Mother purchaseth the part of one brings dower against the feoffee who Vouches the Daughters shee shall recover all the other acre of the other Daughter if Tenant by the curtesie make a feoffement with warranty and dyes and his Sonne heire of the Feme recovers and assets discends after the feoffee shall have a Scire facias to have the Land first recovered by the Statute of Glouc. c. 3. but if assets descend to the Heire in taile bound with a lyneall warranty after recovery in formedon the Feoffee shall have a Scire facias to have the assets for otherwise if the recoverer alien the assets the issue of him will recover the Land in taile againe but in these cases the discontinuee ought to confesse the title of the Demandant and pray that if assets descend after they may discend unto him for if he plead a warranty and assets this is peremptory unto him if it be found that assets did not discend for the Statute is that a Scire facias shall issue out of the rolls of the Justices and in this case there is no ground for the Scire facias in the Record but in this case if the issue in taile pleads no assets and assets are found but not to the value the tenant shall have a Scire facias to recover the assets discended after for that false plea of the Vouchee Warranty and estoppell discend upon the heire generall and warranty barreth although that he upon whom it discends claimeth not by him that made it but so doth not an estoppell but estoppells with recompence binde the right of one who claimeth not by him that made it Roger Earle of Rutlands Case 6. Jacobi fo 55. THe King grants the pannage and herbage of a Park to M. for life and reciting this grants it to the Earle of Rutland for his life 1. Resolved the King hath three manner of inheritances 1. Some which he cannot excercise himselfe and cannot grant them in reversion or remainder as Corodies and Churches of which he is Patron 2. Others which he cannot excercise himselfe but may grant them in reversion or remainder as offices 3. Others which he may excercise himselfe and may grant as Lands Houses c. 2. The King here is not deceived for when he reciteth here that M. had for life and grants for life this inureth as by Law it may that is as a grant in reversion 3. In this case the grant to the Earle shall commence after the determination of the estate of M. and if the King grants Land to one and his Heires Habendum to him and his Assignes it is good and the Habendum shall be rejected for the honour of the King See the Lord Chandos case in the sixth Booke and when a Charter of the King may be taken to two intents good in many cases it shall be taken to such intent as is most beneficiall for the King but if it may be taken to one intent good and to another void then for the honour of the King and benefit of the Subject then it shall be taken so that it may take effect Beechers Case 6. Jacobi fo 58. B. Plaintiffe in Debt Se retraxit by attourney and by the judgement is not amerced he brings eror 1. Resolved a Retraxit ought to be in proper person for at the common Law every one who appeared ought to come in proper person and make his attorney after by license of the Court but if it be without writ he cannot without a writ of Attornato faciendo In cases where one may make an attourney but for contempt is bound to appeare in person if he appeare by attourney this is not error because the court may dispens with the contempt otherwise where he cannot appeare by Law by attorney as here for if he appeare by attourny this is error 2. B. ought to be amerced if upon a Nonsuite a Fortiori upon a Retraxit and although it is for his advantage yet he may assigne it for error because the judgement is not perfect and because it is for the advantage of the King and it shall not be amended because the act of the Court. 3. Where one disclaimes he shall not have a Writ of error because he hath confessed that he had no right otherwise it is upon a Retraxit for this is but a barre of the action à fortiori here where it wat void done by an attourney
