case the lady russell case forcible entry in a indictment if a collateral fact  be express allege and the jury find it to have happen in a different county it  be void post   Litt b   hawk p c hawk p c a grant to a woman to have the  custody of a castle be good Calais Inst Inst cro car stram Bac Abr term Rep  averment in plead   b a person can be guilty of forcible entry into his own  house cro Elizabeth more keb if a person who have a office of the custody of a  house under the crown and deny entrance to he who have the inheritance it be a  forfeiture of the office   light b cro car more Bac Abr lady Russell prosecute  a indictment against diverse servant of the Lord admiral upon the statute of  Henry c for that the late queen by her letter patent under the great seal  recite whereas she have by her letter patent in the twentythird year of her  reign grant to one Richard Beak the office of the custody of the castle of  Dunnington with all profit thereto appertain and a annual fee for the exercise  thereof habendum for his life and have grant to her the reversion of that  office for her life post death surrender or forfeiture c that Richard Beak die  such a day at h in the county of Buckingham and that she afterward exercise  that office and the defendant with force expel her and seize her of that  office c diverse exception be take to this indictment croak throw first  because the jury find the death of Beak in another county which they ought not  to do for they ought not to find thing do in another county but it be void  therein and then the death of Beak be not find and so she have not any title  and although they may have find his death without express any place this find  as it be now be void and to this opinion the justice seem to incline but they  give not any resolution therein second for that a woman can have this office  of the custody of a castle because it appertain to the war and be to be  execute by man only say non allocatur because it be grant to her to be  exercise per see well deputy suum and it do not appear to be a castle of war  but may be a private house three because the indictment be that the queen  recite that she have grant it for life grant the reversion thereof and it be  not aver that the queen grant it for life otherwise the grant have not be good  and so no title show and to that opinion all the court incline croak James er  p fourthly that a indictment upon the statute of Henry c lie not for such a  office but there ought to have be a seize allege of the tenant of the freehold  of the house but the court deliver not any opinion therein the case of lady  Russell then appear to be that she have the office grant to her of the custody  of the castle with all profit c and the Lord admiral have the inheritance of  the house grant to he the Lord admiral send his servant with his stuff to the  house intend to use the house and lady russell servant deny they to enter  pretend that lady Russell be to have the use and dispose thereof during her  life which be allege to be a forfeiture of the office and to that opinion  incline all the court if such a disturbance have be by lady russell servant at  her command but if the servant do it on their own head it be otherwise and  therefore Popham say it be so resolve in the case of Lord Arundel for the  custody of nonesuch house which be grant to sir Edward Carden who deny Lord  Arundel who have the inheritance to come there to inhabit and it be resolve to  be a forfeiture