b Burleigh versus harris No writ of error in person thou lie after affirmance  this be a action bring in the Marshalsea court against a woman who plead non  assumpsit and give her coverture in evidence but judgement be give for the a  this case be thus report by sir I strange the churchwarden be cite into the  court of Litchfield to account they plead that they have account at the vestry  accord to law which be reject and a prohibition grant for the ordinary be not  to take the account he can only give a judgement quod computent and to what  purpose shall they be send back to those who have take their account already  the same rule be make in Scaccario pasch Geo between Haughton et all  churchwarden of saint Alban Woodstreet and Kendrick et all and the case of the  churchwarden of Hammersmith mich Geo Nutkin v Robinson and vide Lutw and  Prideaux to churchwarden b this case be thus report by sir John strange a  judgement be recover in the Marshalsea and error bring in b r and error in law  assign and the judgement affirm then a writ of error in person thou be bring  and error in fact assign and the court stay proceed upon it and give leave to  take out execution for as error in fact and law can be both assign on one writ  there be no reason to do it by a more dilatory method and it be like the case  of Lambell v Pellyjohn where it be hold that error in person thou will not lie  after affirmance in the exchequer Chamber beside it will be very odd that the  same court shall affirm and reverse and as to the case in salk where it be  report to lie after affirmance that be not warrant by the record which be  enter hill James by which it appear the writ of error abate and there be no  affirmance which be agreeable to roll Abr Cunnigham er p plaintiff upon which  she bring a writ error here and assign the general error and judgement be  affirm after which she bring here a writ of Cunningham error in person thou  resident and assign her coverture for error upon which a rule be make to show  cause why the proceed on this writ of error shall not be stay upon which Mr S  to show cause say that this be the same case with Thompson and lion pasch Geo  where such writ of error be allow and that the case of a horn a this case be  thus report by sir I strange error be bring of a judgement in the Marshalsea  court and error in law assign and the judgement affirm then a writ of error in  person thou which the court say can not be allow without leave and therefore  hold it no supersedeas the same case be report in a ms in the follow manner a  action be bring in the Marshalsea court against a woman who plead coverture  and after verdict judgement be give for the plaintiff a writ of error be bring  in this court the general error be assign and the judgement be affirm the last  term plaintiff in error bring another writ here in person thou resident and p  move that this writ of error in person thou shall be set aside and that the  defendant in error may have liberty to take out execution S contra cite the  case of Thompson and lion p Geo in this court which be thus there be a action  in the marshal sea against a woman who plead the general issue and on the  trial give her coverture in evidence but judgement be give against her and  then she bring a writ of error here and assign the general error and judgement  be affirm upon which she bring a writ of error here in person thou resident  and assign her coverture for error and on application to this court to set it  aside the court refuse to do it now there be the same error assign which be  find against her in the Marshalsea court and we on our writ of error have not  as yet assign any error but they move this on suggestion videlicet that we  shall assign the coverture for error but it be mere suggestion for they can  possible tell what we shall assign for error p there be a plain difference  between the case of Thompson and lion and our case page I there be so for in  the case cite it can appear what be give in evidence it not be in the record  but here be a error assign of a fact which appear by the record of the plea to  have be determine p a writ of error in person thou resident do not lie in this  court after a judgement give on a writ of error in this court a writ of error  in person thou be of necessity when a judgement be original give in this court  but when a writ of error be bring in the exchequer Chamber and the writ of  error be send down here by a remittitur it have be determine that in such case  a writ of error in person thou do not lie here so be lev keb Lambell and  Prettyjohn hill Geo S this be a case of consequence and not fit to be  determine on a motion but that such error will lie here appear by these case  salk show Yelv lee I it do not appear what the error assign in the case of  Thompson and lion be which be very material to be know for a writ of error in  person thou be to be allow or reject by the court as they think proper in vent  it be express say that a writ of error in person thou shall be allow by the  court and I apprehend the court have power to permit the defendant in error to  take out execution in case they do not approve of the error assign page I a  writ of error in person thou must be by direction of the court and they will  not grant it for delay and if you do not show we a sufficient reason to the  contrary we will hinder you from delay defendant from take out execution  probin I you must have leave of the court for a writ of error in person thou  and if you do not show we sufficient reason to grant it we ought to allow of  the motion cur order the writ of error in person thou to be set aside and that  the defendant may take out execution lee I cite the follow case buller and  Lusitano m Geo Mod vent Carth warder and Stocow and say that in the case of  Thompson and lion this point never come before the court Cunnigham er p and  bushel pasch Geo be different from this for there the coverture be special  plead so that it Cunningham must appear on record that that matter have be  already adjudge whereas in this case it be only give in evidence Mr p cite  salk and lily Ent to show that salk be mistake and vent lev keb hill Geo  Lambel and a Prettyjohn the court put it off for a day to look into the case  of Thompson and lion and then the Ch just say that in that case there be a  rule make to show cause why the assignment of error shall not be set aside as  appear by the rule itself and that the irregularity of the writ of error  itself never come in question by motion to quash it or set it aside so that  the case at bar depend on the general rule of law and I think there be no  foundation to say that such writ will lie as to salk it be a error of a fine  and the record be print in lily entry and there it appear it be bring after  abatement and not affirmance of the writ of error I think you can no more  bring a writ of error in person thou resident in this court after a judgement  have be affirm by a writ of error in the same court than you can assign error  of law and fact in the same writ for either of they be equal grievous and  dilatory and if this be to be suffer it will be every day practice and  therefore per cur the rule to set aside the proceed on the writ of error be  make absolute but the Ch just say that they shall move to quash the writ of  error and the court seem to confirm the judgement give in horn and bushel that  such writ be no supersedeas till a allowance from the court because bail be  not require to be give on it