case Northleigh against LUSCOMBE that July bill for account of good land at a  certain key the plaintiff claim a right of tollage by prescription defendant  deny plaintiff title and refuse to discover the good and hold he be not  compellable till plaintiff have establish his right at law lib Reg b foe b  bill by plaintiff Lord of the manor of and claim by prescription to be entitle  to certain toll for land good at a certain key or on the adjoin beach of the  river Salcombe in Devonshire he and his predecessor lord of the manor have  time out of mind keep the key ambler c in repair and pray a discovery of the  good land there by thedefendants and relief the defendant by his answer deny  the title of the plaintiff and refuse to discover the quantity of good land  upon exception to the master report ambler er p Lord Henley chancellor be  clear of opinion that the defendant be not compellable to discover till the  plaintiff have establish his right at law where the title be in equity the  court will compel such a discovery but not where it be at law he say it will  be very inconvenient by put it in the power of every wharfinger or lord of a  manor to harass person and oblige they to make such discovery all that appear  of this case in lib Reg be that the exception take by the plaintiff come on to  be argue this day the same be overrule see city of London v Perkins bro p c vo  Edward city of London v ainsley Anstr corporation of maiden v coat mad duke of  Norfolk v Myers mad corporation oh f Carlisle v Wilson Ves corporation of read  v Winkworth price Mundy v Mundy Ves jun see the distinction take in Lord  tenham v Herbert atk but although a defendant be not bind to discover until  the plaintiff have establish his right yet it will seem that accord to the  modern decision he must in such case protect himself by plea or demurrer and  can by his answer object to answer full see the note to Dowsett v sweet ante  and in sharp v Macauley mad ovey v Leighton S S v Harrison mad but although a  defendant submit to answer he be not bind to answer as to any matter that will  tend to criminate he Curzon v de la zouch Swanst see Parkhurst v Lowton mere