ccxlvi tempest and mallet case in nullo be erratum in a action of trespass by  tempest against mallet judgement be give and eror bring and assign for error  that whereas the action be bring against four one of they die meine betwixt  the award of the nisi prius and the inquest take and it be say on the part of  the defendant in the writ of error which be enter upon the record that the  plaintiff show unto the court the death of one of the defendant and pray  judgement against the other see h Elizabeth and there be a difference where in  a action of trespass there be but one defendant and where many another error  be assign the defendant to bring before see per Higgins attorney suum without  show his Christian name as John or William for Higgins only without the  Christian name be not any name if or it be but a addition to show which John  or William coke the same be help by the statute of h cap where it be enact  that after verdict judgement shall be give notwithstanding the lack of warrant  of attorney of the party against who the issue shall be try or any default or  negligence of any the party their counsellor or attorney and of necessity this  default here in the Christian name ought to be the fault of one of they see  also Elizabeth cap for want of any warrant of attorney c Glanville the statute  provide for default of warrant of attorney c then coke to what end be the  statute of Elizabeth make for the statute of h provide for defect of warrant  of attorney Glanville the first statute for warrant of attorney of such person  a Leonard against who the issue be try but the late stat be general another  error be assign quod defendens to take in hand where the offence so the fine  be pardon by parliament and therefore the entry of the judgement ought to be  et de fine nothing because perdonatur coke the judgement be well enough for in  every general pardon some person be except and it do not appear if the  defendant here be one of they and then the fine be not pardon for the court  can take notice of that as it be hold in sergeant Harris case but if the  defendant be charge with the fine then he ought to plead the pardon and to  show that he be not any of the person except and afterward at another day the  defendant do allege that there be a warrant of attorney in the common plea and  also it appear upon record that the defendant do appear upon the supersedeas  by attorney who have his full name and therefore pray a certiorari de to make  new to certify the same matter vide e Wray a case here great debate betwixt  the Lord Norris and Braybrook and upon advice such a writ of certiorari be  grant after the plaintiff have plead in nullo be erratum for this plea in  nullo be erratum go but to that which be contain within the body of the record  and not unto collateral matter sure warrant of attorney and afterward the writ  of error be allow and upon the day of return thereof it appear upon the record  of supersedeas that the defendant do appear by such a one his attorney but it  be say by the court that there ought to be two appearance the one upon the  supersedeas and the other when the plaintiff declare see as to the name of the  attorney Tirrells case mark dyer cro cro cro hill Elizabeth in the king bench