ambler case Carthew against Edward in exchequer June easter offer due of  common right hob the editor have search the decree and minute book of several  year in the court of the exchequer for this cause but have be unable to meet  with any trace of it S c hill ms the whole court videlicet Parker c b clarke  clive and leg baron be unanimous of opinion that easter offer be due of common  right and have be so ambler er p hold ever since the case of the case intend  to be refer to here be probable the case of Laurence v Jones bunb S g e you in  Lord chief baron gilbert time before that the law be as in Linw Inst that  offer and oblation be of two sort voluntary and consuete it be also declare to  be their opinion that the occupier must set out the ten meal of milk in his  own vessel at the know milk place and the person be to fetch it and pour it  into vessel of his own and this be say by they to have be the constant rule of  the court for thirty year last pass otherwise Lord chief baron Parker say he  shall have be of opinion that tithe milk ought to be carry to the church or  the vicarage house as doctor Martin dean of the arch in king Charles ii s time  declare the law to be at that time as to milk and all other tithe but praedial  see Egerton v style Brunb wood e you see Sloane v de Vernon Gwill e you in Mr  coxes ms Vol c c there be the follow note of the principal case of Carthew and  Edward it be hold in this case that easter offer be due of common right and  that d a head be Payable for they by the man his wife and child above sixteen  and that he be not liable to pay for his servant unless by custom in collier v  Heathfleld in chancery July plaintiff the vicar of Croydon in Surrey claim  from defendant a payment of two shilling and sixpence for every person die  within the parish and bury in the churchyard a mortuary for every person die  within the parish c five shilling for church a woman after lie in and the  state and ordinary easter offer for themselves their wife and servant  defendant by their answer admit that plaintiff be entitle to some customary  payment for burial of the dead and read the burial service and to easter offer  but not to any mortuary or oblation unless the easter offer or payment after  mention be to be esteem such videlicet fivepence for a man and his wife  fourpence for a single man and threepence for a single woman the decree  declare plaintiff entitle to the twoshilling and sixpence for each burial to a  mortuary for any person die in the say parish leave any personal estate accord  to the rule lie down by the statute of Henry and to the easter offer as lie in  defendant answer the person be of age of lib Reg a foe S c Cox ms Vol d d in  lib Reg it appear that there have be two previous decision in the exchequer on  that Feb and Feb the decree in which be give in evidence see Laurence v Yeates  wood S g e you Burnett v tooker wood in the king v reeves W Kel S g e you it  be say argo that offer be due by custom only see Dodson v Oliver Gwill wood I  e you but see Scoles v Lowther Lord raym e you but there may be a custom that  the tithe milk ought to be bring to the church porch for the use of the pastor  Morgan v Neville wood e you see hill v Vaux Lord raym e you the method of set  out tithe milk be to set out the entire meal every ten day both morning and  evening where a contrary custom be allege it must be either formal plead or  support by evidence sufficient to warrant the court direct a issue on the  custom Hutchins v full wood bro p c Edward tom e you see Bosworth v Limbrick  wood e you S c serj hill ms Vol p Gwill dobson v Norton wood e you bear v  Sprackling Gwill e you gee v perch Gwill e you