case Sacheverel against BAGNOLL waste must he bring in the tenet or to hold  but this action will not lie by a remainderman in tail against the husband of  a tenant for life after her death and a see the continuation of this case post  and its conclusion post croak Elizabeth er p if it do he may plead that he  deliver the deed of feoff to use to the plaintiff in satisfaction I roll ab  roll ab Com Diu post Ro ab   b   light a   b ante post Ro Abr cro James waste  the plaintiff count that one Elizaheth Bingham be seize in fee and by deed  feoff sir Gervise Clifton and other in fee to the use of the say Elizaheth for  life and after to the use of Elizabeth her daughter for life remainder to the  plaintiff in tail that Elizaheth the feoff die and Elizabeth the daughter take  the defendant to bushadd who commit waste and his feme die and for that waste  do during the coverture this action be bring and it be not bring in the tenet  nor lenuit wherefore for this cause the   urt hold the writ to he ill the  defendant plead in bar confess all the matter precedent a concord and  satisfaction videlicet that thefeoffees give anand delivered unto he the deed  of feoff to use which he deliver to the plaintiff in satisfaction of the waste  c and it be thereupon demurrer and argue by Savell that it be not any plea  first because it be a action find upon a statute and in the realty wherein  concord be not any plea and in proof thereof rely upon I Henry and Henry where  it be hold that concord be not any plea second because the concord allege be  by the delivery of a deed to the plaintiff which helonged unto he and so it  can be any satisfaction as pound Henry a deed of the gift of entail to the  issue in tail can be any satisfaction so Edward and Elizabeth Onelys case  accord upon this reason wherefore c Warherton contra first the writ of waste  be not tenet nor lenuit and therefore it be do good because it be variant from  the form of the ring star for it ought to have be the one way and to make his  count special and of that opinion be the court that for this cause the writ be  ill as also because the writ suppose that the baron fecit croak Elizabeth  empty whereas the baron be charge as tenant in right of his feme the writ  ought to have be jecerunt empty for so be the form in the register and so be  nature narrow places and to this opinion the court agree the form also of the  writ be ill for this cause for in debt against they for debt of the femes it  shall he dehent c the court also conceive that the writ lie not against the  baron for waste commit by he in the time of his feme for he be to he charge by  reason of his feme and joint with her and she be dead the action be go for it  be but a personal wrong do by her but the prothonotories inform the court that  a action of waste have be bring against the baron for waste do in the life of  the feme and the writ be quod lenuit in jure wife and it have be maintain but  the court say they great marvel at it vide Henry pl will but for the matter  all the court resolve that it be a good bar admit that the action lie for it  be in its nature personal for damage only be to he recover and not the place  waste and in every action personal concord with satisfaction be a good plea  and therefore in a attaint concord be a good plea a but where land be to he  recover by a writ of waste it may peradventure he otherwise as pound Henry et  Elizabeth dyer be and here the delivery of this deed be good matter of  satisfaction for the deed do not appertain to beneficiary and use but to the  feoff by the commonlaw and the statute do not transfer it unto he then by  consequence the gift by the feoff to the defendant S good and the delivery  thereof by he to the plaintiff be good satisfaction and Walmsley cite that it  be adjudge in one Mins case wherein he be of counsel that the deed appertain  to the feoff and not to beneficiary and use wherefore it be adjudge for the  defendant a Edward pl   dyer croak Elizabeth er p