case dr hussey and his wife and other against Francis more Trinity term James  roll in a prosecution against husband and wife if the husband be acquit  judgement shall not be give against the wife SC   SC hob con SC roll Bulst a  verdict in ravishment of ware be not good unless it find the age of the heir  and the fact of marriage in ravishment of ware judgement of damage and value  be bad the plaintiff both in the king bench and common plea must find pledge  to prosecute for if he be nonsuit he shall be amerce but if they be find after  the writ execute and beforeor pen plea it be sufficient ante post dyer hut lev  lev Bulst march Jones show fort barn b r h will strange the omission to find  pledge to prosecute in a writ of ravishment de guard be a error not aid by  Elizabeth c error bring of a judgement give against they in the common plea at  the suit of Francis more in a writ of ravishment de guard upon argument by all  the justice it be unanimous agree notwithstanding diverse exception allege in  stay of the judgement after verdict and diverse error assign that that  judgement against husband and wife where the husband be acquit ought not to be  against a feme covert by the statute of Westminster the second cap second that  the verdict not find the age of the heir at the time of the ravishment nor the  marriage nor by who he be marry nor that he be marry without the plaintiff  assent be not good three that the judgement of the damage and of the value of  the marriage be not good but for these matter see the case more at large   foe  croak throw it be also move that neither upon the return of the original writ  before the sheriff nor after in court any pledge be return the defendant plead  in nullo be erratum and now this term it be argue upon the exception only for  want of pledge and the point adjudge not meddle with and after argument at the  bar all the judge several deliver their opinion and they all a reed that at  the commonlaw it be clear error for which the judgement shall be reverse for  for the king and party benefit the plaintiff ought to find pledge that if he  be nonsuit he and his pledge shall be amerce or if the verdict find against he  in any part he be to be amerce which be ground upon great reason that the  plaintiff shall not trouble the king court or the party without cause and if  he do he shall be punish and those pledge ought to be find either upon the  purchase of the writ in chancery or before the sheriff before he execute the  writ for otherwise the sheriff be not bind to serve the writ but may return  that the plaintiff have not find pledge yet he may serve it if he will and if  the plaintiff do find pledge at any time pendant the plea in court it shall be  good enough but if no pledge be find pendant the plea and judgement be give it  be error and cause to reverse the judgement vide Edward pl Edward pl Henry pl  Henry pl and dyer   foe but the principal question be whether it be aid by the  statute of Elizabeth c by the body of the say statute which aid defect in  return defect of form c be out of the proviso that that shall not extend to  writ or penal law croak James er p Houghton hold that it be within the body of  the Act and out of the proviso for penal law be intend those action which be  popular and a penalty in gross for the king or for the party but not to those  which give great damage as action of waste action of debt upon the statute of  Edward c for they be out of the proviso and within the Act as it have be  oftentimes resolve wherefore he conceive it be not error after verdict  Montague and croak hold that it be not aid by the body of the Act for that  only redress default in form or misreturns or insufficient return or want of  warrant of attorney or want of original which all may hap in negligence of not  fill or in the insufficiency of the clerk but not find of pledge be mere the  act of the party which be not aid although it be within the word in the body  of the Act yet it be clear except by the proviso for this action be find upon  a penal law which the proviso except clear out of the Act for it be very penal  extend to banishment and perpetual imprisonment and be more penal than any  forfeiture of any sum Doderidge as to this point agree with they that it be  except by the proviso but he hold that statute which give only addition of  damage be not to be account penal law within this proviso as the case of waste  or forcible entry upon the statute of Henry c for those give only more damage  in satisfaction bait do not add any corporal punishment but here be the great  penalty that can be except the loss of life or member and therefore croak  throw there be three kind of penal law pna pecuniara pna corporal pna exile  and here be two of these penalties Wherefore they three resolve that this be  not aid by the statute of Elizabeth c a and it be adjudge for this cause that  the first judgement shall be reverse but for the principal matter there be not  any argument make or opinion deliver