case parkins against woollaston in debt on a recognizance against bail if the  defendant plead no capias against the principal and the plaintiff reply a  capias prout to stand open per record a rejoinder that a writ of error be  allow before the return of the capias be a departure from the plea S c ante S  c salk debt upon a recognizance against bail and plea that there be do capias  against the principal a replication aver a capias prout to stand open per  record in the common plea rejoinder that there be a writ of error take out and  allow before the capias be return and file and on demurrer it be adjudge that  the rejoinder be a departure from the plea for it be a new modern er p matter  which do not agree with or enforce the matter of the plea for the plea be that  there be no capias and the rejoinder say there be a capias but that it be  supersede and there be a great difference between no capias and a capias  supersede for the supersede do not make it null or no capias but only suspend  the fruit or effect of it and one must distinguish between the writ itself and  the effect of it this capias though supersede be nevertheless a writ and  therefore if after allowance of it the sheriff before a supersedeas serve upon  he execute it the writ shall excuse he which a void writ can not do and if the  writ of error have be quash before the return of the capias be out then this  writ may be well execute and the case of veer v smith lev a be allow for law  it be debt upon bind to account for money the defendant plead that be do  account the plaintiff reply that the defendant have receive twenty pound at  such a time of which he give he do account the defendant rejoin that he be rob  of they whereof be give notice to the plaintiff and sure that maintain his  first plea for it be a legal account of they and by the whole court judgement  be give for the plaintiff note it seem ill for another reason because the  allowance of a writ of error before the return and fill if it be return before  do not obstruct the fill