clvii Charnock and WORSLEYS case fine reverse as to one to stand good against  another Charnock and his wife bring a writ of error against Worsley the case  be that the husband and wife the wife be within age levy a fine and the wife  upon inspection be adjudge within Leonard age it be move if the fine shall be  utter reverse or as to the wife only shall stand against the husband by  Godfrey the book of e be vouch where it be say by candish that where such a  fine be reverse the plaintiff shall not have execution till after the death of  the husband and by coke and Atkinson a fine acknowledge by the husband and  wife be not like to a feoff make by they for in case of feoff something passes  from the husband but in case of a fine all passes out of the wife and the  conusee be in by her only and Atkinson show a precedent in h where the fine be  reverse for the whole and also another precedent p b h rot a fine levy betwixt  Richard Elie plaintiff and n ford and jane his wife deforceants the wife be  within age and judgement be give quod Finis predict adnulle pro nullo inside  to have and that the husband and wife shall be restore and thereupon a writ  issue to the custos narrow places to bring into court the foot of the fine and  it be present cancel in court Wray this be a strong precedent and we will not  varse from it if other precedent be not contrary gawdy who be the same day  make justice the fine can be reverse as to one and stand as to the other and  resemble it to the case of Littleton where land be give to husband and wife in  tail before coverture and the husband alien and take back a estate to he and  his wife for their life they both be remit for the wife can be remit if the  husband be not remit and a precedent be cite to the contrary Elizabeth where  the case be that the husband and wife levy a fine the husband die the wife be  within age the wife take another husband and they bring a writ of error and  the wife by inspection adjudge within age and the fine be reverse as to the  wife and her heir and it be argue by Golding that here the writ of error ought  to abate for the writ be too general whereas it ought to be special ex  complaint a b we abjectly to kneel down to take without effort c see the book  of entry also the purclose of the writ be ad damnum Self the husband and the  wife whereas the wife only have loss by it and as to the fine it self be  conceive that it shall be reverse but as to the wife as if a man of full age  and a man within age levy a fine id a writ of error bring the fine shall be  reverse as to the infant only and shall stand against the other and he cite  the case of the Lord Mountjoy Elizabeth where a man seize in the right of his  wife acknowledge a statute and afterward be and his wife levy a fine and he  say that during the life of the husband the conusee of the fine shall hold the  land charge with the statute also in the precedent of h the judgement be that  near haec altos wandering the fine shall be reverse and I conceive that  another error be in the say writ for which the fine may be reverse in all  videlicet the fine be levy of two part of the manor of d without say in tres  part dividend and see that where two part be demand in a writ the writ shall  say so brief coke contrary and as to the last matter I confess the law be so  in a writ but not in a fine for the same be but a conveyance for if I be seize  of a manor and I grant to you two part of the say manor it be clear it shall  be intend in three part to be divide and as to the principal matter I conceive  when the fine be levy by the husband and wife it shall be intend that the land  whereof c be the inheritance of the wife if the contrary be not show and  therefore if the party will have a especial reversal he ought to show the  special matter as in English case a fine be levy by tenant for life and he in  the reversion be within age bring a writ of error now the fine shall be  reverse as to he in the reversion but not as to the tenant for life but here  it shall be intend the inheritance of the wife and that the husband have  nothing but in the right of his wife and therefore she shall be Leonard er p  restore Leonard to the whole for nothing passes from the husband but be be  name with his wife only for conformity h a take to wife a inheretrix who be  attaint of felony the king shall not have the land present by which it appear  that all be in the wife and she shall be restore to the whole and the  judgement shall be accord to the precedent cite before and as to the precedent  cite Elizabeth the same be not to the purpose for the second husband be a  stranger to the fine for it will be absurd to reverse the fine as against he  Egerton solicitor general precedent be not so holy quod bed of violets non to  withhold as to be rule to other judge in continuous and I conceive that the  fine shall be reverse as to the wife only for the fine be but a conveyance and  the husband may lawful convey the land of his wife for his life and if the  husband alone have levy the fine the same have bind the wife during his life  if a woman lessee for life take to husband he in the reversion and they join  in a fine the fine shall stand as to the inheritance of the husband but shall  be reverse as to the interest of the wife coke it shall be intend here all the  interest and estate in the land to be in the wife as h I where the husband and  wife be vouch it shall be intend by reason of the warranty of the wife only  and so the counterplea shall be of the seize of the wife and her ancestor Wray  when the husband and wife join in the fine it shall be presume the inheritance  of the wife and if it be otherwise it ought to be special show and as to that  which have be say that if the husband alone have levy a fine it shall have  bind the wife during the life of the husband the same be true but such fine be  but a discontinuance but the right continue in the wife but when the husband  and wife join in the fine all passes out of her and if the fine in such case  for the inheritance shall be reverse in all to who belong the freehold to who  shall he be attendant gawdy h in a praecipe quod To give back against three  they vouch several the voucher be not receive and yet they may have several  cause of voucher but the law presume they be jointtenants and have a joint  cause of voucher if the contrary be not show and afterward judgement be give  quod Finis predict reversetur and Wray say he have confer with many of the  other justice who be of the same opinion gawdy the fine shall be reverse in  all for this be a error in law of the court f b d for by this fine the husband  give nothing divide from the estate of the wife but all passes from the wife  and therefore all shall be reverse and if the fine shall be reverse as to the  wife only then the fine levy now by the husband alone be a discontinuance by  which the wife by the commonlaw shall be put to her who in vita and that be  not reason also we can by this reversal make the conusee to have a particular  estate during the life of the wife and therefore the fine be to be reverse for  the whole and as void for the whole to the conusee Owen I Cr   modern Rep trin  Elizabeth in the king bench