Bulstrode dominus king plaintiff against STAFFERTON and brown defendant a  information upon a quo warranto for claim liberty Cr Yel a information upon a  quo warranto by what warranty they claim to have certain liberty brown one of  the defendant disclaim in all the liberty and so a judgement enter against he  for the king upon his disclaimer the defendant Stafferton disclaim likewise in  all but only in one and that be to have and hold a court baron and for  maintenance of this by his plea he show that sir Henry Nevil be seize of a  ancient manor of which manor the manor of Newman and other be parcel and  convey to himself from sir Henry Nevil a admittance to the manor of Newman in  Elizabeth and so likewise of two other S of lake and Bulstrode er p Ayleworth  these by the name of so many acre and show that a message and seven acre of  customary land use to be demise be to he convey by sir Henry Nevil tenendum  secundum experience manor the sole and only question in this case upon this  quo warranto be whether Stafferton by his plea have so well entitle himself to  the manor of Newman as that he may justify the keep of a court baron against  this quo warranto it be argue that where there be a manor there of common  right as incident thereunto be a court baron and this appear to be so by the  book of e foe Even as a court of pipowders be incident to a fair and with this  agree the book of h Br case foe plan b title incident plan here in this  principal case the quo warranto be quare proclaim rashly curian baron in Tr e  Brit title quo warranto plan quo warranto he claim to hold a court of his  tenant within his manor it be there hold that it be sufficient for he to show  that he there have a manor without say any iliore and there it be say that he  deed not to make any further or other answer therellntO so be may well have  plead here that he have a manor without savinZ any more kellaway foe in  journey en temps roy e plan en Gern see un quo warranto issuist pur c he claim  to have a court of his tenant it be here say that the commonlaw give he a  court of his tenant and therefore he ought not to make any claim to it for  that this lie not in point of franch so here in this principal case the court  baron lie not in point of franch but admit that he ought to make a title unto  this manor he have here make a good and a sufficient title one manor may well  be parcel of another and one manor may be hold of another as appear by the  book of h foe all that be here desire be but to hold a court baron as to the  manner of his title here make be entitle himself to this manor of newnam by  this manner of conveyance by the name of a message and of seven acre of land  customary use to be demise tenendum secundum experience manor in hill e foe  plan where the conveyance to a manor be plead to be by the name of two message  and of two carews of land and by e foe and e a fine plead of a manor by the  name of land and there it also appear that a manor may well pass by the name  of land or of a message also a manor may be know by the name of priory or  chaUntery and by the same name it may pass as appear by the book of e foe  where a feoff in approach of a manor by the name of knight fee and this be  there hold to be good this have usual carry the name of knight fee and the  same may well pass by this name either by fine or by feoffinent here in this  principal case the manner be cogniturn peremptory or urgent call by the name  of seven yard land as well as by the name of manor and so in this manner the  same pass and so here be a good interest set forth by the defendant that this  be time out of mind dernize by copy and this be be sufficient for he to keep a  court baron as incident thereunto Yelverton all contrary and pray Bulstrode  that the defendant may be oust from keep of this court baron it be here say in  this principal case that sir Henry Nevil be seize of the manor of c of which  the manor of c newnam and other be parcel and that in Elizabeth he be admit  unto this and so unto the two other by the name of so many acre but as to the  manor of Newnarn there be no plea at all make b he as to the case cite in e Br  title quo warranto plan quo warrant he hold a court of his tenant in his manor  there he plead that he have a manor and this be sufficient here he entitle  himself unto seven yard land and S refit eastern warranto claim to hold a  court baron this be no good plea for it be unpossible for a copyhold manor to  be a manor for that he can have any freeholder and one can have a manor if he  be not capable to have a escheat and therefore a copyhold manor can be a manor  also it be here allege that this be only a manor in reputation and that this  may pass in this manner by a conveyance and that one manor may be parcel of  another and one manor may be hold of another this principal case here be out  of the reason give in kelloway before cite the king be the original of all  franchise and a quo warranto be the king writ a tenant at will have not title  to keep such a court be but a customary tenant himself of a manor the king  here ought to be answer in chief