a Retraxit ought to be when the party is supposed to be present therefore it shall not be when he imparleth Swaynes Case 6. Jac. fo 63. 1. REsolved the King grants a Mannor for life except Timber Trees the Lessees grant copy-hold the Grantees may shrowde Timber Trees because they come in by custome Paramount the exception 2. If Copyholders prescribe to take profit in any part of the Mannor if the Lord aliens it a Copy-holder admitted after shall have it because he is in paramount the severance but he shall prescribe and plead specially that is untill such a time Viz. Before the severance Talis habebatur c. consuetudo c. and then shew the severance Sir William Fosters Case 6. Jac. fo 64. C. F made a feoffement 4. E. 6. reserving a rent charge which rent descends to T. F. who dyes intestate his administrators avow for it and alleadge no seisin within 40 yeares yet good for the Statute of 32. H. 8. c. 3. that none shall avow for rent if he had not seisin within 40. yeares is to be intended when it was necessary to alledge as upon rent betwixt very Lord and Tenant for this may be had by incroachment and perhaps the comencement of the Seigniory was before time of memory but where rent is by deede or reservation as here or upon an estate taile the seisin is not materiall for the deed or reservation is the Title and incroachment shall not hurt and they shall not have a Ne injuste vexes but shall avoide it in an avowry and Magna Charta c. 10. Quod nullus distringatur ad faciendum majus servitium c. doth not extend to donee in taile Lessee for life c. but is intended betweene very Lord and very Tenant Lovedayes Case 6. Ja. fo 65. IF a Jury who appeareth to try a certaine issue give a verdict which is accepted be it perfect or imperfect they are discharged and shall not trie the same issue upon a new Nisi prius but a Venire facias de novo shall issue otherwise it is of the Recognitors of an assize they shall trie all the issue because they are not to trie any certeine issue and because they come in upon an Originall the Court will not award a new Originall but the Plaintiffe shall have a Certificate of assize to trie the imperfections the Plaintiffe sueth a Venire facias against diverse the Sheriffe returneth no Writ the Plaintiffe shall not have severall Venire facias after for he cannot vary from the first Crogates Case 6. Jacobi fo 66. THe Defendant pleads in barre to trespasse that the B. of N. leased by Copy to W. M. to which copyhold there is common in B. and justifieth as Servant to the said W. the Plaintiffe replies De injuria sua propria c. this is an insufficient replication for De injuria c. hath reference to all the plea in barre and not to the Commandement Ergo if the Defendant in false Imprisonment justifie for that a Capias was awarded to the Sheriffe who made a warrant to him to take the Plaintiffe De injuria c. is no plea because it referreth to all and so Record shall be tried by Jury but he shall traverse the Warrant which is matter in fact but this had beene a good plea if the proceeding be in a Court which is not of Record 2. De injuria c. is to be pleaded where the plea is matter of excuse and not where he claims an interest in his owne right or in the right of his Master for there he shall traverse the Commandement 3. Where authority is derived from the Plaintiffe himselfe or is given by Law as to fee if wast the Plaintiffe ought to answer to it although no interest be claimed and he shall not plead De injuria c. 4. If this plea be admitted here all parts of the plea in barre shall be tried and the issue will be full of multiplicity Trollop Case 6. Jacobi fo 68. THe Defendant in error pleads excommunication c. and sheweth the Certificat of the Vicar generall de D. the words of which were Vniversis clericis literatis per totam diocesim D. the Plaintiffe pleads the generall pardon 3. Jac. 1. Resolved the officiall cannot certifie excommunication for none shall doe that but he to whom the Court may Write to assoile the party as the Bishop and Chancellour of C. or O. and for that if a Bishop certifie and dye Before the returne of the Writ it shall not be received but the Successor shal doe it and one Bishop shall not certifie an Excommunication made by a Bishop in another Court but a Bishop after Election before Consecration may and so may the Vicar generall if it appeare that the Bishop is in Remotis agendis 2. The Certificat is insufficient because by the particular direction to the Clerks of D. the Kings Court and all others are excluded and so a protection in one Court serveth not in another and Excommunication is such a thing as the Court of the King hath conusance and therefore the Suite and the Cause are to be expressed in the Certificat that the Kings Court may judge of the sufficiency and if it be insufficient as if a Bishop certifie an excommunication made by himselfe in his owne Cause the Court may write to absolve him If the Certificat had beene good the point was whither the generall pardon dischargeth an excommunication or not Whitlocks Case 6. Jacobi fo 69. A Revertioner upon an estate for life levys a fine to the use of himselfe untill Marriage of his Sonne and then to the use of himselfe for life with power to make Leases so that they exceede not 21. yeares or three