case GOODDAY against Michael parishioner can allege a right by prescription to  abate nuisance and obstruction to their perambulation in Rogationweek ante  post SC Owen sand lev   Ent bro Ent Foxalls case ante the plea must precise  answer the allegation in the declaration   light Mod shall salk plead by a  because adjudge have I sand dyer trespass quare clausumfregil and two gate and  three perch the defendant justify for that the say close be within the parish  of rudham and that all the parishioner there from time whereof c have use to  go over the say close upon their perambulation in Rogationweek et because the  plaintiff obstruxil two door et tres particalas sepium in with prcedidd the  defendant he ing one oh the parishioner door et tres particalas that see  piumfregit c and it be thereupon demurrer and after argument by the sergeant  the court resolve for the plaintiff Anderson it be not to he doubt but that  parishioner may well justify the go over any man land in their perambulation  accord to their usage and to abate all nuisance in their way as f n b b and  the book of entry but whether the justification here be good or not be the  question and he hold it to he ill for parishioner can prescrihe neither in  matter of easement nor interest nor otherwise but in matter of easement as a  way to the church or common fountain or otherwise they ought to allege custom  or usage within the parish as Edward pl pound Edward pl be a see car c Mod  salk skin Mod Ve nit bunb andr ante croak Elizabeth er p second the plaintiff  declare of the break of two gate et tresParticat sepium the defendant make  title to a way and because the plaintiff make two door et tres particat sepium  and do not say prcedictas the defendant door el hedge that to break in pieces  so he justify the break of the gate and hedge in his bar mention but he answer  not to they whereof the plaintiff declare and thereto agree and the justice  that this fault in the bar be incurable for Walmsley say that he thereby do  not answer to that wherewith the plaintiff charge he for it may he that the  plaintiff have erect four door el sex particatas sepium and the defendant have  break all of they whereof for two gate and three perch of the hedge he may  justify for the cause allege and for the other two gate and three perch c cast  down he bring the action so the defendant answer not to they whereof the  plaintiff complain and he can refer it to those mention in the declaration but  to the door el hedge mention in the bar the bar be also ill for another cause  for that it be et because the plaintiff to build against door c whereas he  ought to have aver precise gubd to build against for otherwise no issue can he  take wherefore it be adjudge for the plaintiff