and it be to be observe for a rule that none  can plead in chief with the king but be which have a freehold and herethe  defendant which have only Bulstrode er p a estate at will and so can hold a  court baron because he be not capable of a escheat croak justice the plea here  of the defendant be not good the same be in it self repugnant for that it be  impossible for one manor to have two court baron they be two manor here but  that be so to visit looking back non simpliciter absolute this here be a great  usurpation upon the prerogative of the king for one to use a manor and keep a  court baron and that without have of any good title tenant at will of a manor  may grant a copyhold estate but not keep a court baron be have make no good  rule here and so he ought to be debar from hold of a court baron William  justice it be to be consider whether a quo warranto lie against one to show by  what title be keep a court baron or not as to this in the beginning all these  liberty be in the crown and as it be say in kelloway foe the king be the  original of all franchise and the quo warranto be call the king writ and that  a quo warranto lie of a court baron this appear by old naturan narrow places  foe the sole and only authority for this where it be say that this writ of quo  warranto lie for the king in case where a man usurp certain franchise upon the  king as for to have wafe or stray mareb or ferry or a court baron or any such  like without any good title and against the will of the king if he have good  title to hold this he must make this to appear this court baron be incident to  every manor but as to this it be to be understand to be of a manor in facto  and in truth but not to be as in this principal case a manor only in  intendment and a dominal manor a man can have a court baron without a manor  for that this court be incident to a manor and can be sever from it as appear  by the book of h Br case foe plan Br title incident plan a court baron be  incident to a manor and a court of pipowders to a fair and the lord of the  manor can grant away his court to another and if he grant away the manor or  fair he can reserve such court unto himself for that they be incident to the  manor h foe Br title incident plan there by Bryan to every manor there be  incident a court baron and by vavisor there be certain thing that be incident  to the principal as fealty to homage homage to escuage a court of pipowders to  a fair and a court baron to a manor and by the grant of the principal these  thing do pass without be name Elizabeth dyer plan the king by his letter  patent do lease the manor of rock unto or ne for year except all the court and  perquisite afterward the king grant the reversion to a stranger with the  perquisite and court the grantee make another lease to Bulstrode be after the  first lease end except court perquisite it be there hold that this exception  be good in a lease of the king contrary in the lease of the grantee the same  be repugnant to the lease of the manor h fol every manor have a court baron as  incident to the same in common right Fitzherbert title court plan also to a  manor there be requisite to be demesne and service here in this case he ought  to make a good title to the manor otherwise he can justify the kee I fig of a  court baron if a man have acre of land and these pass unto he by the name of a  manor this be good but yet this shall not be in he as a manor a copiholder can  grant a copyhold this be impossible here in this case in question he have only  the name of a manor but not the effect of it in a quo warranto a customary  court be not in question but at the commonlaw one manor may be hold of another  this be clear and when the same escheat the other be extinguish and the new  remain and this appear by sir Henry Nevil case cook page fol where it be  resolve that there may be such a customary manor hold by copy and that such a  customary lord may keep court and grant copy and that such a customary manor  may pass by sum render and admittance but in this principal case there be no  book nor any authority in the law to warrant the defendant to keep a court by  reason of this copyhold manor which he have he have make no title unto himself  unto the manor and so he be not any way enable to hold and keep a court baron  and so his plea to this quo warranto by way of justification be not good nor  to be allow of as sufficient Yelverton burn e usurpation deal lete and court  baron in this quo warranto be examinable it be to be consider whether here be  any good bar and title make against the king in this quo warranto it be for  clear that neither the bar nor title here make be good but that by the  judgement upon this quo warranto he ought to be oust of this court baron a man  can not malie a manor at this day as appear Bulstrode er p by h fol Br title  comprise plan that a manor can be but by ancient continuance for a manor can  be make at this day a man which have not a court can enable another to keep a  court and there can be a manor without a court Perkins chap reservation fol  plan as touch the commencement of a manor a court