archer against bennet Tuesday June Tr car rot appendant Siderf pl by special  verdict in ejectment it be find that oaker be seize of a manor and message and  a close and have two mill on the west side and of a kell which he new erect  upon the other side then by meat and bind divide the close and feoff the  plaintiff of the west part of the close and the mill with the appurtenance  after assign the other part of the close with the manor unto the defendant and  whither to these ancient mill the kells will be sever pass as appurtenant have  be enjoy and use with the kell by assignment of the feoff who have both for a  year which by common reputation be sufficient to be so account parcel by  bigland for the plaintiff they shall this be the intent of the conveyance as  hill against grange pl com and also the end of the kell be to serve the mill  and so may as well be appurtenant as a shop to a house I Cr Brian I Cr Hern  against Allen seem contra but there the verdict find they be never enjoy  together as appurtenant or not intend to pass I Cr gennings against lake  adjudge in case of the king that such grant be good for the joint enjoyment Cr  reignolds against chamberlain because of the necessary use conduit be adjudge  to pass as appurtenant to the house especial be use joint by he that have the  inheritance any small time be sufficient to cause thing in be to pass in grant    contra to enable one to prescribe or make title as appurtenant also the mill  be useless without the kells and so as in Hub darcy against Askwith they shall  pass together Wilmot for the defendant in all the verdict the kell be not find  necessary I agree the case cite but ex naturan rei both mill and kell be  corporeal they can pass as appurtenant as in case of a manor which be compound  as Tirringhams case brief f also from the nature of appurtenants as Fleta lib  cap page the usage here be not above a year which be not sufficient to make it  appurtenant also have the demise be of the mill with the kell appurtenant it  have be good as in hill and Granges case cum terris pertinent pass the meadow  but by general word it will not have pass Br n case h Cr be on the same  diversity betwixt devise and demise also as e Snelfords assize both be enjoy  by I S and he grant away but the mill only the other can pass as appurtenant  also they have find the defendant seize of the manor general and no other  title for the plaintiff so whatever come after be superfluous Keeling conceive  strong it passes not be neither find necessary or belong to the mill Windham  accord that the verdict be short for it appear not but it be a limekill and  not kell purposely erect for the use of a mill in which case it will have be  parcel as a dove house or conduit be to a message also cum appurtenance be too  short without all kells appurtenant Twisden and hide accord judgement for the  defendant nisi