case taverner against owner cromwell see Johnstone v Spencer Ch d if several  copyhold be hold by several tenor waste in one of they be a forfeiture of that  estate only though they be all grant by the same copy roll ab   a Leon pale  yellow ten ld raym a prescription for one copyholder be good post   b it be no  cause of forfeiture for a copyholder to disobey a general summons of the court  in the church post   Ent roll ab Leon cro car pale yellow ten trespass the  case upon demurrer be diverse copyhold be grant by one copy and several  hahendums and several reddendums for every of they but they a this custom be  explain and confirm by charter Henry vide Priv land b   light b croak  Elizabeth er p all hegan at one time and be to end at one time the copyholder  commit waste in one of the copyhold the question be whether that shall he a  forfeiture of they all?Secondly for this copyhold wherein the waste be do  which be cut down tree the copyholder prescrihes that every copyholder of that  parcel of wood have use to cut down tree there grow the question be if such a  prescription for one copyholder only be good?Thirdly whether the not come to  the court upon summons at the church he cause of seizure for the first all the  justice resol ed that they be several grant and as several copy and the  forfeiture of the one be not the forfeiture of the other and the several  hahendums and reddendums make they several in themselves although they he all  by one copy vide   a d they hold the prescription good for Walmsle say there  be for the suet a difference hetween a prescription for freehold land and for  customary land for custom which concern freehold ought to be throughout the  count and can be in a particular place assize but a prescription concern  copyhold land be good in a particular for de least non curdt law and the law  be not alter thereby and it may be there be but one copyholder there for which  he may prescribe Heaumond agree to this difference and custom to have a profit  a prender privilege or discharge may very well he in a particular and by Owen  it be rule accord in Colliss case in the queen Hencfi for the three they  conceive it to he no cause of forfeiture for it shall not he a forfeiture but  upon refusal to perform his service or a wilful nonpayment of the rend or  wilful absence from court but in this case it may he he have no notice of the  summons and know not of the court for the summons proper be to he to his  person or at his house or it ought to be aver he have notice thereof and  exception be take to the summons because it be but four day before the court  whereas it ought to be fourteen day at the least and of that opinion be  Walnisley but the other justice be against he therein for they say the summons  be well enough for the time and it be adjudge for taverner the copyholder vide  coke entry pound