Burglacy versus Ellington Burglacy bring a replevin against Ellington for the  take of his cattle c the avowant plead that one W b be seize of the place in  Brownlow goldsborough er p which c in his demesne as of fee and be so seize  die by reason whereof the land descend to one Crist his daughter and heir who  take to husband the avowant the plaintiff in his bar to the avowry confess  that W b be seize and that it descend to c who take to husband the avowant but  he further say that the of April Jacob the husband and wife by their deed  indent and enrol do bargain and sell the same land unto Missenden and a fine  levy by they and that m the of king James bargain and sell it to f m in fee  and he be so seize licence the plaintiff to put in his cattle the avowant  reply that in the say bargain and sale make by the husband and wife a proviso  be contain that if the say Ellington shall pay one hundred pound a year after  therl c and plead the statute of Elizabeth of usury with a averment that the  profit of the land be of the value of twelve by the year the plaintiff rejoin  that true it be there be such a clause in the indenture but he further say  that before the seal of the indenture it be agree by word that the say  Ellington shall have and receive the profit and not the plaintiff and  thereupon the avowant demurrer and the case be thus Ellington bargain his  landto m for the payment of one hundred pound a year after to be pay and that  the bargainee shall have the profit the bargainer enter as upon a void sale  because of the statute of usury for by the proviso he be to have the hundred  pound and ten pound for the forbearance and by the law he be to have the  profit and the which do amount above ten pound by the hundred the bargainee to  avoid the usury plead a agreement by word before the seal of the bargain and  sale and the querAion arise upon this be if the bargainee may plead this  verbal agreement for the avoid of the deed which do suppose the contrary and  more of LincohisInn counselor be of opinion that he can not and put that maxim  that every thing must be dissolve by that by which it be bind and his whole  argument depend upon that be cite diverse case as I h h Elizabeth dyer  Butlands case frame and Cheyny case there but the whole court without any  argument be of opinion that he may plead the verbal agreement and avoid the  usury and first they all agree that when a deed be perfect and deliver as his  deed that then no verbal agreement afterward may be plead in destruction  thereof as it be in the case put but when the agreement be parcel of the  original contract as here it be it may be plead and second otherwise it will  bring a great mischief be the custom so to do by word but if it have be  express within the deed that the bargainee Brownlow goldsborough shall have  the profit and that it be deliver accord that no agreement or assignment of  the profit can now avoid it for it be a usurious contract and therefore the  whole court give judgement for the plaintiff that he may well plead the  agreement action OF trespass and battery the defendant in his demurrer answer  not the whole declaration and judgement reverse Johnson versus turner Trin  Elizabeth trespass bring for break the plaintiff house and the take and carry  away his good the defendant justify all the trespass the plaintiff as to the  break of the house and take the good and the matter therein contain demurrer  upon the defendant bar the dependent join in demurrer in this form to wit  because the plaintiff aforesaid as to the break of the house and take the good  be sufficient demand judgement and judgement give in the common plea for the  plaintiff and a writ to inquire of damage upon which damage be assess for the  break of the house and take the good and whether the subsequent word to wit  and the matter therein contain go to the whole matter in the bar to wit the  carry of the good away also for when the defendant join in demurrer with the  plaintiff he join special to wit to the breathe of the house and take the good  but nothing of the carry they away and so as to the carry they away nothing be  put into judgement of the court yet the writ be to inquire for the whole and  the judgement also and the carry of the Lyoods away be parcel of the matter  and for which great damage be adjudgied and that be not put into the judgement  of the court by the demurrer therefore the judgement be erroneous for there be  a discontinuance as to the carry Brownlow goldsborough er p of the good hway  which be part of the matter and this business concern Mr darcy of the privy  Chamber concern his patent for card