case Cholmely against morton Michaelmas term car b r roll a justification to  trespass by virtue of process out of a pie powder court must show the cause of  action and that it arise within the jurisdiction of the court SC Jones  trespass for false imprisonment justification by a process out of the pie  powder court at c and only set forth a plaint levy and a recovery but shower  KB do not recite the declaration nor do they show that the cause of action  arise within the jurisdiction first if it be out of their jurisdiction then  all be void and it be no justification whereas if they have a jurisdiction  although the process be erroneous the imprisonment will be justifiable a as in  the Marshalsea case Rep a see cro Elizabeth Noy Bulst fitzg salk but see  Douglas v hall Wilson that a quod cum in trespass be well enough after verdict  and white v shaw will that when the writ be set forth in the declaration it be  good on special demurrer see also side cro Elizabeth Lutw and dolly v Edward  stram ld ray b it be settle that if a bill of exchange be not accept a action  on the bill will lie immediate against the drawer although the time of payment  be not come Milford v mayor dougl see also stram will but if the bill be draw  after sight the declaration must state a request on and a refusal to accept by  the drawee Rushton v aspinal dougl see also burr term Rep a see the case of  Roland v veil where in a justification by process out of a inferior court the  plea state that the plaintiff below levy his plaint in a plea of trespass on  the case for a cause of action arise within the jurisdiction of the court  shower KB er p the court agree that if two man make a contract for land in a  fair that can be within their jurisdiction and they ought not to bold plea of  such a contract but only of buy and sell good in the fair second they lie the  court to be hold before the mayor and that can be as mayor for though a mayor  may be steward yet in that case he ought to be lie so the court agree that the  mayor if owner of the fair can be a good steward of it Mr holt then take  exception to their declaration that it be not pro eastern quod but quod cum  which in trespass be nought Mr pollexfen answer that their plea of  justification which be a confession of the fact help it as when a venue be  want in a declaration if a release be plead in bar with a venue that help it  send quaere if it will help it on a demurrer for it be most true that the plea  help it if issue be take on the release beside here the quod cum be only to  the plaint and then it be nor the defendant do imprison he which be  affirmative and direct Mr holt reply that nec non there be comparative and  copulative refer only to the first which be by way of recital but Pemberton  chief justice think it begin a new trespass Adjournatur b