case major against BRANDWOOD Hilary term car roll the lord may at his election  distrain or seize for heriot service and upon replevin the avowry need not  show the particular thing to which he be entitle as a heriot but if be seize  be can only take the identical thing S C Hutton   Copy S Plowd more cro  Elizabeth bendl and Lutw salk Henry ass Kely kit Mod Bl Com pale yellow ten  Com dig Bac Abr ld ray espin dig replevin of a ox take c the defendant make  conusance as bailiff of John Brandwood for that he be seize in fee of the  manor of d and that one smith be seize in fee of such a tenement hold of the  say manor by rend and hariot service Payable after the death of the tenant and  that smith die possess de animal et catallis and because the hariot be not pay  he by the command of the say John Brandwood distrain and so make conusance the  issue be upon the tenure and find for the defendant exception be now take in  arrest of judgement because be do not show what be the best beast which he  demand nor the kind thereof nor the price of it for this cause hide move that  the avowry be ill for it be uncertain what thing the defendant shall have or  how be shall be satisfy if he shall have return and be say all the precedent  be in point that be ought to show what the hariot be when be demand the price  thereof   Talborts case Plowd bk of Ent but Hutchinson say when the lord  distrain it be because the hariot be eloigned and therefore he can seize it so  then he can show what be the best beast and for a hariot service it be at the  lord election either to distrain or to seize it if he can find it yet seize be  can unless the proper beast of the tenant only but he may distrain any man  beast which be upon the land and retain they until the hariot be satisfy and  be say there be diverse precedent in the common plea where be avow without  show what be the best beast or any price thereof and it will be inconvenient  to enforce the avowant to show it for peradventure be do not know or ever see  it vide Edward pl Edward pl afterward it be adjudge for the avowant this case  be move again Michaelmas term car by Germin that the avowry be not well make  because it do not appear what beast he shall have for the hariot nor of what  value the return be irreplevisable nor can the plaintiff know what to offer to  have again his cattle but all the four justice present agree that the avowry  be good enough for peradventure the avowant do not know what be the best beast  and the plaintiff have do wrong by his eloignment be at his peril ought to  tender sufficient recompense and that the avowry be good there be show two  precedent the one in Trinity term Elizabeth roll dicker v Higgens and the  other in Trinity term James roll