lives reserving the ancient rent the remainder to his Sonne in fee the Sonne is Marryed the Father maketh a Lease for 99. yeares if two shall so long live reserving rent to him his heires and the reversioners this is a good Lease 1. Resolved he had pursued his authority for if he had a perticular power to make Leases for 21. yeares or three lives he cannot make leases determinable upon lives but having a generall power to make Leases so that they doe not exceede 21. years or three lives he may 2. The rent reserved goeth to the Sonne although that he who reserved it had but for life because the Lease for yeares hath no being out of the Lease for Life but out of the Fee and in judgement of Law preceedeth both in construction upon the limitation of uses but the most safe way here had beene to reserve the rent generally and lest it to the distribution of the Law Greenelyes Case 7. Jacobi fo 71. BAron and Feme Tenants in speciall taile the Baron infeoffeth P. G. and dieth the Feme dyes the Sonne enters and Leaseth to the Plaintiffe 1. Resolved if Baron joyntenant in speciall taile with his Wife had made a Feoffement or had beene
he lost his Common the Jury found that the Defendant did not put in the Beasts but they of themselves depastured there 1. The Jury have found the substance of the issue for the Plaintiffe the depasturing there and it is not materiall if he put them not there 2. This Action lyeth for the Commoner for he may distreine damage feasant and it may be that with strong hand he is hindered to distreine and so if he shall not have this Action he is remedilesse 2. A Commoner who had freehold in the common shall have an Assize Ergo a Copy-holder shall have this Action 3. The wrong ought to be so great that the Commoner loose his Common as a Master shall not have an Action for beating his Servant without losse of his Service and it appeareth not to the Court that there are more Commoners then he and if there be yet an Action lyeth because each had private damage and it is not like to a common Nusans which shall be punished onely in a Leete if there be not speciall damage but be the Trespasse never so little the Lord may have an Action of Trespasse The Lord Sanchars Case 10. Jacobi fol. 117. For procuring the Murther of John Turnor Mr. of Defence 1. REsolv That a Baron of Scotland shall be tried by Commons of England 2. The Indictment of the accessory in one County to a Fellony in another County by the Statute of 2. E. 6. c. 24. shall recite that the fellony was done in the other County for an Indictment is no direct affirmation of the fact 3. The Justices of the Kings Bench are within these words of the Statute Justices of Gaole-delivery or Oyer and Terminer for they are the supreame Judges of Gaole-delivery 4. The Lord Sanchar cannot be in the Terme-time Arraigned in Midd. before Justices of Oyer and Terminer because Justices of Oyer and Terminer shall not sit in the same County where the Kings Bench is but the principalls were Arraigned in L. in the Terme-time because this is another County 5. There needs not be 15. dayes for the returne of the Venire facias upon an Indictment in the same County where the Kings Bench is otherwise in another County 6. Because there is no direct proofe that the Lord S. commanded one of the principalls but that he associated himselfe to one who was commanded the best way is to arraigne him as accessory to him whom he commanded but if he be Indicted as accessory to two and found accessory to one of them this is good The word Appeale in the Statute of W. 1. c. 14. is to be intended generally Viz. By Indictment by Writ or Bill c. and attainders is to be intended upon any such accusation Ergo if upon any such accusation the principall be attainted erroneously the accessory may be arraigned because the attainder is good untill it be reversed but if the Accessory be Hanged and after the Attainder against the principall is reversed the Heire of the Accessory shall be restored to all which his Father lost either by entry or Action By 5. H. 4. cap. 10. none shall be imprisoned by Justices of Peace but in the Common Gaole whereby it appeares that Justices of Peace offend who commit Fellons to the Counters in L. and other Prisons which are not Common Gaoles Cases in the Court of Wards Anthony Lowes Case 7. Jacobi fol. 122. A. L. Tenant of 59. Acres parcell of the Mannor of A. by chivalry and Suite of Court to B. whereof A. was parcell and both A. and B. were parcell of the Duchie of L. out of the County Palatine holden formerly of the King in Chivalry in Capite and of another House there holden of A. by fealty and rent H. 8. grants the rent by release