case coat against Robinson in what case a reextent may be issue into a  different county S c stram S c fort S c will sir Edward Northey open this in  easter term Geo to be a case in ejectment agree at nisi prius to be thus sir  William Jolliff be conusee of a statute of all land and extend land in  Staffordshire and have a liberate and be evict by extent on a prior statute  then without sue a to know facias be extend land in Nottinghamshire then in  mortgage to the lessor of the plaintiff and have a liberate on which the  lessor bring this action modern report er p Hanbury sergeant in open say there  be no eviction but sir William find the land first extend insufficient Hanbury  sergeant the commonlaw give execution only against good except for the king a  Inst a the statute of Westminster the second c give a elegit then Edward give  the statute of merchant and Edward c and hell c the statute staple these  statute therefore be in alteration of the commonlaw ought to be take strict  there may be extent into all county in England but they must be all award and  return about the modern report same time cro Ent raze so that sir William have  a opportunity to extend and then the account will be entire and not by  fraction where there be a liberate of good they be take for part of the debt  but the extent be to hold until what time be be satisfy the conusee may be  without remedy by his own default cro title stat pl roll Abr blow Com ross  case the land be not original the debtor for if a person release the land be  may afterward charge the body the land be only Chargeable as they belong to  the body at the time of the statute cro stat pl hob Shepperd roll Abr the  conusee by the first extent have make his election to be satisfy out of those  land then he have discharge the other in Nottinghamshire and shall not have a  extent to they Fitzherbert title exec pl Henry foe Richard Henry thus stand  the case before the statute of Henry which give a to know facias and be  explain in Inst Inst Rep Fulwoods case Rep bloomfield case cro hob sider lev  the last come to this case and be in lev and those two be that after a extent  in land there can be no execution against good much less a strong can there be  one against land in Leon pl extent to southton the sheriff give possession of  half and there be a sheriff non to cause to go breve then they take out a new  extent and return a extent not make this be a reextent for that imply only  against the land of the same person and need not be the same land the case of  Boucher be only that they may have extent into all the county in England but  that must be at one time the precedent be both way but they be of no authority  for the officer of the petty bag be not so very curious Pratt chief justice  the statute bind all his land if part be extend and the party accept it and it  be file whether he have not except those land to hold until what time and if  so whether not bind by his acceptance where land be in several county as in  one as to the value of the land the party must come at the return of the writ  and complain but if he have accept it the party be without remedy extent to  several county return at the same time must be take as one execution in Hilary  term Geo Chesshyre sergeant say the question be whether the second execution  be unwarranted I maintain it be good so often how often in as many county as  the party have land it arise on Henry c but brief to explain execution before  that Act and what alteration by that Act by Henry this have the force of a  statute staple which arise from Edward c by which due execution on inquiry be  on statute merchant and staple as all land be subject so execution must in  some case be against all or it may be defeat by hearing complaint so in a to  know facias against tertenants one plead other make default   Inst cro cro  more consequent there be some method to modern report extend the land though  in different county though by several writ and liberate and averment of land  extend in one county no conclusion but to part before Henry execution go into  all the county some for the whole some for part of the debt raze as appear by  precedent not unlike elegit and to know facias which go into all county dyer  Mod cro Brownl side roll pl Fitzherbert ex cro Elizabeth b some be for the  whole debt adjudge that execution ought to pursue the judgement   land in  several county can be extend but by several extent and liberate this be not a  reextent but the first and original extent and not proper call a alias if the  plaintiff be bar by liberate in the first county be never can have another  extent into another county which be not reasonable the statute Henry have make  a alteration it be to favour creditor be remedial modern report er p to help  creditor to their debt the Act give relief after perfect execution but be  never intend to stop person from go on to perfect execution beside this be not  a reextent after award of execution on a to know facias but a testatum of land  in another county a reextent on this statute can only be where the whole  extent be recover evict or take away No word in this statute can restrain a  extent in any other county as to elegit person be bind by acceptance of a  moiety of the land not of the writ hob if a void writ the party be not bind  pullen v Pinbeck but elegit will go into any other county and acceptance only  bind in that county Westminster have give a moiety of all land as statute  staple have all land as to the word in f n b c the lib si to take volveri they  be insert on account of Acton Burnell which make the acceptance on high  appraisement before return which mean if he will take the good at the price  and to refuse at the return land extend too high and pray a reextent so may  the defendant if appraise too low so that there may be a reextent even at  commonlaw ass pl ass pl roll Abr Henry c Edward c cro if liberate be not  return it be a good execution if the party have it to produce at a trial in  ejectment   hose case   such writ need no return reeves contra the case will  depend upon the law as it stand before Henry and we pretend no aid from that  statute to make it void only to show that if such reextent be not void there  will have be no occasion to make that statute the question be if this be  warrant by the statute de mercatoribus the statute say all land at the time of  the recognizance take which by this case he have not but I confess now the law  be settle and all land at the time of the recognizance statute staple or  merchant or after be liable I admit these land be liable but question if the  conusee have not bar himself by the return and liberate of the land in  Staffordshire the body of the debtor be modern report original debtor blow Com  and land become liable in respect of body but the creditor may accept part of  the land in satisfaction and discharge the rest at the return be may waive the  acceptance and pray a now extent into another county or pray extenders to take  the land if too high appraise the return of the sheriff be not conclusive but  the acceptance of the party if a man have a extent in one county and all land  deliver to he and the debtor purchase new land yet that be a satisfaction and  the new purchase land will not be liable the same law if land lie in different  county for some reason will hold and form of extent in several county be by  several writ take out at the same time for by writ in one county the sheriff  can extend land in another and such writ take notice of former writ in other  county Reg the precedent cite out of rastal prove that the law then be that  one writ may be a bar to all other county old Ent because they apportion part  of the debt dyer adjudge case which respect elegits be to this point and they  be in the same reason of law capias to take the body lie only on non invent  return roll Abr and interest of conusee determine before satisfaction Richard  b capias lie only in the county where extent lie before Henry b No land liable  on new extent case on elegit cro keb be in point I lev lev Lut this be not  within Henry but show what be before Inst a it appear by the preamble no  reextent be to he have but after full extent the word of Henry be general and  can be tie up to only a reextent in the same county Mod be object but odd  report there cro state the case true and there the suggestion be at the return  which waive the first writ roll Abr say the second extent be only voidable by  error but the case be true report in cro which contradict Mod and roll and the  court hold it total void this term the court deliver their opinion we be all  of opinion that the second extent be regular a prayer be enter at the time of  enter the first which the court of chancery allow note there be no judgement  it go off on proposal of go to a new trial modern report er p