anthony gibson against edward ferrers Anthony Gibson bring a action of debt of  l upon a obligation make the that of December throw and the defendant come and  demand oyer of the condition and the condition recite that whereas there be  difference between the say party concern some account now they have for the  final determination of they they have put themselves upon the award and  arbitrament of Gerrard de Malines to be make before the last day of December  next if therefore the say Edward Ferrer his executor c shall and do for his  and their part perform stand to and keep the say arbitrament of the say  Gerrard de Malines that then c who bed et hearing idem Edward to say quod  prediction Antonius act svan versus the dawn to have non debet because he say  that the say Gerrard de Malines do not make any arbitrement and the other  reply and show a arbitrament which he do award to Gibson interest to be pay  for money among diverse other thing and upon that the defendant do demurrer in  law and it be argue by Bridgman sergeant for the defendant that arbitrement be  void for it be for the payment of interest and I hold that arbitrator who be  judge indifferent choose may not award interest to be pay for that be a  unlawful thing for all the statute which have be make concern winch er p usury  have brand that to be unlawful and those difference which be submit ought to  be intend to be lawful difference and he cite a case in the king bench where a  action upon the case be bring upon a promise make upon consideration that if  the defendant will forbear the principal together with the interest that he  will pay that at a certain day and it be adjudge that the action lie because  there be do certain interest set down for be say if the certainty of the  interest have be set down the consideration have not be good and then if this  thing be so unlawful that a man may not bind himself by his promise then a  strong arbitrator may not award that and for another reason it be void because  that interest be award for the time after the submission be make and so I pray  that the plaintiff may be bar Hendon contrary I hold the award to be good for  though that shall be void for the interest yet it shall be good for the  residue and then the non payment be a breach of the condition for where a  award be make for a thing against the law and for another which do stand with  the law this be good for one and void for the other so here second this award  be not for interest but rather for the damage for the forbearance of the money  but admit that this be for direct usury yet that be not void my brother  Bridgman have cite a case where a assumpsit for usury be void I know well what  the judgement be for I be of council in the case and much be say in that  against usury and Glanville be cite lib cap which say that a usurer do forfeit  his good but that be to be intend of such who live by the common oppression of  the people and there be not any precedent find where a contract for usury be  void Noy the Edward winch debt be bring for money give for usury and admit and  the statute of the Elizabeth and h which be make against usury shall be  frivolous if such contract shall be mere void for they make only such contract  to be void as be make for above in the and so I pray judgement for the  plaintiff a action upon the case be bring for call one thief and the other do  justifle the word and say that he be possess of a heifer which be private take  from he and that upon search he find that in the possession of the plaintiff  with his ear cut off and mark with the mark of the plaintiff and it be rule  that this be not a good justification for the matter be not sufficient but he  ought to have express aver that the heifer be steal from he and accord it be  adjudge Hillary term in the two and twenty year OF king james in the common  plead