baron be incident to a manor  and be not to be sever from it unless it be in the case of the king but not by  a common person this be not possible to be do by the same name as land come by  the same name the land may well pass again but this can make this to be a  manor one manor may be parcel of another for a time but not perpetual one may  be lord of another and there be no question to be make but this which escheat  do continue to be a manor still the quantity of land by which the same be pass  be not material that a quo warranto ell lie h c in this case to know why be  keep a courtbaron without any title make to enable he so to do and this be  very clear and not to be question the reason of this be for that this place  for seal or signature a jurisdiction the which he can have nor maintain  without a manor the question here be whether he may maintain and justifle his  keep of a court baron by his have of the copyhold manor hold of another manor  and clear he can and as touch his title here make it be very clear that here  he have make no good title to justify his keep of this court baron against the  king and therefore by judgement of the court upon this quo warranto he ought  to be oust from keep of this court baronFlemming chief justice the first point  here considerable be whether a quo warranto lie for the keep of a court baron  in a manor or not a court baron be incident inseparable to a manor without any  grant to he make by the king to keep the same and this be not claim out of the  crown but be to be use and hold of necessity de necessitate and no  jurisdiction by this draw or derive out of the crown by this these court be to  be hold to avoid inconveniency and this be to be so without any special grant  of the king manor can be at this day create unless it be by way of derivation  as be derive out of the ancient manor which descend unto coparceners in this  case upon partition Bulstrode have of such a manor between they the same shall  now be in they as several manor as appear in h foe where it be agree in the  end of the case of common that if a manor descend to two or more coparceners  and they make partition so that every one of they have part of the demean and  part of the service and so each of they have a manor and Br title manor plan  in abridge of that case conclude therefore to see that each of they may keep a  court so that here necessity and inconveniency cause they to have several  court but Br make this a quere whether they shall hold several court in as  much as it be agree for law in the starchamber that it be not a manor unless  where there be two freeholder at the least and in Br title Cause plan it  appear that in the re gister foe ill the parole be remove out of the court  baron for that there be there but four suitor and therefore it be the say  quere what number be sufficient when there be no more if the creation of the  manor do not come from the king the court baron be incident unto it the court  of pipowders and fair do come and be derive original out of the crown a manor  may be and not derive out of the crown and therefore ex consequent neither the  court baron which be incident to such a manor but a court leet be g horned owl  incident to a manor but he which have a manor may also have a court leet to be  by he hold within his manor but this ought for to be by a special grant from  the king and not otherwise and then he may punish offender the which he can do  in his court baron he can be oust of his court baron unless he be oust of his  manor for if he have a manor he ought to have such a court baron for this be  as a incident and follow the manor as a necessary subsequent and adjunct unto  the manor and therefore if be have the one S the manor he shall also have the  other S the court baron there be no doubt to be make but that a quo warranto  well lie for to show how and by what right and title be keep a court baron but  it be to be well consider of to who the writ of right of the king shall be  direct be quod dominus to let go back debet curian svan baronam his plea here  be that three other manor be within the great manor of c and usual demise by  copy of court roll a manor before the statute may be very well derive out of  another manor but he ought to have say here that such a manor have be use time  out of mind to be grant by copy and also that time out of mind such grantee or  donee have use Bulstrode er p also to hold such court baron and also to grant  copy of court roll to other and so he ought to have prescribe in all this time  out of mind and then this will have be good and much better than here it be  the plea be here too short the other way have be a sure way and that without  all question but as the plea here be the same be too short and doubtful there  may be a copiholder of a manor whether a grant by copy make by such a  copiholder be good on not William justice Cleerement such a grant be not good  Fleming chief justice such a grant be clear good if he prescribe in this that  so it have be use time out of mind but not otherwise and this appear coke pa  foe and on sir Henry Nevil case where it