case eve against wright Hilary term car roll a verdict in replevin find the  special matter as the avowant have plead be good and subsequent matter shall  be reject as surplusage there may be a superior leet at which the resiants of  a inferior leet be bind to attend Edward pl Edward pl Henry pl   Ent hetley  cro James roll Abr Com dig Cowp hawk p c if the jury find a direct verdict  uncertain or contradictory matter afterward add shall be reject as  surplusage Post roll Abr Leon more   light hob ray cro Elizabeth sand Savil  Leon side b r h Doug term Rep wood Inst hawk c S replevin the defendant make  cognizance as bailiff to Lord Peter because Lord Peter be seize in fee of the  manor of Writtle and he and all those who estate c have have within the say  manor a leet of all the resiants in Writtle semel in year videlicet upon the  Monday next after the Feast of Pentecost tenendum and all amercement in that  leet for not come and that the plaintiff be amerce and for the say amercement  the distress be take and issue be join upon this prescription the jury at the  bar find this special verdict croak car that Lord Peter and all they who  estate c have have a leet c verbatim ut above but further they find that the  warden and scholar of new college in Oxford be seize in fee of the manor of  the rectory of Writtle call Romansfee in Writtle and that they and all those  who c have have a view of frankpledge of all the inhabitant and resiants  within the say manor call Romansfee semel in year in holiday commemorationis  Pauli tenendum secundum ancient experience ibidem as to their manor of Roman  belong and that the plaintiff be a resiant within the say manor and if super  totan means c the point intend be because the plaintiff be a resiant within  the leet of the college whether he may be say a resiant within another leet  and so Chargeable to two leet and whether one may have a grand leet of all the  inhabitant within a will and another may have a inferior leet of some of the  inhabitant within the same will so as they shall be subject to two leet be the  question but all the court hold that forasmuch as the verdict have find the  issue vain to be precise for the avowant as he plead the find of the other  matter after be not material but idle and judgement to be give for the avowant  so the matter in law be never debate by the justice