ccciv VANDRINK and archer case trover and conversion Vandrink bring a action  upon the case against archer and declare that whereas he himself be possess of  twenty else of linen cloth as of his own good the same come to the hand of the  defendant by trover and he know the say good to be the good of the plaintiff  sell they unto person unknown and the money thereof proceed do convert to his  own use the defendant plead that as to twenty four else of the say linen cloth  long time before the lose one Copland be possess thereof ut de good nest not  common with others and sell they to the defendant who before any notice that  they be the good of the plaintiff before any request sell they to person  unknown and as to the other three else he be always ready to deliver they to  the plaintiff and yet be and upon these plead the plaintiff do demurrer in law  Owen sergeant for the plaintiff that both plead be insufficient the first plea  be not a answer but by argument for the plaintiff declare of a commission of  his own good and the defendant answer to a commission of his own good h Br  action Leonard sur Le case in a action upon the case the plaintiff declare  that the defendant find the good of the plaintiff and deliver they to person  unknown non to weigh well modus form be no plea but he ought to plead not  guilty and in a action upon the case the plaintiff declare that he be possess  of certain good ut de good nest not common with others and the defendant find  they and convert they to his own use it be no plea for the defendant to say  that the plaintiff be not possess of the say good as of his proper good but he  ought to plead not guilty to the misdemeanour and give in evidence that they  be not the good of the plaintiff and e Br action upon the case the plaintiff  declare that he be possess of certain good as of his proper good and lose they  and the defendant find they and convert they to his own use the defendant  plead that the plaintiff pawn the say good to the defendant for To give back  for which he detain they accord to the say pawn and traverse the Leonard er p  conversion and by some it be hold that he ought to plead not guilty and give  the especial matter aforesaid in evidence and Phil and man dyer the case of  the Lord Mountegle in a action upon the case the plaintiff declare upon a  trover of a chain of gold and that the defendant have sell it to person  unknown the defendant plead that ipse non to sell modus form upon that the  plaintiff do demurrer in law and see h where good come to one by trover he  shall not be charge in a action but for the time he have the possession but  that be to be intend in a action of detinue and not in a action upon the case  for such action upon the case be not ground upon the trover but upon the  misdemeanour that be the conversion and as to the other plea it be utter  insufficient for the plaintiff declare of a conversion and he plead a  possession that he be always ready and so do not answer to the point of the  action Yelverton sergeant to the contrary and be conceive for the first plea  that it be a direct answer for he have justify his sale to person unknown for  that he have buy the good of one Copland who good they be and because the  plaintiff have demurrer upon the plea be have confess the truth of the matter  contain in it sure that I the property of the good be to Copland and so in  defendant by the say sale and then he have good cause to convert they to his  own use by sale or otherwise and he conceive that there be a difference h  betwixt bailment and trover for in case of trover the party be not Chargeable  but in respect of the possession which be remove the action be go against the  finder for he who find good be not bind to keep they nor to give a account for  they and he put the case report by dyer Elizabeth r fine bring a action upon  the case and declare he be possess of a hawk as of his proper good at W and  casual lose it at b and that it afterward casual come to the hand of the  defendant by trover and that be know it to be the plaintiff hawk sell the same  for money to person unknown the defendant plead that the hawk first after the  lose of it come to the hand of one Jeoffryes who sell it to one Rowly who give  it to the defendant at a who sell it to Poulton and the same be find a  sufficient bar and it be hard where good as ox or horse come to another by  trover that he shall be charge to keep they and pasture they until the owner  claim they and therefore it be not reason but that he discharge himself by the  quit of the possession of they and as to the other plea the matter of the plea  be good enough and the defect be but in the form which because the plaintiff  upon his demurrer have not show to the court accord to the statute he shall  not take advantage of it but the matter of the plea be sufficient sure the  find and the offer to deliver it to the plaintiff Anderson justice for the  examination of the insufficiency of this plea the nature of the action and  Leonard the cause of it be to be consider the nature of the action it be a  action upon the case the cause the trover and conversion then for the latter  plea his readiness to deliver it it can be any answer to the declaration of  the plaintiff for this action be not debt or detinue where the thing itself be  to be deliver for in such case the plea have be good but the conversion be the  special cause of this action which by this be not answer and for the other  plea the declaration be not answer by it but here be some matter of  justification for when a man come to good by trover there be not any doubt but  by the law he have liberty to take the possession of they but he can abuse  they kill they or convert they to his own use or make any profit of they and  if he do it be great reason that he be answerable for the same but if he lose  such good afterward or they be take from he then he shall not be charge for he  be not bind to keep they and so he conceive judgement ought to be for the  plaintiff Windham justice neither plea be good as to the first plea he confess  the conversion but have not convey unto himself a sufficient title to the good  by which he may justify the conversion for the plaintiff declare of a  conversion of his own good and the defendant justify because the property of  the good be in a stranger who sell they to he which can be any good title for  he without a traverse unless he have show that be buy they in a open market  mid then upon such matter he may well have justify the conversion and a to the  other plea the same be nought also for the good be not in demand and then the  say plea be not proper to say that he be ready to deliver they for damage only  for the conversion be in demand and not the good themselves and therefore the  Leonard er p same be a plea but by argument sure he be ready to deliver ergo  he have not convert and yet the same be not a good argument for if a man find  my horse and ride upon he or hereby he become lame or otherwise by excessive  travel misuse he so as my horse be the worse thereby he may be ready to  deliver I my horse and yet this action will lie for such a abuse of the horse  be a conversion to his own use periam justice the latter plea clear be  insufficient for it amount but to not guilty but for the first plea he doubt  of it for first the property be not traversable nor the know but upon the  general issue plead such matter may be give in evidence and he conceive that  where a man buy good of one who come to they by trover that he may sell they  and shall not be answerable for they and although it may be say that the say  matter may be give in evidence yet it be not good to put the same to the  people but to refer the matter to the judgement of the court walm justice the  latter plea be clear insufficient but for the first he doubt of it for be  conceive that the sale of the good be not a conversion Anderson the first plea  be ut above and nothing in that be material or traversable for all the plea  may be true and yet the defendant be guilty for it may be that the defendant  himself sell they to the plaintiff or to another who sell they to the  plaintiff and that afterward the defendant find they and here the conversion  be confess and not so void by sufficient justification and by he the sale to  person unknown be no good plea for his sale be his own act and it can be but  he must have notice of the buyer and therefore he ought in his plea to show  their name periam contrary to that matter as to the name of the buyer for it  shall be a infinite thing for a draper to take notice of every one who buy a  ell of cloth of he and afterward the same term judgement be give for the  plaintiff upon the insufficiency of the plea ante post Leonard mich Elizabeth  in common banc