Brownlow goldsborough dame pet case mich James in a action of trespass bring  by the lady pet upon not guilty plead the jury be at bar the matter follow  come in question upon the evidence by Haughton and the other justice if a he  seize of a great close where c and a stranger enter and occupy part of the  close yet notwithstanding a continue the possession of the residue whether  this shall preserve his possession in the residue and he shall be judge to be  in possession of that because it be a entire thing e and e seize of part of  the service be the seize of the whole and so be Bettisworths case Rep the  possession of the house be the possession of the land for the lessee against  the lessor of that which passes by one demise but if a stranger enter sever  and part by meet and bind nothing be wrought by the possession of the residue  another question be this a lessee for year of ten acre pay twenty shilling  rend the lessee be out of parcel yet he pay all the rend to he in reversion  the lessee have notice of the entry whether this protect the revision so that  nothing be gain by the entry but the interest of the lessee and shall not be  no seize and Yelverton at the bar be of opinion that it shall be no seize  rithen sect say that so long as the particular tenant continue his possession  so long be the reversion in the lessor for in such case as to the lessor the  lessee shall be always deem in possession by force of the lease and the reason  why the lessee shall be adjudge in possession of all as to the lessor be  because the lessor can have notice of the alteration of the Brownlow  goldsborough er p possession for when the lessee by his own act or sufferance  do a thing in alteradon of the possession of which by common intendment the  lessor can have or take notice there the law will not prejudice the lessor and  see for that farmer be case in the three Rep if tenant for life levy a fine  have land in the same village this shall notL bind the lessor if five year  pass before be take notice of what land the fine be levy and the same law if  tenant for life make a feoff to one who have land without the same village and  levy a fine and in this case if the lessee have continual pay all his rend the  lessor can intend or suspect but that the lessee be absolute tenant of the  whole and in farmer be case it be say that if the lessor levy a fine the  disseizee be bar without claim for it be impossible but he to who the wrong be  do shall present know it but if he that have the particular estate by grant or  trust repose in he shall secret practice although be pay the rend and continue  possession yet it be otherwise but the reporter opinion be that if in the  principal case no rend have be reserve then the reversion have be divest by  the entry for there have be no act do to mislead or binder the knowledge  thereof and also although rend Brownlow goldsborough be reserve and all pay  yet if he have express notice thereof the reversion have be divest and second  if it shall be a seize a great mischief will follow for if a descent shall be  it will take away the lessors entry and yet no fault in they because in common  presumption the lessee always continue tenant but coke of a contrary opinion  for he say it can not be deny but that the lessee be out of the possession and  then it follow of necessity that the lessor must be out of his reversion and  as to notice to make his claim he must take notice at hisperils m dyer b but  note that this be when the law intend that he may take notice which it will  not intend in this case Haughton be of opinion that it be a seize and  Doddridge say it will be mischievous if it shall hill James in the common plea  that if in the common bar in trespass the place in the common bar be allege to  be in black acre the plaintiff may plead that it be his freehold and then it  be hold by the whole court that a abuttal of one side be sufficient without  allege it of every side whether a copyholder may lop the tree grow upon his  copyhold and hold be may