to him and confirmeth his estate in the said Lands by fealty onely and grants to him the Mannor of A. Tenendum by fealty and rent It was Objected that when the King grants the Seigniory to his Tenant the ancient Seigniory is extinct and a new one that is best for the King created Viz. Chivalry 2. When he extinguisheth services parcell of the Mannor of A. this shall be holden as the Mannor of A. is that is by Chivalry But resolved that the 59. acres and house shall be holden by fealty onely and as to the said Objection the release of the King doth not extinguish service which is inseparable to a Tenure that is fealty but all others are gone and true it is when the K. grants and expresseth no tenure it shall be by Chivalry but when the Land moveth from a Subject and the Tenure is changed the new Tenure shall be as neere the ancient as may be as Feoffee of Tenant in Frankalmoigne shall hold by fealty onely and here although they grant the services yet he limits the grantee to doe fealty A Knights fee is not to be taken according to the quantity but the value of the Land as 20. l. per annum and a Hide of Land is as much as a Plough can Plough in a yeare Reliefe is the fourth part of the annuall value that is of a Knight five pound of a Baron a 100. Markes of an Earle 100. l. of a Marques 200. Markes of a Duke 200. l. The Eldest Sonne of E. 3. called the black Prince was the first Duke in England and Robert Earle of Oxford in the Raigne of R. 2. was the first Marques and the Lord Beaumont was the first Viscount created by K. H. 6. Floyers Case 8. Jacobi fol. 125. BAron and Feme seized of Lands holden in Chivalry in right of the Feme in Fee levy a Fine to one who grants and renders to them and the heires of the Baron and levy another Fine to their use for life the remainder to their three Sons in taile one after another the remainder in fee to the heires of the Baron the K. shall have neither wardship of body nor Land 1. Resol That is out of the Statute of 32. H. 8. cap. 2. if he who had the fee dye c. in respect the estate by the first Fine did not continue and this although both the Conveyances are voluntary 2. The King shall not have wardship of the third part because it is not for advancement of the Wife for in the first Fine the Land moved from her and shee had no more by the second Fine then by the first 3. In regard the particuler estate is out of the Statute no wardship accrueth to the King by advancement of him in the remainder but if a revertioner upon an estate for life convey it to the use of his Wife this will give wardship of the body of the heire for he in revertion is tenant if a Lease for life be the remainder to two and to the heires of one he who hath the fee dyeth his heire shall not be in ward if the heire of one joyntenant who had the fee dye of full age living the tenant for
the Lord Dyer made a Quaere of that if one of the Jurors die before Verdict be given a Tales shall be granted he who is meerly a Defendant cannot pray a Tales untill default be made by the Plaintiffe the number ought to be under the number in the principall pannell except in an appeale because there the Defendant may challenge peremptorily the number shall be diminished in every new Tales and they ought to be of the same quality with the former as if the principall pannell were Per medietatem linguae so shall the Tales be Justices of Assize shall not award a Tales de circumstantibus in an Assize for the Statute of 35. H. 8. c. 6. speaketh where the Triall is Habeas corpora distringas or Nisi prius for an Assize cannot be taken by Nisi prius but must be taken in the proper County and after by advice of all the Justices of the common place and Barons of the Exchequer the judgement was affirmed Humphrey Lofields Case 10. Jacobi fol. 106. In debt upon Bond. D. Leased for a yeare to H. L. and if the parties shall please to renue the terme at the end of that yeare that he shall have for three yeares rendring 40 l. per annum H. L. bindeth himselfe to performe Covenants and faileth of payment of 20 l. at Christmas Quarter D. bringeth debt It was resolved for the Plaintiffe It was objected against the action 1. That the reservation was upon a contingency if the terme shall revive 2. Because the reservation is durante termino praedicto Viz. the last terme 3. The reservation shall be taken strictly because the words of the Lessor But it was resolved that the reservation extendeth to the first yeare for the proper place of a reservation is after the limitation of the estate as if a Lease be made with diverse remainders over reserving Rent this goeth to all and although the second terme be in contingency