case sharp be case a indictment for perjury on Elizabeth c must show with  convenient certainty that the oath be concern land that it be material to the  issue and prejudicial to the party ante Inst hawk p c ld ray peer will dougl  term Rep sharp be indict of perjury upon the Elizabeth c for that whereas one  Henry Damport be seize in fee of a manor in Sheapside in the county of  Leicester whereof one great waste contain two hundred acre lie betwixt such a  river on one side and such a brook on the other side be parcel and whereas  there be a suit in chancery betwixt the say Henry Damport and the earl of  Rutland and a commission issue under the great seal for the examination of  diverse witness and interrogatory be exhibit whether he know the party whether  he know the say parcel of waste in question and if it be the soil and freehold  of the earl of Rutland and parcel of his manor of Sheapside or not he be  examine upon these interrogatory before the say commissioner false voluntary  and corrupt depose upon his oath that it be the soil and freehold of the say  earl of Rutland and parcel of his manor of Sheapside where in fact it be not  the soil nor freehold of the say earl of Rutland nor parcel of his manor of  Sheapside but parcel of the manor of the say Henry Damport in Sheapside and so  commit wilful and corrupt perjury against the statute babington move to quash  the indictment because he do not show what be the issue in chancery nor that  this land be there in question nor it do not appear that it tend to the proof  or disproof of the issue so as it may be a damage to the plaintiff Richardson  chief justice and myself be of this opinion and although the interrogatory  mention it to be the land in croak car question it be not show how it be in  question and there can be no indictment upon this statute but where it be show  that the deposition be upon the matter in question and conduce to the issue  and the party thereby prejudice Richardson chief justice say it be usual in  the starchamber to dismiss bill if it be not show what be the issue and how  the perjury conduce thereunto and how in prejudice of the party Jones justice  doubt whether the indictment be good in respect of this exception but because  it be a odious crime he wish the defendant to plead not guilty and to try it  and upon the evidence it will appear whether it be pertinent and what be the  issue which ought to be prove but Berkley justice hold it to be good enough  for it will be too prolix to croak car er p show the bill and answer and what  be the issue a and inasmuch as it be allege there be a suit betwixt they in  chancery and the interrogatory be whether he know the land in question which  show that the land be in question and a convenient certainty be mention it  suffice otherwise he agree it be not good wherefore it be advice there be two  indictment he shall plead to the one and so try the truth and the exception  shall be save