Barnardiston king b darbey and gold vide ante this matter come on again Mr  fazakerly submit it that the plaintiff be entitle to his judgement he say it  must be agree even by the other side that the plaintiff may well declare upon  the bind general without set forth that it be give to he in the name of his  office and when the defendant will avoid this bind by the statute of Henry  that the plaintiff may well reply that it be give to he in the name of his  office and this will be no departure the question therefore for Barnardiston  king b er p the consideration of the court be whether the plaintiff by his  replication have sufficient show that this bind be give to he in the name of  his office he have aver that it be give vigor secundum form set up and that he  submit it be a sufficient averment after a verdict that this bind be give to  he in the name of his office however if this shall not be take to be a  sufficient averment after a verdict yet he apprehend the plaintiff ought to  have judgement by reason that the issue be join upon a collateral matter and  thereby the averment make unnecessary Mr Benney too enforce this latter part  of the argument by two case out of lev saun where such averment be not in the  record and yet the plaintiff have judgement Mr Dennison argue on the other  side and say that he conceive that neither the want nor insufficiency of such  a averment will be cure by a verdict and for this purpose rely upon sand judge  lee say the difficulty with he be what sense shall be put upon the word vigor  secundum foreman set up he do agree that if the sense of it be that the  plaintiff take the bind exact accord to the precise term and direction of the  statute this will be good after a verdict without show in particular what  those direction be that he follow but consider that the defendant have plead  that Birley take this bind in the plaintiff name he take the sense of that  clause to be nothing more than that the plaintiff take this bind under the  statute absq hoc that Birley take it for which reason he think that the  plaintiff have entire omit show that he pursue the direction of the statute in  take the bind which he take to be necessary for the plaintiff to have do as  the case come out upon the defendant plea in order to maintain his action to  this purpose he put the case of a man declare in a general manner in debt upon  bind as the plaintiff have do here and the defendant plead the statute of h as  he have do here likewise suppose he say the defendant plea be ill in some  point of form and the plaintiff demurrer special he take it in that case it  have be hold that the plaintiff in his replication must set forth that the  bind be give to he in the name of his office otherwise the demurrer will be  bad for which reason he think the judgement ought to be arrest however the  rest of the court be of a different opinion and say they think the  Barnardiston king b word secundum form set up will after a verdict imply that  the bind be give accord to the direction and form of the statute though judge  probin agree if the word have be vigor set up only it will have be otherwise  accord judgement be give for the plaintiff