case lord tenham versus herbert December SC Eq ab pl the defendant demurrer to  the plaintiff bill bring to establish a right to a oyster fishery and to be  quiet in the possession of it as be a matter proper triable at law Lord  Hardwicke declare that where the right of a fishery be in dispute only between  two lord of manor they can neither come here till it be first try at law and  therefore allow the demurrer the plaintiff bring his bill in order to  establish a right to a oyster fishery and to be quiet in the possession of it  against the defendant Herbert who claim the piece of ground where this fishery  be as belong to his manor the defendant demurrer to this bill as it be a  matter proper triable at law Lord chancellor undoubted there be some case in  which a man may by a bill of this kind come into this court first and there be  atkins other where he ought first to establish his right at law it be certain  where a man set up a general exclusive right and where the person who  controvert it with he be very numerous and he can by one or two action at law  quiet that right he may come into this court first which be call a bill of  peace and the court will direct a issue to determine the right as in dispute  between lord of manor and their tenant and between tenant of one manor and  another for in these case there will be no end of bring action of trespass  since each action will determine only the particular right in question between  the plaintiff and defendant this point be establish by the case of how v the  tenant of bromesgrove vern new elm hospital v Andover vern week v slake vern  arthington v Fawkes vern brown v Vermuden l Charles can mayor of York v  Pilkington ante vol city of London v perkyns bro par can and Edward bro p c as  to the case of the corporation of York and sir Lionel Pilkington ante vol the  plaintiff there be in possession of the right of fish upon the river Ouse for  nine mile together and have constant exercise that right and as this large  jurisdiction entangle they with different lord of manor it will have be  endless for the corporation to have bring action at law but where a question  about a right of fishery be only between two lord of manor neither of they can  come into this court till the right be first try at law agreeable to this  distinction be the follow case Whitchurch v hide ante Welby v the duke of  Rutland bro par can and Edward bro p c parish of saint Luke v parish of saint  Leonard bro Charles Rep weller v Smeaton bro Charles Rep Lord tenham do not  charge in this case any possession for the last year so that this be the  nature of a ejectment bill the plaintiff say that this piece of ground water  overwhelmed belong to he Mr Herbert insist it belong to he so that this may  very proper be determine at law as it be a mere single question to try the  right between two person and it be not like the case of the corporation of  York who must have go all round the compass to have come at their right at law  therefore the demurrer must be allow