case the king against KINGSMILL grant of a hundred where good c I vent show  Fitzherbert Mod Mod Peer wms stram Com dig quo warranto against the defendant  to show cause why be execute the office of a bailiff of the hundred of  Barnstaple the defendant plead that the say hundred be a ancient hundred that  the office of bailiff be a ancient office that the hundred court be a ancient  court hold from three week to three week before the steward thereof that the  return of writ be a ancient liberty and franchise which do belong to the say  bailiff that king Charles the first be seize of the say franchise jure coronae  in fee and by letter patent date c grant the same to one north habendum the  say hundred to he and his heir and that by several mesne assignment it come to  and be vest in the defendant and so be justify to have to turn in a lathe  narrow places to this plea the plaintiff demurrer it be argue for the king  that this claim be not good first as to the manner of the grant as it be here  plead videlicet that the king be seize in fee c and that he grant the  franchise habendum the say hundred for that such a grant can never include the  hundred as nothing can pass by the habendum but what be mention in the premise  modern er p second the defendant have derive a title from the crown to this  office of a bailiff which must be either by grant or prescription modern it  can be by grant for it be a question whether the hundred court can now be  separate from the county court it have be derivative from it in former time  when the sheriff do let those hundred to farm to several person who put in  bailiff errant to the great oppression of the people which be the occasion of  the make of the statute of Edward c by which such hundred be unite and rejoin  to the county as to the bailiwicks thereof except such as be then grant in fee  by the king or his ancestor Inst a now these hundred be usual grant to abbot  and other religious person and their possession come afterward to the king by  the dissolution of their abbey and monastery by the statute Henry c b be now  merge in the crown and can be regrant after the make of that statute and as  the defendant can have a title by grant so he have not prescribe to have this  office it be true the plea set forth that it be a ancient office but that be  not a prescription but a bare averment of its antiquity but admit he have  allege it by way of prescription he can not do it by a and estate to have to  turn in a lathe narrow places yearbook Henry pl a a man can prescribe to have  cognizance of plead in a hundred court he may in a county palatine because it  be of a mix jurisdiction but see   light and Com dig court p and franchise d b  neither can he prescribe to have return of the king writ because they be  matter of record see the case of the abbot de Strata Marcelia c e contra here  be a good title plead it be never yet deny but that the king may be seize in  fee of a hundred and that he may grant to turn in a lathe narrow places the  statute be plain in it see Edward c and Edward c d for otherwise how come any  lord to have hundred in fee but by the king grant and it be as plain that  hundred may be divide from the county for else to what purpose be the statute  of Lincoln make Edward c e which adjoin hundred and wapentakes to the county  and provide that they shall never be separate again which show that they be  divide at that time the objection which have be make be videlicet that the  defendant can have a title to this office by grant and he have not make any  prescription to it the reason give why he can not have it by grant be because  ancient hundred which be unite to the county by the statute of Edward c can  never afterward be divide from they by any grant of the king and those which  be except in that statute as be grant in fee by the king or his modern  ancestor when they come again to the crown can be regrant because they be  merge in it in answer to this it be say that such ancient liberty which be  create by the crown and do subsist by the king grant before the statute of  Edward c when afterward they come to the king be not merge but remain a  distinct interest in he the hundred of Gartree in the county of Leicester be  such a liberty it be a ancient hundred and grant by Edward the second to John  Sedington not in fee but durante bene plea king this grant be long before the  make of the statute of Edward the three and yet afterward this very hundred be  grant to several other person by the succeed king of England which show it be  not merge in the crown when it come to the king coal v Ireland raym show f the  other objection be that to turn in a lathe narrow places do not lie in  prescription now as to that though it be true that no title by prescription  can be make to such franchise and liberty which can be seize as forfeit before  the cause of forfeiture appear on record because prescription be a usage in  pais do not extend to such thing which can he have without matter of record  yet my Lord coke   light b g be clear that a good title may be make to hold  plead leet hundred c by prescription only without matter of record modern er p  but notwithstanding what be say to maintain this plea judgement be give  against the defendant