be clear resolve by the whole court  that there may be a customary manor and hold by copy and that such a customary  lord may hold court and grant copy and that such a customary manor may pass by  surrender and admittance and that fine shall be pay upon admittance as well  upon alienation as upon dissent and there may be also a customary lord mesne  and a customary tenant as well in case where the mesnalty be a tenancy at will  accord to the custom of the manor as there be a tenancy at will at the  commonlaw of a manor and also if such a customary manor be forfeit the lord  shall have the custom and service as appertain unto the same and it be there  say that the manor of Aylesham in the county of Norfolk be hold by copy  Hubberd Le attorney Le roy the question be not here whetlfer be may drive this  from the king but whether he may give this to himself or not William Bulstrode  justice the suitor be the judge in a court baron Flem chief justice he may  have here suitor S those which pay their rend unto he William justice it be  here considerable whether he may draw the king subject to a court convey to he  here and by himself the writ of right in a court baron shall go and be direct  unto the lord paramount Fleming chief justice agree in this Fenner justice you  have no manor here and therefore you can have such a court baron as be only  incident unto a manor you can here hold plea in a writ of right nor do justice  curian all accord in this clear against this court baron and his keep of it  have make to himself no good title thereunto by his plead and that therefore  he ought by the judgement of the court upon this quo warranto bring against he  to be oust of the court baron by he keep but of nothing else that be pass unto  he afterward by the rule of the court judgement be give for the king in this  quo warranto that the same lie well against the defendant Stafferton for claim  to hold a court baron and that he have make no good title to himself by his  plead to this quo warranto to enable he to hold this court baron and therefore  judgement be give against he for the king to oust he for keep of this his  court baron which judgement be enter accord error upon remove OF a record  error upon remove of a record the record to be remove be take before and be  remove it appear to be take before this question be move upon the remove of a  record by the bishop of Durham upon a writ of error to certify the same  whetherlthe record as ertified be well remove or not the same be certify to be  take before eight and be remove it appear to be take before nine the principal  case be a record take before eight this be to be remove up into this court and  upon the certify of it it appear that the record certify and remove be take  before nine whereas the record to be remove be take before eight and so the  record certify and remove be not the record which be to have be certify and  this matter be assign for error Yelverton at the bar argue that this be  erroneous for that this can be take to be the same record for the record  proceed and judgement to be certify be take before eight and this which be  remove make mention of a record take before nine and therefore it neither be  nor yet can be the same record John more argue to the contrary upon this  reason that the great number contain the lesser but not on the contrary  Fleming chief Jus ice the record certify to be take before eight and be remove  it appear the same to be take before nine and so not the same Yelverton  justice all the proceed at Durham Bulstrode er p be by commission and there  may be two several commission the one before eightg and the other before nine  William justice if there be here any error at all there be sufficient warrant  for we to proceed to examine the error the record be here before we as to the  earl of Leicesters case in Plowdens comment foe in case of a indictment the  judgement be there reverse by a writ of error in this case the record be now  before we and erroneous a writ of error ought to be de think over quod in  person thou to sit back the commission direct to nine the writ of error make  mention but of the recital be that the judgement be before and certify to be  before this be erroneous Flem chief justice the writ be here direct to certain  person by their Bulstrode name and they be to certifle such a record and their  name or else they be to certify that there be no such record if they certify  part but not all may we proceed upon this and take this now for the same  record this be doubtful but it be better for they and the sure way the record  be now certify and here before we to have a writ of error de think over quod  in person thou to sit back the whole court agree clear in this William justice  we may also proceed here very well upon this error upon the record that be now  before we in this manner as well as if the record have be well remove all the  judge agree in this clear that the record be now here in court and therefore  the rule of the court be that they shall begin again de to make new in a writ  of error de think over quod in person thou to sit back quod notam