case herbert against water in replevin if the defendant justify as overseer of  the poor under the Elizabeth c and the plaintiff be nonsuit the jury may  assess the damage or if they omit so to do the court will grant a writ of  enquiry S c salk S c comb S c skin S c Mod S c Carth S c holt S c ld ray  replevin the defendant as overseer of the poor justify the take by virtue of  the statute Elizabeth c for a poortax by which statute it be enact that if  after issue try for the defendant or nonsuit of the plaintiff after appearance  the defendant shall recover Triple damage to be assess by the same jury or a  writ to inquire of the damage as the same shall require c the plaintiff be  nonsuit and the jury have not assess the damage and now the court be move to  award a writ of enquiry to supply that defect upon these authority the  defendant justify under this very statute in a action of trespass Bramptons  case roll Rep a bring against he and the plaintiff be nonsuit a writ of  enquiry be award for the Triple damage in replevin Anonymous roll Rep b the  like justification be make as in this case and the plaintiff be nonsuit and  upon a writ of enquiry award judgement be give for the avowant and a writ of  error bring because the enquiry be erroneous award since the statute express  require that the first jury shall inquire of the damage but that exception  modern be overrule for though the first jury may have inquire yet it be only a  inquest of office and no part of the issue side c nor be it a thing for which  a attaint will lie against they and therefore it be within the rule take in  Cheyneys case   d that where the court ex duty ought to inquire of a matter  upon which no attaint lie the omission of it may be supply by a writ of  enquiry beside these authority in point there be other case adjudge in law  which come near this videlicet where a demurrer be join upon the evidence the  jury be as much discharge from try the issue as they be upon a nonsuit for the  fact be agree by both party the judgement of the court be then demand whether  the matter give in evidence be sufficient to find a verdict for the plaintiff  upon the issue join now though the jury be discharge of the issue yet they  ought to assess damage conditional videlicet si law be cum to express grief  quod pillage defend be worthy of blame quodq pillage the plaintiff occasion  praemissor to hold up financial loss c yet if this shall be omit see Mallory v  Jennings that the omission of a writ of enquiry be aid by the statute of  Jeofails stram f it may as well be do upon a writ of enquiry of damage after  judgement be give upon a demurrer cro car g and for these reason a writ of  enquiry be grant in this case so also where a action be bring against a  overseer of the poor for any thing do in the execution of his office and a  verdict be find for he he shall have a writ of enquiry for the Triple damage  give to he by Elizabeth c Valantine v Fawcett stram S c case t h for although  the Elizabeth c S direct that the damage for the wrongful vexation shall be  assess by the same jury yet by Lord Hardwicke chief justice in every case  where the court be not tie tip by the statute car c which respect only rend  arrear a writ of enquiry may be grant to do complete justice dwell v martial  Bl Rep S c will see also freeman v lady archer Bl Rep hullock on cost h modern  er p