yet the first is certaine and Termino praedicto signifieth both the termes for it is Nomen collectivum and the reservation shall be taken reasonably according to the intent of the parties Tenant in taile of an Acre in borough English and of another by the Common Law by an Oxe dyeth having issue two Sons the service shall not be increased And Increase is onely betweene very Lord and very Tenant for there may be an increaser but not where there is a reservation or if the Seigniory be by Deed and services are reserved within time of memory for he shall have no more then he himselfe reserved In the Case at Barre in respect the obligation was forfeited the Court moved the Plaintiffe to take his arrerages costs and damages with which he was contented and so no judgement was given Arthur Legats Case in subversion of pestilent Patents of theevish Concealors 10. Jacobi fol. 109. in Communi Banco THe King ex certa scientia c. grants fifteene Acres as concealed which were parcell of a Mannor of the profits whereof the King was answered Nothing passeth 1. Resol If the King were answered of the old Rent of the Mannor and the Fermors c. suffer one to intrude in part this is not concealed 2. The grant is voyd for quae quidem c. is the suggestion of the party 2. This is a clause of restraint and nothing passeth which is not concealed 3. The King did not intend to diminish his Revenue which will be if the grant be good 4. The clause quae quidem hath a double conjunctive concelata detenta and Land cannot be detained from the King 3. Ex mero motu c. aydeth it not 4. If the Officers of the King may by matter of Record have notice of putting the Land in charge in Court of Record and doe it not yet this is not concealed and if the clause quae quidem be added for more certainty the grant shall not be vicious by it if it be false as if a Mannor be granted quod quidem was in the tenure of I. S. where it was not this is good If one substract or take the Kings Rents this is not concealed for the King may charge him as Baily and the Law will make a privity See the Statute of 4. H. 4 cap. 4. called in the Rolle Brangwyn in English White Crow And it was sayd that Perpetuities Monopolies and Patents of concealement were borne under one unfortunate constellation for as soone as they came in question judgement was ever given against them and none ever for them and they have all two inseperable qualities Viz. to be troublesome and fruitlesse Robert Pilfolds Case 10. Jacobi fol. 115. THe Plaintiffe in trespasse counts to damages of 40 l. and at the Nisi prius the Jury assessed for damages 49 l. and 20 s. costs at the day in banke hee released 9 l. parcell of the damages and had judgement of 40 l. and 10 l. for costs de incremento the defendant brings error because the damages and costs surmount the summ in the Count but judgement was affirmed for in reall actions before the Statute of Glocester 6. E. 1. cap. 1. no damages were recoverable but in personall actions and mixt they were and by that Statute a man shall have costs in all cases where he recovers damages Viz. before or by the same Statute therefore if after this damages are given where they were not at the Common Law costs shall not be recovered as in a Quare impedit but if a Statute after this give double or treble damages where damages and costs were by the common Law there the Plaintiffe shall recover the damages increased and costs also but in waste against tenant for life costs shall not be recovered for although that this Statute was at the same Parliament yet it was an act of Creation and therefore no costs And true it is that damages include costs in a generall sense but in the count it is taken for damages before the action brought in a relative signification therefore expensae litis may be added to it although he count not of them as a man shall doe in reall actions without counting of them because he shall recover them pending the Writ In entrie sur disseisin the Plaintiffe shall recover damages from the disseisin to the Writ of Inquiry c. and if the issue be tryable by verdict c. to the verdict but in a Praecipe of Rent of his owne possession hee shall recover all arreares to the judgement Judgement affirmed by all Cheyneyes Case 10. Jacobi fol. 118. IN a Valore maritagij issue is joyned upon the tenure and found for the Plaintiffe but the Jury did not inquire of the value Adjudged the verdict is insufficient and shall not be supplyed by a Writ of Inquiry 1. In this Writ three things are to be recovered the value damages and costs and although the issue be joyned upon the tenure yet as a consequent upon the issue and their charge they ought to