case Bretton Elizabeth his wife against bolton of grey inn a action on the  case upon assumpsit will lie for the nonperformance of a promise to provide  the plaintiff with hetter security in consideration of her deliver up to a  three pergona bind in which the defendant and such three person be coobligors  and lend such three person a additional sum of money I roll ab burr diverse  exception to a declaration on the case in assumpsit vent cro James assumpsit  the plaintiff declare that whereas Thomas Bolton be the brother of the  defendant and the defendant be a counsellor et die in lege and whereas croak  Elizabeth er p the defendant do know that the say Thomas be seize to he and  the heir male of his body the remainder to the defendant and to the heir male  of his body of the manor of Heywood in the county of Norfolk and that the say  Elizaheth the wife of the plaintiff have lend l to the say Thomas for the  payment of which sum at a certain day to come the say Thomas and the defendant  be oblige by their write Obligatory seal his adorned with small figures joint  and several in l the defendant in consideration that the say Elizaheth at his  special instance shall deliver to the say Thomas the say write Obligatory to  he cancel and shall lend to the say Thomas another l do assume to the say  Elizaheth that if she will refer to the defendant the make of the say  assurance for the l and will use no other counsel than the counsel of the  defendant that he will provide ankle assurantiam hence pro prcedict BlizahethO  per qdalem I psam eaden Elizahethet haheret majus advantagium of the say  Thomas if he shall make default of payment of the say l than she have before  for the say l and allege in facto that she trust to his promise use no other  counsel c and deliver to the say Thomas the say bind to he cancel and that she  lend to the say Thomas the other l and that the defendant not regard his  promise but intend to defraud her then and there know that the say Thomas be  adtunc ut prcefalur seize in tail videlicet to he and his heir male of his  body but say not where the reversion or remainder be then and there falsb et  malilioZ provide for her assurance a grant of a annual rend issue croak  Elizabeth out of the say manor of Heywood to have in fee and show it in  certain which be a refitseek which she trust to the say promise receive for  the security of her l and allege in facto that the say Thomas within one year  die without issue by which after his death the say rend cease and hecame void  and the say manor come to the defendant discharge of the say rend and further  allege that the defendant provide no other assurance for the payment of the  say l and that the say l and every part thereof be yet unpay el such the  defendant false and malicious deceive the say plaintiff in provide the say  assurance for the payment of the say l by which she be without remedy for the  payment of the say rend or the say l ad damnum l the defendant plead non  assumpsit and find against he diverse matter be allege in arrest of judgement  first it be allege that whereas the say Thomas and the defendant be oblige per  scri plum suum obligatorium seal his adorned with small figures and so be  uncertain for it can be the bind of both for it be seal his c in the sin ular  numher say non allocatur for S qillo his may he refer to both their seal and  both may use one seal Secondly the assumpsit be that if she at his instance  and request wou ld deliver the bind c and she allege that she deliver the bind  c but say not that she deliver it at his instance and if it be not deliver at  his instance but upon some other consideration as it may be intend it be no  performance of the consideration say non allocalur for when she deliver the  bind to he cancel it shall he intend upon the consideration before and at the  request of the defendant three for that it be allege that the defendant well  know that the say Thomas be seize utprcefertur in tail but say not in who the  remainder be and it may he to his right heir and then the rentcharge may have  continuance say non allocatur for when in the recital it be say that Thomas be  seize in tail the remainder to the defendant and it be say afterward that  Thomas be seize ut prcefertur in tail this shall he intend with remainder over  as before fourthly upon the substance of the matter that this assurance that  be make be better than what she have before for it be not allege when the  first l be to he pay but at a day to come which may he long after and here the  rend that be grant be a inheritance which charge the land be a hetter  assurance than a bind which charge the good for which she have no remedy if  the obligor leave no asset to his executor but the court hold clear the  contrary for the bind charge his person and his executor after his death but  this rend do only charge his land during his life and he be dead she have no  remedy five the conclusion of the action sound in nature of a deceit and then  the issue non assumpsit be no answer to that with which the plaintiff have  charge the defendant say non allocalur for the plaintiff have declare upon the  whole croak Elizabeth er p matter and have show to the court sufficient matter  that the defendant have not perform his promise the conclusion be not material  but the CoLtrt shall adjudge upon the whole matter precedent so it be a good  issue and the plaintiff have judgement