coke b HICKMOTS case mich James king in common banc in debt on bind the  defendant plead a release which a oyer appear to be that the plaintiff  acknowledge himself satisfy and discharge of all bind debt or demand  whatsoever and that the plaintiff be to deliver all bind as yet undelivered  except one yet unforfeit and in which defendant and his brother be bind to the  plaintiff replication that the bind declare on and the bind except be one and  the same demurrer resolve the word acknowledge himself to be satisfy and  discharge c make a release the exception in the release extend to all the  premise and not only to the clause of delivery the plaintiff replication by  show that the bind except be the bind declare on and that such bind be joint  have abate his writ in a action of debt bring by William Hickmot against  Thomas Oxenbridge on a bind of Jan James the defendant plead in bar that after  the make of the say bind know Julii the plaintiff release unto he and plead  part of the release the plaintiff demand oyer of the release which be read to  he in these word July the that day in year it be conclude and agree upon the  day and year above write between William Hickmot of the one party and Thomas  Oxenbridge of the other party that upon good consideration draw the party  thereunto the say William Hickmot do acknowledge himself full satisfy and  discharge of all bind debt or demand whatsoever from the beginning of the  world until this present day by the say Thomas Oxenbridge Ald that he the say  William Hickmot be to deliver all such bind as he have yet undelivered to  Thomas Oxenbridge except one bind of yet unforfeit which be for the payment of  wherein the say Thomas Oxenbridae and Roger Oxenbridge his brother stand bind  to the say William Hickmot in witness whereof c and the plaintiff say that he  ought not be bar of his action for he say that the bind of oh except and the  say bind cur hic lengthen be one and the same bind c upon which the defendant  demurrer in law and in this case three point be resolve that the say  acknowledgement by his deed to be satisfy and discharge of all bind be in  judgement of law a release or discharge of the bind for none ought to be  satisfy but once although the word discharge be not proper say of the part of  the obligee but of the obligor for the obligor be to be discharge yet when the  obligee confess himself to be coke a discharge of all bind by the say Thomas  Oxenbridge it amount to as much as the bind themselves shall be discharge so  that as well this word discharge as this word satisfy be sufficient in law to  bar the plaintiff of all benefit of the say bind for by what word a debt by  deed may be create by the contrary word it may be discharge a by what word a  release may be make Vid touch vin ab release l Com dig release a Bac ab  release a a vide a Fitzherbert oblige Br oblige Wentw roll a e a b Fitzherbert  oblige Br oblige b e a h a what shall be good word c dyer pl r Det kelw b h a  e a Fitzherbert oblige Br oblige Stath oblige roll c Obligatory et bis idem  coke report b er p to drive out good fides non suffer et in penalty non to let  pass greater number become how semel factum be it be resolve that the say  exception shall d light Rep d extend to all the premise and not only to the  clause of delivery for three reason because it be a rule quod e light Rep e  exception always ultimo to put down be vide king b all the word before make  but one entire sentence and one depend upon the other for it be reason when  bind be satisfy and discharge that they shall be deliver there be reason that  this bind of shall be except for it be not then due the three point that now  it f   b hob style S   b Mod note f   a f appear by the plaintiff confession  in his replication that he can have a action against the defendant only but  ought to have bring it against he and Roger Oxenbridge for the bind of except  be a joint bind and the plaintiff aver in his replication that be the bind  upon which he have conceive this action and therefore he have abate his own  writ but the court give day to another term at which day the plaintiff be  nonsuit in all case of a joint obligation or deed or a joint contract in write  or by parole or ex quasi shrinking if one only be sue be must plead the matter  in abatement and can take advantage of it afterward upon any other plea or in  arrest of judgement or give it in evidence indeed if it appear on the face of  the declaration or any other plead of the plaintiff that another joint seal  the bind with the defendant and that both be still live as be suppose to have  be the case in Horner v more cite burr both these fact be admit by the  plaintiff the court will arrest the judgement because the plaintiff himself  show that another ought to be join and it will be absurd to compel the  defendant to plead fact which be already admit sergeant williams note cabell v  Vaughan sand b the learned sergeant in the same note observe that it do not  appear upon any part of the record in Hickmots case that r either seal the  bind or be alive all the authority seem to prove that these be essential fact  which must either be aver by the defendant or admit by the plaintiff in order  to abate the action and what give great weight to this observation be that  this resolution in Hickmots case be impeach by sir W Jones who say that there  be no resolution upon that point and that the chief justice be absent W Jones  cloud v Nicholson Mod Vid king v young Anst king v chapman Anst and the can e  cite there the nonjoinder of a jointcontractor be a good ground of abatement  although the joint contractor not name be personal discharge of of cattle v  wood m S Hawkins v Ramsbottom taunt in the case of a joint contract by a  infant or a feme covert it be not necessary to name they in a action as  cocontractors with the defendant but the contract may be describe as a  contract make by the other party only chandler v park Esp Jaffiray v Trebain  Esp burgess v Merrill taunt and a defendant may plead a secret partnership in  abatement though the plaintiff have no mean of know of the partnership unless  the interest of the party be material alter by it dubois v Ludert taunt S C  marsh upon the death of one of two joint debtor the joint debt may be treat as  if it have be original a separate debt in a action against the survivor  therefore it be not necessary to mention the decease party and the plaintiff  may recover in the same action a demand for which the defendant be liable  individual and also one for which he be liable joint with the other partner  who be dead Richard v heather barn Ald and with mountstephen v brook ib a  different rule apply to the case of cocontractors be plaintiff there inasmuch  as the party bring the action must know who we his own partner in a  transaction he ought to name they all and the omission of a party who ought to  have be a coplaintiff be a ground of nonsuit Snellgrove v hunt city Rep and in  assumpsit by one survive partner the fact of the plaintiff be survive partner  must be state in the declaration Jell v Douglas barn Ald Vid note b cabell v  Vaughan sand I Edward Petrie v bury barn Cress SC dow Ryl b coke report b er p