case sir george more and Francis brown against Onslow Hilary term Elizabeth  roll a general writ by jointtenants or tenant in common form on Henry c be  sufficient without recite the case particular if it conclude contra form to  cause to stand a nle Lut Leon Bac ab Cowp Doug hawk Bl Rep a writ of partition  may demand the view of frankpledge together with the manor a writ of partition  shall abate if it state a seize in fee instead of in tail ante dyer Bl Rep  venire facias misawarded partition the writ be general upon the Henry c that  they do hold accuse el pro undivided manor de d et land et look franciplegii  in d and that the defendant deny partition contra form to cause to stand c the  declaration be accord to the writ and that the plaintiff hold to they and  their heir the one moiety and to the defendant and his heir pertain the other  moiety the defendant plead quod non to hold accuse prout c the jury find a  special verdict that the plaintiff hold in fee and that the defendant be  tenant in tail remainder to his right heir of the other moiety et si c it be  move first that this general writ be not good for it ought to have be a writ  special find accord to the case for so the statute appoint that every one  shall have his writ accord to his case to he frame by the clerk of the Chanc  ery and of that opinion be Anderson that for this cause the writ be not good  but all the other justice hold that this general writ be good for the croak  Elizabeth statute do not prescrihe a form but leaves it to the clerk of the  chancery to he frame and they have devise this writ upon this statute general  add only these word contra form to cause to stand which show it to he ground  upon the statute and it have be the usual practice ever since that statute  that such writ hetween jointtenants and tenant in common of a inheritance have  be allow but a writ find upon the Henry c betwixt jointtenants croak Elizabeth  er p and tenant in common of a particular estate ought to be special show  their particular estate wherefore it be rule accord that the writ be good  second exception be take because partition as demand of the view of  Franckfield which be not severable but it be hold to he well enough for  although it he not severable by itself as Anderson and Glanville hold but  Walmsley and Ki smil contra yet the profit thereof may he divide or it may be  divide that the one shall have it at one time and the other at another time  yet be demand to have partition thereof with the manor and other thing it well  lie for it may be entire allot to the one and land in recompense thereof allot  to the other three because this declaration suppose that they hold joint in  fee whereas it be find by the verdict that the defendant hold in tail and so  the estate mistake the court hold it to he ill for although the one need not  to take conusance of the other estate yet when he will take upon he the  knowledge thereof and miss take it he fail and his writ shall abate fourthly  because the venire facias be award de vicineto manor de d where it ought to  have be also from the will and for this cause it be hold to he ill but the  party compound see will c and Ann c by which proceed on a writ of partition be  regulate