Carthew baker versus LADE Trin W m b r rot vent lev SC Mod SC comb SC where a  deed be plead as a grant and no attornment of the tenant this ill skin SC than  pl vide post in replevin c the defendant make conusance for arrear of a  rentcharge and Yelv hut cro roll Rep style Carthew er p set forth that one  Robert lade be seize in fee of the locus in quo c and by indenture grant a  rentcharge in fee to Nicholas marsh who devise it to his son Richard marsh in  fee who by deed indent in consideration of natural love and of S in money to  he pay by his son Nich marsh devoted to to go away prediction Nich marsh son  heir nest the aforesaid rend as by indenture produce it appear who indeed  permission ult mentionat nullo attornamento nec alian execution superinde  fanctam existen praeter solan sigillation deliberation ind operavi per way  assembly predict Richard marsh stare seized ad use in eaden concession  mentionat per quod vigor to cause to stand in use c the say Nich marsh the son  be seize of the say rentcharge in fee and the defendant as his bailiff  distrain for rend arrear and upon a demurrer to this plea in c b the defendant  bad judgement in this form videlicet quod to express grief nil to take in hand  c quod defendens eat ind without die quod to have return averiorum predict  detinend Himself irreplegiabile in continuous super hoc pillage the defendant  per to cause to stand c petit breve ad inquirend c concern the arrear of the  rend and the value of the cattle accord to the Oxford Act and thereupon  judgement c and upon a writ of error bring in b r the first error be assign  over as far as videlicet that the avowry be ill in the plead the conveyance of  the rend from Richard marsh to his son Nicholas marsh it be quod devoted to to  go away which be by way of grant to which the attornment of the tenant be  necessary and there be no attornment allege therefore this a void grant that  this a idle allegation for the defendant to say that this deed operate by way  of covenant to stand seize for though a deed may operate several way and this  in the election of the party to use such a deed accord to any particular  operation for his purpose Carthew yet the deed must be plead as such a  conveyance proper which work for his purpose and therefore in this case the  defendant shall have plead this deed as a deed of covenant to stand seize and  not as a deed of grant for every deed must be plead express accord to its  operation and not accord to the word at large the second error be that the  judgement be double videlicet one at commonlaw and the other by the new  statute and in this case where the avowant proceed on the statute and have  judgement there ought not to be any judgement de return habend for that be the  judgement at commonlaw say per curian the statute do not alter the judgement  at commonlaw but only give a far remedy so as to that point the judgement be  well give but it be resolve that the judgement be erroneous in the matter  assign for the first error for that the defendant have plead this deed as a  grant and have not show any attornment of the tertenant for if the plaintiff  have take issue upon to go away the defendant can not have maintain it by the  covenant to stand seize and for that error only the judgement be reverse and a  new judgement be give by the court for the plaintiff in replevin videlicet  quod recupere financial loss c as it ought to be where the plaintiff in the  action bring a writ of error but this otherwise where the defendant in the  original action bring a writ of error for in such case this quod judgment  reversetur vide stat Ann for amendment of the law