case morris and other against prince in a assize for arrear of a rentcharge  devise to the plaintiff if the jury find a arrear of thirty year without find  when the devisor die the verdict be bad for otherwise the certainty of the  arrear can be know S C Jones SC roll Abr march cro James Noy Mod a seize by  one of two coparceners be good for both a demand of rend and a refusal of  payment be not a seize of the rend unless it be make upon the land ante error  by Thomas morris and Elizabeth his wife against Thomas Middleton James palmer  John Lewis Evans Potham I S and t d of a judgement give against they in a  assize in the county of Montgomery to their damage c upon this the record be  certify that the assize be bring that may car against the say six defendant  and Charles Vaughan and Margaret his wife sir Peter mutton and six other in  all fifteen person that the assize be de book property his in Brentdaigne and  in five other village within the say county the say fifteen defendant be  return attach the plaintiff make his plaint to be seize of his freehold  videlicet of twenty pound rend issue out of forty message one thousand acre of  land fifty acre of meadow c in the say village within thirty year c and for  title he say that one Edward prince Esq be seize in fee of the tenement  aforesaid in the village c and hold they in soccage and by his will in write  that December year James devise to the plaintiff a rend of twenty pound per  annum issue out of the say tenement for his life and afterward the say Edward  die seize and the say tenement descend to the say Elizabeth who afterward be  marry to the say Thomas morris and to the say Margaret who be after marry to  the say Charles Vaughan and that the plaintiff be seize of the say rend by the  hand of the say Thomas morris be seize of the freehold of the say tenement in  right of the say Elizabeth in form prediction until the say John morris and  Elizabeth and the other thirteen defendant he be seize and thereupon bring  this assize the say Charles Vaughan and Margaret and nine other of the  defendant make default wherefore the assize be award against they by default  four other of the defendant videlicet Thomas morris and Elizabeth his a   b it  be move again in Hilary term and all the judge give their opinion seriatim in  favour of the plaintiff that the writ be good and that the judgement and  execution shall be affirm post croak car er p wife Thomas Middleton and James  palmer plead that they be tenant of a acre parcel of the tenement put in view  and that Roger palmer and William Hewks be tenant of the freehold of a message  and four acre of land put in view c who be not name in the writ for which they  demand judgement of the writ et si c the jury find that Roger palmer and  William Hewks be not tenant c and that the plaintiff be seize by the hand of  the say Thomas morris prout and that the plaintiff demand of the say Thomas  morris and his wife Thomas Middleton James palmer John Lewis and croak car  Evans Potham the say rend and that they deny to pay it and so they seize he of  the say rend and find arrearage for thirty year and a half and for the other  nine they find that they do not seize and hereupon judgement be for the  plaintiff against six and for the nine quod aleront sans jour upon this error  be bring and assign principal because be demand rend by a devise whereof  arrearage be find for thirty year and it do not appear when the devisor die  nor any time or feast appoint for the payment and therefore the verdict be  clear ill because the time of the devisor death not appear the certainty of  the arrearage can be know the second question be if the jury find a seize by  the hand of one of the husband of the say heir whereas the land descend to two  daughter whether this be a sufficient find of the seisin?And it be resolve  that it be as seize give by one jointtenant c the three question be if the  jury find the demand of the rend from six of the defendant and their denial of  payment and not find that it be demand upon the land but that they so seize  the plaintiff whether that be sufficient?For it be hold by all the justice  that the demand of it of their person off the land and their denial be not  sufficient for it ought to be upon the land but this be upon a verdict in a  assize I hold that the court shall intend it be a demand upon the land as  Edward title verdict and   lib but Brampston Jones and Berkley hold that it  shall not be so intend the judgement be reverse because it be not find when  the devisor die see Geo c