BELLENGEHAMS case upon a pardon of outlawry on a appeal of murder defendant  need not have a to know facias against the lord mediate and immediate but only  against the appellant if such pardon vary from the indictment in the addition  defendant must aver that they be the same person the word in the pardon we  pardon to a and b all outlawry c against they or either of they proclaim c be  sufficient without say to a and b and to each of they in the king bench two be  outlaw upon a appeal of murder and purchase their charter of pardon and have a  to know facias against the plaintiff in the appeal and also a cognizant fa  against the lord mediate or immediate send quaere si de stiffness law for  Spilman and Portman think there be no necessity to have that against the lord  for the attainder be affirm by the sue out of the charter of pardon and not  reverse c and note that the pardon do not agree with the indictment in the  addition wherefore the judge doubt whether to allow the pardon but the party  make a averment that they be the same person that be indict and the exception  be take by James dyer for the king that the charter be insufficient for the  word be we have pardon remit and release to William Bellengeham of London  servingman c and Laurence Bellengeham late of London yeoman all and all manner  of outlawry against the say William and Laurence or against either of they  proclaim which charter in the premise S in the word of pardon be joint where  it shall have be we have pardon c to W b and l b and to each of they c because  each felony be several and for those several contumacies it be requisite to  have several pardon and although the sequel be against they or either of they  that do not make the pardon several wherefore c and so be the case rule in e b  that such pardon be not good but there the case vary from this for the charter  be we have pardon to a b and c all felony by they or any of they do and  perpetrate but quaere if it be any one of they c and on account of that case  the judge be doubtful and send by baker attorneygeneral who go to the common  plead and ask the advice of the judge there who be of different opinion but at  last the judge of the king bench order the precedent to be search and such  pardon be allow in the same year e term rot and it be the case of Wingfield  and so the case be misreport and contrary to the record wherefore without  further argument the aforesaid pardon be allow also quod notam dyer b er p