case gunning against gunning a declaration in waste that the defendant plough  up the land which be pasture et such compose empty be bad for uncertainty even  after verdict roll Abr   light lev Mod Mod sand Ch Rep waste the defendant  plead no waste commit modus et form prout c the jury find he do modus et form  as in the count move in arrest of judgement that the plaintiff in his  declaration do not so much as allege a waste do but leaves it absolute  uncertain for he say that the defendant do plough up his land which be  pasturable et such empty fecit and so non constat to the court that it be  waste and the verdict do not help it for that only say they do it modus et  form prout in narration now the plough pasture may be or may not be waste and  to make it such it ought to have be pasture time out of mind and it be not  enough to say that this be pasture ground day ante Jones justice say arable  and pasture ground be convertible and that which be one of they this year may  be the other the next and the law do not so much distinguish and therefore  judgement be stay a a the court in the Trinity term follow be of opinion that  Edward have only a estate for life for there be a express limitation to he for  life and a estate tail limit to each of the son and judgement be accord give  for the plaintiff SC t Jones SC Freem the defendant bring a writ of error and  upon the first argument the court of exchequer incline to affirm the judgement  send vide SC raym but before it be affirm or reverse the suit abate by death  SC lie it be say however that a new ejectment be bring SC lev and that  judgement for the plaintiff be affirm on error in the exchequer Chamber by the  opinion of the great part of the judge and baron SC pollexfen and in a  marginal note to the case of Hodgson v Bussey it be say that on search make by  Mr justice Tracy this affirmation of the judgement for the plaintiff be enter  on the record atk a after verdict nothing be to be presume but what it either  express state in the declaration or necessary imply from those fact which be  state spire v Parker term Rep for a verdict will only cure ambiguity but will  not aid where the gist of the action be omit in the declaration Avery v Hoole  Cowp see also Rushton v aspinal dougl shower KB er p