bern ux and mattaire declaration in replevin for take a gross number of  different article without specify how many of each hold good on motion for  arrest of judgement by reason that the avowant have avow the take where it do  not appear that the take be during the coverture husband and wife may declare  in replevin for take the good of the husband and wife for as they may have be  joint possess before marriage so after they may declare as for the good of  husband and wife Str but not so full bull n p Bac Abr Com dig pleader king SC  videlicet as to sufficiency of description the opinion of the court Lord  Hardwicke c j this be a action of replevin wherein plaintiff declare case  tempt Hardwicke er p for take fourteen skimmers and ladle and three pot and  cover the good and chattel of they the say Bern and his wife the defendant  avow the take for rend in arrear upon a demise plaintiff plead in bar to the  avowry and traverse the demise and issue be join upon that traverse of non to  send down and verdict for plaintiff that no such demise be and thereupon it be  move in arrest of judgement in behalf of the avowant and three exception take  to the declaration saint exception that a declaration in replevin can be  maintain by a husband and wife joint for take the good of the husband and wife  d exception that it be also a bad declaration in lie it to be to the damage of  both d exception that it be ill for the uncertain description of the good take  it say fourteen skimmers and ladle and not say bow many of each sort as to the  first exception it depend on this foundation that husband and wife can have a  joint property in chattel and in general that be true because the marriage be  a gift of all chattel to the husband but in this case it do not appear that  the take be during the coverture nor can we presume it be and the plaintiff  for ought appear may be joint possess of those good before marriage and if  that be the case that they be so joint possess case tempt Hardwicke before  marriage and those good take before marriage they may after coverture join in  the replevin and declare for take the good of husband and wife Com dig pleader  king Selw n p n r city on plead and if there can be such a case we must take  it to be so here because the avowry allow a property in they both if it may be  by not dispute the property as the avowant may have do so in the yearbook of  Michaelmas Edward two foe this exception be overrule so in bro Abr title baron  and feme pl he say baron and feme shall not join in replevin but quaere as to  good which she have as executrix for there it seem they shall join in replevin  de good wife capacity dumb sola to be so in Ventris Batmore ux grave in trover  bring by husband and wife though the conversion be lie after the marriage it  be hold that in regard the trover be lie to be before the marriage which be  the inception of the cause of action the wife may be join as if one have the  custody of a woman good and afterward marry her she may join in detinue with  her husband and hale say in such case the husband may bring the action alone  or joint with his wife and so I take the law to be in this case that the  husband may have declare in this replevin alone or joint as he have do the  material authority that have be cite against this doctrine be f n b foe let  king but it be only that if the good of a feme sole be take who afterward  marry the baron alone may sue a replevin and side powis ux and martial where  it be hold by Twysden and Wyndham that a replevin so bring be well bring and  that action which affirm property ought to be bring by the husband alone sand  g cro Elizabeth salk Bl r Mod city on plead and that I must confess be  contrary to the opinion now give but it be also contrary to the yearbook of  Edward two and to the placitum in bro Abr and especial to the case of Batmore  and grave in Ventris for action of detinue be much strong affirmance of  property than replevins as to the d exception it will follow the fate of the  other for if there be such a joint possession before marriage the take must be  lie to be ad damn Self because the damage survive to the wife cro Elizabeth  Gurney ux Sir Ed clear as to the d exception the uncertain description of the  good take it be say that though such a general description may be well enough  by the late case in trover and trespass that yet it be otherwise in replevin  which be a action that affirm property and where the good take ought to be  particularize for a direction to the sheriff to know what good to return if a  return habend shall be award case tempt Hardwicke that it be well enough in  trover and trespass can now be doubt case tempt Hardwicke er p though there be  some old case to the contrary yet the modern case be otherwise as Hartford and  Jones Lord raym salk pl S c which be trover for ounce of cleave mace and  nutmeg without specify the quantity of each and judgement by default and this  exception be take in arrest of judgement be overrule so Harrison and bottom  stram r raym Barnard b r S c I see city on plead Trin geo two trover de One  parcella of packthread and cord and judgement in c b for plaintiff and affirm  in this court notwithstanding this exception allege upon the writ of error but  to show that the law be different in action of replevin they cite the case of  more and Clipsam which be in Allen and style which be a replevin of sheep  matrix et wether and hold bad for the uncertainty in not show how many ewe  there be and how many weather though the court agree that centum sheep in  general will have be good but we can rely much on this case for that this very  point come in question in pass I geo in the case of kempster and Nelson Bac  Abr ed and be very full consider that be a replevin for take good et catalla  svan videlicet quandan parcel linen cloth et quandan palcell paper Self to  express grief and the avowry be as a distress for rend and it be except in  arrest of judgement that quandan parcel paper et linen cloth be too general  and uncertain a description and though it may be well enough in trover and  trespass yet in replevin it be ill as not be a sufficient direction to the  jury to assess damage nor to the sheriff in redelivering the good but Lord  Parker in give his opinion say that such a declaration will be ill on demurrer  but that the plead have supply the defect because the avowant have avow the  take have there by take upon himself the knowledge of what the good be so that  by both party know the good make it certain upon the record that they be agree  in what the good be and the only controversy be who shall have they and it  will be no manner of benefit to the defendant to have they particularize for  if the plaintiff have demand ream of paper though be prove but one yet if be  prove one be must recover for in tort if the plaintiff prove any part of his  case it be sufficient see city on plead and as to the sheriff deliver the good  upon a return habend in case the avowant prevail be say the sheriff may  require either the plaintiff or defendant to show he the good and it be a good  return for he to make quod nullus go for sale ex part defend ad ostend aver  and there be such a return in Rastals entry b and Dalton S sheriff and in this  case of kempster and in the case of more and Clipsam be consider and the court  take it to have be determine on the point of a immaterial traverse for they  say it will be a strange resolution to say that the addition of circumstance  shall make it more uncertain case tempt Hardwicke than it be before and we  think the reason of that case of kempster and Nelson govern this case so  plaintiff must have judgement although the declaration as to this point will  have be ill on demurrer yet the plead have supply the defect because the  avowant have avow the take have thereby take upon himself the knowledge of  what the good be